STANDING COMMITTEE ON FAMILY ISSUES Penn Center Conference Room

Transcription

1 STANDING COMMITTEE ON FAMILY ISSUES Penn Center Conference Room October 27, p.m. Attendees: Staff: Guests: Judge Lael Montgomery (Chair), Justice Allison Eid, Judge Karen Metzger, Judge Kathy Delgado, Judge Patty Swift (by phone), Judge Vogt, Magistrate Din Tuttle, Barbara Salomon, Dave Johnson, Anastasia (intern), Magistrate Simon Mole, Steven McBride, Sue Waters, Theresa Spahn, Gina Weitzenkorn, Cindy Hauber, Sarah Ehrlich, Kent Wagner, Sam Benson, and Professor Clare Huntington. Alicia Davis, Bill Delisio, Maureen Leif and Kristine Vasquez Victoria Provenza DISCUSSION ITEMS General Recommendations (#79) -- Ongoing Oversight Committee for Family Issues 2:00 2:05 Welcome Judge Montgomery The interactions that families have with the courts in any shape or form need to be the absolute least painful experience for them as possible. A particular passion of Judge Montgomery would be to raise the stature/prestige for all the people who work within family law. Introduction to Justice Eid: as a new member of the Supreme Court, Justice Eid was sworn in on March 13, Justice Eid has found that it is a privilege to work with people like those on the committee, because it is imperative to be dedicated to improving our court system. First she d like to thank everyone on the Standing Committee for all their hard work as it exhibits real progress. Secondly she wanted to make sure that everyone knew that the courts are here to help facilitate, the court is very committed to help in any way possible. While the Chief Justice was unable to attend today, she is very pleased with the work of the committee. Training of Judicial Officers (#42-49) 2:05 2:55 Progress Made on Commission Report and Staff Recommendations- Alicia Davis, Bill DeLisio, Peter Koelling, Diana Coffey and Maureen Leif Consider Draft 2007 Charge and Order Page 1 of 8 The Family Issues Unit: Alicia Davis, Family Issues Unit Supervisor Bill Delisio, Court Improvement Coordinator Peter Koelling, Family Friendly Coordinator; Court Improvement Training Coordinator Diana Coffey, SANCA Project Manager Alison Young, SANCA Technical Assistance

2 Maureen Leif, Child Support Enforcement Coordinator Michelle Chostner, Intern Family Representation Coordinator, TBA A substantial percentage of the positions in the Family Unit are grant funded, or grant matched. Chief Justice Mullarkey appointed the Standing Committee on Family Issues to implement the recommendations of the Commission on Families in the Colorado Courts and to monitor and continue to improve the ways in which Colorado courts serve families. In August 2005 The Standing Committee on Family Issues was charge with 79 recommendations to work on. The committee had agreed on looking at these 79 recommendations periodically. By doing so, we are able to know exactly what has been accomplished and where we really want to focus our efforts in the future. The Committee reviewed each of the 79 recommendations and for each, was asked to consider: 1. How much of this recommendation has been accomplished? 2. Is it still a worthy goal today? 3. If so, what priority should be assigned? 4. What resources do we need to accomplish it? Progress has been made in the following areas: 1-18: Developing a central case management process for family cases. SANCA/FAMJIS. Developed SANCA performance measures. Drafted rules for the ethical transfer of data in the SANCA project. To be rolled out statewide by February To continue to be added upon by new Court Improvement grant and possibly new Child Support grant. Position Description Questionnaire (Winter 2006) and Workload Study (Spring 2007) of the Family Court Facilitator position. Assistance with performance standards Model Courts project promotes interdepartmental and interagency collaboration. Chief Justice letter to Chief Judges regarding importance of training in rotations October : Providing non-adversarial alternatives. CBA survey of implementation of CRCP 16.2 Revised the Sworn Financial Statement 25-31: The status and roles of judges and magistrates. 3 sites designated as Model Courts for D&N Spirit of the Summit award created in Winter 2006 to recognize judicial officers/attorneys for excellence in D&N Family Friendly Facilities program has expanded into a majority of districts statewide. Magistrate rules and authority being studied Domestic and Juvenile Judges listserves established. Annual training on mental health issues. Page 2 of : The selection and evaluation of judicial officers. Annual training in child and family law. AFCC to establish local chapter in Colorado

3 Educational materials and questions supplied to Nominating Commissions. With assistance from Court Improvement, the University of Colorado Law School established a Juvenile Law Clinic in Court users can register comments on the State Judicial Website. Standing Committee prepared materials that will be disseminated to the Performance Commissions in November : Training of judicial officers. Annual training in child and family law. AFCC to establish local chapter in Colorado Court Improvement Project Training Grant to provide multidisciplinary training. Senior judges currently provide docket time. CBA Family Law Section provides monthly phone hook-up for CLE 50-52: Community involvement by judicial officers. Individual judges participate in testimony and debates : Compensation and training for public sector attorneys. Court Improvement Committee established the Respondent Parents Counsel Task Force in June 2005 to address training, standards and compensation of RPC. More information available at: ODR and OCR provide training statewide : Training and mentoring for private attorneys. Offered through CLE at CBA : Ethics, professionalism, and accountability of attorneys. With assistance from Court Improvement, the University of Colorado Law School established a Juvenile Law Clinic in Ethics is being studied by the Standing Committee s Ethics Subcommittee : Accessibility and availability of legal services. See report by Judge Vogt below : Roles, responsibilities, guidelines, and accountability of professionals who interact with the courts. Standards for CFIs have been created and are being amended. Guidelines for PCs and DMs are being considered for formalization : Providing support for current judicial branch efforts in the areas of pro se litigants and domestic violence and restraining orders. Protection Orders Committee was reconvened and made amendments to all forms. Policy changes are being considered. Pro se centers are being studied : General recommendations. In November 2002, the Standing Committee was created and membership remains strong and invested Page 3 of 8

