Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Judicial Department topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Colorado Supreme Court chief outlines security fears, judgeship needs and a $3M case‑management push
Summary
Chief Justice Monica Marquez told the Joint Judiciary Committee that court staff and judges face growing security risks across the state and asked the legislature to fund an analyst to convene a task force; State Court Administrator Steven Vasconcelos also sought cash‑fund authority (~$3 million) to continue a vendor‑led overhaul of the courts’ case‑management system.
Chief Justice Monica Marquez told the Joint Judiciary Committee on Feb. 8 that the Colorado judicial branch is confronting an escalating set of safety and security problems that have strained judges, court staff and probation officers across the state. "Serving as a judge these days also means facing real security risks," Marquez said, citing recent courthouse shootings, bomb threats and assaults she and other leaders observed during visits to all 23 judicial districts.
Marquez said the incidents — including a December 2023 shooting near the El Paso County Courthouse and multiple threats and assaults in 2024 — have traumatized staff and highlighted safety vulnerabilities such as unsecured entrances, broken elevators and inadequate emergency notification systems. She asked the committee to support a small, targeted request: a cash‑funded analyst position to help her launch a task force to identify practical, multi‑agency steps to improve security without asking for large general‑fund increases this year.
State Court Administrator Steven Vasconcelos, who accompanied Marquez, described other near‑term department priorities. Vasconcelos said Colorado’s trial courts handle roughly 600,000 new filings a year and that the branch is in a multi‑year effort to replace a nearly 30‑year‑old case‑management system. The department is seeking about $3,000,000 in IT cash fund spending authority to fund phase two of a vendor‑based replacement covering trial court, appellate court, court financial and probation functions. "This phase will lead us to finding a vendor and starting configuration," Vasconcelos told the committee, adding that vendor licensing and early configuration are the largest near‑term costs.
Vasconcelos also highlighted the department’s ongoing facility reconstruction at the Ralph Carr Center, which he said has been funded entirely through the state’s insurance policy and is expected to allow displaced tenant agencies to move back by late summer or early fall.
Both presenters emphasized the effect of increased workloads on judicial timeliness. Vasconcelos pointed to statistics showing the branch is struggling to meet timeliness guidelines across case types and repeated the department’s request for annualization of earlier judgeship funding that would bring 10 additional judge positions online in July 2026.
Committee members pressed for more specific budget line items and asked the department to provide follow‑up details about security spending requests and the case‑management procurement timeline. Marquez and Vasconcelos said they would supply additional material and work with committee staff to address specific questions raised during the hearing.
The department characterized the analyst position as an initial step to coordinate a cross‑jurisdictional task force on security; any larger funding or capital projects would be the subject of future budget requests.
The committee spent the remainder of the morning on related questions, including family‑law rulemaking, eviction data reporting and how legislative changes and technological shifts (body cameras, digital evidence) are affecting workloads across courts. The Judicial Department said it will provide the requested follow‑up information to the committee.
