Whitman County judge highlights therapeutic court success, court tech upgrades and public-defense strains

Judge John Hart, Whitman County District Court, told the Pullman City Council on June 30 that the county’s Pullman branch has modernized court operations while expanding alternatives to incarceration, but faces budgetary pressures tied to statewide public-defense policy changes.

Hart introduced Malise, the court’s new administrator, and said the court has moved to a new Tyler Technologies case‑management product and associated public search tools intended to improve access to information for litigants and the community. “We volunteered to be an early adopter court in a brand new case management system,” Hart said, describing the system as a step toward faster, more accessible services while staff complete data cleanup and reporting work.

The judge emphasized the importance of local access: the Pullman branch operates administrative offices five days a week and holds court twice weekly, which Hart said removes transportation barriers for residents seeking protection orders or other relief. Hart noted that “roughly 40% of all of our criminal cases are cited by or investigated by Pullman Police Department” and that protection orders and small-claims matters commonly involve Pullman residents.

Hart described the county’s therapeutic/community court, created about three and a half years ago for eligible low‑level, nonviolent defendants whose underlying problems are diagnosable health issues. He called the program “data‑driven” and “an enhanced level of accountability,” and reported that 10 participants have graduated, leaving them housed and employed. “Those 10 people all graduated with a job, housed, stable, with a plan,” Hart said, adding that graduates have shown reduced recidivism in the period he cited.

On defense capacity and funding, Hart answered council questions about recent state changes that lower the threshold for cases requiring public defenders. He said the policy will increase demand for public defenders and could create staffing and funding pressures for counties and cities that must provide public defense services. “I hope some of that money will find its way to our court, to staffing our court,” Hart said, but also observed that much of the county sales‑tax increase may be directed toward sheriff’s office needs.

Hart urged proactive local planning, including retaining newly minted law‑school graduates locally as one mitigation strategy, and noted his office is tracking weighted caseload proposals being developed at the county level. He also described ongoing grant efforts to fund courthouse security upgrades while noting that personnel costs remain the principal barrier to expanded security.

The presentation concluded with an offer to provide follow‑up information and data to the council; Hart invited council members to visit community court sessions and graduations and offered the court’s administrative staff as a contact for additional questions. The council did not take formal action following the presentation.