4 Line by line updates on each recommendation are appended in a spreadsheet to these minutes. The Committee considered the draft 2007 Charge and Order. The draft Charge and Order to some degree altered committee membership and procedure. The 2007 charge included the following: FY 2007 CHARGE For Fiscal Year 2007, the Standing Committee on Family Issues is charged with developing a detailed strategic plan intended to outline progress made on the original objectives set forth in the 2002 Report of the Commission on Families in Colorado Courts, and to set forth a plan for how the remaining issues will be addressed in the year ahead. For FY 2007, areas for close study include: Case management, and continued development of the FAMily Justice Information System ( FAMJIS ); Re-examination of the Family Court Facilitator position; The continued implementation of non-adversarial alternatives in family law through C.R.C.P. 16.2; The development of standards for professionals in family law; Increasing compensation and training opportunities for Respondent Parent s Counsel; Developing an award of excellence for child and family law practitioners and judges; Training and resources for Judicial Officers. The Strategic Plan may also requests for study presented in the preceding fiscal year. For FY 2007, the requests for study include, but are not limited to: Parenting classes; Protection orders; Performance standards for domestic cases; Continued development of multi-disciplinary and other training opportunities. Judge Metzger opined that the charge should not be established in the Order, but should rather be an internal charge to the Committee. Other committee members expressed concern with limitation of terms and with the reorganization of membership. The committee decided to review in detail the information presented on the recommendations, to consider priority areas for 2007, and to discuss these matters at the January meeting. Action Items: The committee decided to review in detail the information presented on the recommendations, to consider priority areas for 2007, and to discuss these matters at the January meeting. Person Responsible: All Standing Committee members Deadline: January meeting Page 4 of 8

5 Ongoing Oversight Committee for Family Issues #79 2:55 3:05 Hot Topics for 2007 Kent Wagner Consider Draft 2007 Charge and Order Kent Wagner of the Judicial Education Team ( JET ) asked how the Judicial Branch could best respond to training needs. How can we structure a Judicial Conference, Family Issues Conference, and stand alone programming? JET is always looking into utilizing structure issues. The Family Issues Conference will be looking at structuring the program differently this coming year. The Conference is June 3 rd June 8 th in Keystone and is a joint effort between Judicial and the Colorado Department of Human Services. The first 2 days will look much like the FIC in the past. The next 3 days will focus on mental health, substance abuse and collaboration. Some topics are Gender Specific treatment, Immigration, the role of the judicial officers and the professionals before them. Please kent.wagner@judicial.state.co.us with presenter or topic recommendations. Theresa Spahn: OCR is conducting their annual conference this year in conjunction with the National Association of Counsel for Children conference in Keystone, August Action Items: Committee to kent.wagner@judicial.state.co.us with presenter or topic recommendations. Person Responsible: All committee members Deadline: January meeting. Central Case Management; Non-adversarial alternatives; Support for Current Judicial Branch Efforts in the Areas of Pro Se Litigants and Domestic Violence and Restraining Orders. 3:05 3: Survey Dave Johnson, Barb Solomon, Dinsmore Tuttle Action steps from last meeting: the subcommittee was to study survey results (please see link for full results below: make The subcommittee discussed district results and drafting a letter to send to Chief Judges in each district. The 16.2 survey was put out for review to the entire Family Law section which included over 900 Lawyers state-wide as well as all judges state-wide. There were 222 responses, 161 Lawyers, 23 Judges, 14 Magistrates, and 19 Family Court Facilitators. The least satisfied districts were the 1 st, 2 nd, and the 20 th districts while the most satisfied were the 4 th, 8 th, and the 17 th districts. Five Judicial Officers expressed concern with CRCP 16.2 and Family Court Facilitators expressed almost 100% satisfaction with the rule. Page 5 of 8 The consensus was that no additional information should be added to mandatory disclosures. There has been frustration from the Bar with each district because people are not following the guidelines, rules, and regulations. Seasoned lawyers are not following through, whereas new lawyers/judges are more willing, nor have no issues with this matter. All Judicial Officers should be able to see each districts critique, to know how they work. Education needs to be continued with the bar and the bench. Implementation and sanctions need to be more uniform in judicial districts.

