Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Rules And Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Superior Court warns proposed GR 33 changes could increase costs for smaller counties
Summary
A Superior Court representative told commissioners proposed revisions to GR 33 governing ADA accommodations would limit the court’s ability to gather information about disabilities, could increase court‑appointed counsel requests and generate extra staff time and costs; comment period runs to April 30.
A representative of Superior Court (identified in the meeting as Judge Fassett) briefed the board on proposed changes to GR 33, the court rule that governs ADA accommodations. The judge said the proposed language—developed following a Disability Justice Task Force survey—would allow requestors to decline to specify their disability and would limit follow‑up questioning by the court.
"I think the biggest concern for us is the court‑appointed attorney requests ... we're concerned we're going to see an uptick of those, which is going to impact us financially," the judge said, noting the change would remove funding constraints as a consideration for appointing counsel and would require staff to document outreach to many attorneys to locate counsel for each case.
Court staff said that, under the proposal, counties could be required to document repeated outreach to attorneys until one accepts an appointment, increasing staff time and professional‑service expenditures. The judge and other court staff said the State Court Administrator and Superior Court Judges Association oppose the proposal and that the rule is open for public comment until April 30; they encouraged local officials to review and consider submitting comments.
Commissioners asked about the Washington State Bar Association’s position and whether the change had been adopted; court staff said it was proposed and remains subject to public comment.
Court representatives also said they are working on supplemental funding opportunities for drug court and coordinating with county staff on juvenile and drug‑court responses to recent announcements.
