Court Administration Forum II

On October 5, 2005, USC’s Institute for Public Service and Policy Research sponsored a second Court Administration Forum. Twenty-five city managers/administrators, court administrators and judges attended. The discussion included a wide range of topics which are summarized below.

Office of Court Administration

Participants expressed their concerns with the lack of responsiveness and the inconsistent direction they receive from Court Administration. They feel that municipal courts are not considered a key stakeholder by Court Administration. Participants believe the relationship between Court Administration and municipal courts affects many of the issues listed below.

Training Issues/Opportunities

One of the issues mentioned at the forum in May was training of judges, court administrators, and other court personnel. Several participants mentioned this during introductions as one of the top issues their courts are facing. Specifically, the two major concerns are the need for standardization in courts rules and procedures to allow more consistent training and lack of training opportunities for court personnel. Several ideas were suggested on how to address these issues. A task force has been formed to consider these and other ideas to develop a plan of action. Listed below are the task force members:

  • Diane Anderson, Clerk of Court, City of Rock Hill
  • Ponja Beck, Administrative Judge, City of Greer
  • Liz Lewis, Clerk of Court, City of Goose Creek
  • Alma Miller, Court Administrator, City of Spartanburg
  • Jane Modla, Municipal Judge, City of Rock Hill
  • Sally Phipps, Court Administrator, Town of Mt. Pleasant
  • Sylvia Skeeter, Court Administrator, City of Charleston
  • Lee Tindal, Magistrate/Municipal Judge, Sumter
  • Steve Willis, City Administrator, City of Lancaster

Standardization of Fines & Assessments

State assessments were the most common issue mentioned by participants. The City of Lancaster proposed a method for simplifying the current court assessment process. The City’s recommendation is that a flat percentage assessment replaces all regular assessments, special assessments, add-ons, and exemptions. The City also suggested exempting parking tickets from the assessment process. The group concurred with this recommendation. An additional suggestion was made to have the assessment based on the date the ticket is written as opposed to the date the ticket is adjudicated. The Municipal Association has agreed to place this on its 2006 legislative agenda. USC will contact the Association of Counties to enlist its support.

Statewide Court Computer System

The discussion focused mainly on the implementation status of the Judicial Enforcement Management Software (JEMS). The participants discussed technical support issues and differences in the vendor-purchased version and the state-purchased version. Several cities have purchased other systems (e.g., SmithData, EnCode, etc.) and have found them to be useful.

Court Security

Participants discussed the need for written procedures for security plans. The cities of Charleston and Rock Hill have written security plans and agreed to share them with the group.

Other Issues

Listed below are issues the participants mentioned that could be discussed in more depth at future forums:

Transportation of mental health patients

Range of fines charged for parking citations

Types of cases sent to 30-day court

Need for municipal courts to have advocates, such as city manager/administrator, chief magistrate, etc.

Increased caseload of courts (staff, space, funding, etc.)