6 Barb Salomon, Magistrate Tuttle and Mr. Johnson worked together to gather all the pertinent information need to complete the findings of the survey which entailed summarizing information from 22 districts. The results are at : Lawyers need to read the rule and judicial officers need to enforce the rule. If it s a rule, it should be enforced, if it s not enforced it should then be changed. The big picture is that education must be kept uniform. It was suggested by Mr. Johnson that the mailing list should include the Colorado Bar Association President, and each district courts division. The committee has agreed that the 16.2 survey should be mailed out to the Chiefs Judges in every district. If districts want to see raw data it will be available on the website, or they may contact Dave Johnson. Simon Mole made the point that while the survey is interested with the way the judicial districts are working, it does not give the status on the effect of people it is serving. Judge Montgomery mentioned that the survey was drafted before the committee determined how the data would be used. Central Case Management Process 3:35 4:20 Case Management and the Family Court Facilitator Alicia Davis, Simon Mole, Sam Benson Human Resources will do a collective study regarding the position description data. This data will be divided into three positions clerical, pro se, and case management. Different districts utilize FCF differently. The results should be in by November 15 th. Once the results are in, Alicia will share the results with the Standing Committee for input and feedback as permitted by Human Resources. The Family Court Facilitator position is designed to provide professional assistance to judges and magistrates in managing the progress of cases from time of filing until final orders. The duties of this position include provision of individual case management and coordination of family-related matters before the courts, including domestic relations, domestic violence, D&N, and delinquency cases. The Division of Planning and Analysis has also committed to conducting a statewide workload assessment for the FCFs. In many districts, FCFs are part-time. Full-time positions may be justified now, but they weren t when the position was first established. Information on the HR assessment and the workload assessment will be shared with District Administrators and Chief Judges in November. Action Items: Once the results are in, Alicia will share the results with the Standing Committee for input and feedback as permitted by Human Resources. Person Responsible: Deadline: Page 6 of 8

7 Support for Current Judicial Branch Efforts in the Areas of Pr Se Litigants 4:20 4:50 Access to Justice and Information Available to Pro Se Litigants Judge Vogt Judge Vogt has noticed #62-67 make frequent references to working together with the Access to Justice Commission, Judge Vogt has been chair to the commission for 2 years now. She thought it would be a great idea to see how the committee is actually working with the Access to Justice Commission to achieve this requirement. Judge Vogt was hoping to conclude that some of the recommendations have been in fact achieved. Judge Vogt s conclusion has been that none of these recommendations have been fully carried out in the specific way they were described when they were initially drafted. Judge Vogt was not a part of the drafting process, and was wondering if in some instances the specific recommendation might no longer be something the committee wants to do, because it s being addressed in a different way. In regard to The Supreme Court and the local Colorado Bar Association organizing Pro Bono night and dissolution settlement day in an attempt to ensure uniformity and consistency throughout the state; the recommendation contemplates cooperation with the Supreme Court and the CBA. The overall goal is to get The Supreme Court and the CBA on the same page in looking at some of these issues in being carried out throughout the Access of Justice Commission. This is an entity a joint commission created by The Supreme Court and the CBA. It intrudes working with the local bar associations with the Judicial districts on a whole range of issues relating to accessibility to the courts for pro se litigants and other persons facing barriers to access the courts. The broader goal is being met; however there is a specific reference in the recommendation 16-2 to Pro-Bono night, and dissolution day. Judge Vogt is unaware of Access to Justice Commission related effort in that area. Judge Vogt wrote to the CBA asking them to appoint Simon Mole to replace a Commissioner who has served her three year term. The committee voted that recommendation 64 - Prepare a video tape seminar on How to Select an Attorney is something no longer needed. Cindy Hauber is trying to find a model self-help center, something which has Lexis-Nexis, copy machines, computers so that parties could come in, download and fill out forms, and be assisted by a pro bono lawyer or paralegal. She is also looking at redesigning the website for a new look. Simon commented that the libraries are open to the public, and have everything necessary for the public to obtain. There should be no reason for Judicial to spend funds on something of a duplicate nature. However, the distinction may be in providing assistance to parties. Barb suggested creating an ethically, mediating job description instead of creating a new professional job. To summarize: much is being done in this area. If any members of the committee are concerned with specific needs that must be addressed please talk to Gina, Simon, Dan or Judge Vogt or anyone who is working with this in another context regarding any of these recommendations. Action Items: Person Responsible: Deadline: Page 7 of 8

8 Professionals who Interact with the Courts (#68-74) 4:50-4:55 Update on Other Professionals Gina Weitzenkorn & Sue Waters Items: The Other Professionals Subcommittee is looking at CFI s and addressing their nature of work, environment, and how they are being utilized. There is a possibility of doing some surveying in that area. The Other Professionals Subcommittee is also looking at standard or suggestive curriculum for parenting and a model RFP. Both should probably be available in Spring General Recommendations (#79) -- Ongoing Oversight Committee for Family Issues 4:55-5:00 Next Meeting s Agenda and Adjourn 5:00 p.m. Judge Montgomery Items: - Committee Structure: sub-committees and new members - Charge and Order -Review Terms - # Survey - Parenting Classes - RPC Needs-Assessment Dates of Next Meetings: January 12, 2006 at 2:00 p.m. Page 8 of 8