Commission hears complaints that GR 34 waivers are being denied or blocked by clerks

Roxana Gomez and Chach Duarte White, representing a coalition of civil legal-aid providers, told the Minority and Justice Commission that courts across the state have been inconsistently applying GR 34 and the court decision identified in the transcript as Jafar v. Webb, leaving indigent litigants unable to obtain mandatory fee waivers.

"We need help. We need education on GR 34 and Jafar versus Webb," Chach Duarte White said, describing repeated examples where clerks refused to process waivers, required unnecessary income statements, or did not place waiver petitions before a judge. The presenters said Legal Counsel for Youth and Children (LCYC) and partners had filed challenges in many counties and that successful appeals in one county did not ensure consistent application elsewhere.

Commission members responded that the immediate remedies should focus on education and coordinated outreach. "This appears to be an issue of education, both on the clerk side as well as on the judicial side," Judge Veronica Galvan said, urging the commission's education committee to review the problem. Judge Dave Keenan, who reviewed the text of GR 34, said he read the rule to cover fees that prevent access to the judicial system and volunteered to assist on education efforts.

Participants described several concrete problems: clerks treating certain charges (ex parte filing fees, e-filing fees, jury fees) as administrative rather than judicial for purposes of waiver; clerks denying waivers without a judge-signed order, which removes an appeal path; and inconsistent local practices that force legal-aid groups to litigate the rule county by county.

Commission members discussed options for coordinated action. Suggestions included the education committee developing written guidance or training; a formal letter from the Minority and Justice Commission to associations (the transcript mentions the Washington State Association of County Clerks and related associations); and preparing materials that could be routed to the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) or the justices for broader messaging. Justice Helen Whitener said the group could formalize concerns in a letter, but cautioned that structural rule changes follow court processes.

The commission did not vote on a binding recommendation at the meeting, but members agreed to task the education committee with follow-up. Chach Duarte White said the coalition can share specific examples and prior outreach efforts, and noted Chief Justice Stevens had indicated interest in speaking with the presenters.

Next steps: the education committee will review the examples and consider targeted outreach to clerk associations and court administrators; presenters and staff will assemble a record of incidents and prior communications for the commission's use.