Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jury Diversity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pierce County juror pay pilot boosts weekly jury attendance, commission hears
Summary
A juror-compensation pilot in Pierce County that adds $100 to summons notices has raised weekly jury attendance from about 350 to roughly 450 on average, commission staff reported, and the initiative will be evaluated for representativeness and downstream operational impacts.
Get email alerts on the Jury Diversity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission staff reported early positive results from a Pierce County juror-compensation pilot that began Oct. 14, saying higher pay (announced on the summons) appears to have increased response rates and weekly attendance.
Frank Thomas, senior court program analyst for the commission, said the courthouse — which handles Pierce County Superior, District Court and Tacoma Municipal matters — typically summons about 2,600 people weekly and expected roughly 350 people to show up; “in the first month of the pilot, about 450 people have shown up for jury duty on a weekly basis on average,” he said.
Thomas said the pilot’s early metric is response and attendance and that higher participation should reduce downstream administrative burden, including fewer mailings and fewer repeat summonses. He said the team will watch representativeness measures — whether the new pool better reflects community demographics — and noted Dr. Patricia Cherico and the Washington State Center for Court Research will evaluate the diversity and representativeness of jurors in coming months.
The AOC staff described operational steps taken to publicize the $100 payment; roughly 70% of survey respondents reported they learned about the higher compensation only when they received the summons, and the office plans a targeted online promotion and outreach to community organizations in Tacoma.
Commissioners framed the pilot as promising but cautioned that the legislature’s budget constraints could limit similar efforts elsewhere and stressed the project’s preliminary nature. No formal vote or action was taken at the meeting.
