Case Flow Management in Limited Jurisdiction Courts

1
Case Flow Management in Limited Jurisdiction
Courts

• Managing a Photo Enforcement Program via
  Partnership
• Janet G. Cornell, Court Administrator
• Daniel W. Edwards, Deputy Court Administrator
• Scottsdale, AZ, City Court
• Presented to the National Association for Court
  Management July 15, 2008

2
Photo Enforcement (PE)

• Question
• What comes to mind when you hear that phrase?

3
(No Transcript)
4
Why Todays Session

• Recent and increased interest in photo
  enforcement implementation
• Photo enforcement as a specialized docket
• Case study in partnering for service

5
Today Well Cover

• Elements of photo enforcement
• Partnership and collaboration items
• Program oversight issues
• Role of the court
• Case flow management
• Program performance
• Challenges and lessons learned
• Ethical issues

6
Whats Your Interest?

• Judges
• Court staff
• Policy setters
• Court finance managers
• Vendor
• Other

7
Question for Attendees

• Which of your courts has a photo enforcement
  program in place?
• Which of you are currently evaluating or planning
  for photo enforcement?

8
Program Policy Areas
8
9
AZ Photo Enforcement Programs

• Town of Paradise Valley, AZ started in 1987
• 20 plus courts live with photo enforcement
• Department of Public Safety Photo Enforcement
• City/County Photo Enforcement
• Methods vary
• Sensors (piezoelectric strips) or radar
• Intersection-mid block-vans

9
10
The Scottsdale Experience

• Scottsdale program operations started 1996-1997
• Current installations streets, mid block,
  freeway
• 7 fixed intersections speed, red light
• 4 fixed installations, mid block speed
• 6 fixed sites on freeway - speed
• 4 mobile vans speed
• City operated program State overseen program
• Over 300,000 photo cites since 2006
• Vendor change in July 2007
• On drawing board coming
• Multiple charges on single citation form
• Left hand turn on red violations

10
11
Elements of a PE Program

• Law enforcement driven
• Vendor involvement
• Technology and automation
• Program visibility
• Political sensitivity of topic
• Citizen acceptance

12
Photo Enforcement Partners
13
Photo Enforcement Program What are the Goals?
13
14
Caseflow Management

• Typical Case Flow Topics
• Early intervention
• Deadlines for events
• Court supervision of cases
• Use of monitoring and information systems
• Additional Issues
• Law enforcement partner
• Local prosecutor involved or not?
• Services process service, driving school,
  collections

14
14
15
Flow Chart of NOV Process
16
Flow Chart of Citation Process
17
Timeline
18
Where Money Goes
19
Unique to PE Program

• Law enforcement program
• Court based activities
• Electronic filing program
• Data exchanges critical
• Data integration imperative
• Notice of violation process
• Obtaining jurisdiction on case

19
20
Court Processing Differences

• Officer written complaints
• Personal jurisdiction
• Violator identified
• Default judgment if no answer
• Collection actions follow
• Photo enforcement complaints
• No service upon issuance
• Defendant not always driver
• Vendor involvement police authorization
• No default or collections without service
• Dismissals if no voluntary compliance or service

21
Program Oversight Issues

• Legislative issues
• Statutes, rules and policies
• Political nature
• Media interests
• Records requests

22
Legislative Issues

• Legislators/citizens get involved
• Other partners impacted
• Constitutionality
• Owner vs. Driver

23
Rules, Statutes, Administrative Orders

• ARS 28-645 Red light violations
• ARS 28-654 Signage
• ARS 28-3392 Defensive driving
• ARS 28-1592 Commencement of action and service
• ARS 28-1593 Days to file in court with service
  of complaint

24
Rules, Statutes, Administrative Orders

• Rule 4 Rules of Civil Procedure time for
  response
• Rule 4 Waiver of service
• Case dismissal times After 90 days, may dismiss
• Administrative Orders

25
Political Nature

• Politically charged program
• Surveys
• Revisited annually by legislature

26
Media Interests/Records Requests

• Media
• Heightened interest
• Statistics/Revenue
• Super speeders
• Frequent fliers
• Records requests
• Individual cases
• Bulk records

27
Role of the Court?

• Boundaries may be fluid
• Court expertise and interest
• Assertiveness of court to be at table
• Caseflow management principles
• Educating partners on judicial processes

27
27
28
The Balancing Act

• Court - executive - legislative
• Court as neutral, yet engaged for operational
  data case, financial
• Law enforcement - court
• Vendor - government
• Facts and anecdotal information
• Program information goal
• Technology differences court, vendor, law
  enforcement, prosecutor

28
28
29
Court as Center of Data
29
30
Court Resources Affected

• Customer service staff
• In person
• On phone
• Handling paperwork/documents
• Judicial officers
• Hearing times
• Contested hearings
• Court security
• Court interpreters
• Daily processing tasks
• Policy issue time
• Program management internal/administrative,
  procurement and contract issues
• Global policy issues city/government officials

31
Statistics Measured by Our Court

• Customers on site
• Front counter volume
• Phone calls
• IVR system
• Correspondence
• Initial hearings
• Contested hearings

• Security screening
• Queuing system
• Docket codes
• Web/IVR use
• Revenue
• Driving School
• Process Service

32
Court Statistics
33
Court Statistics
34
Court Statistics
35
Lessons Learned

• Early and continuous court involvement
• Plan ahead - court involvement at conceptual
  stage
• Court relationships internal and external
• Program statistics critical
• Create metrics in advance - court at center of
  data
• Court also financial focal point due to data
• Program oversight external to court
• Impacts of vendor contract structure

35
36
More Lessons Learned

• Program is technology driven
• Rules, processes and forms manually based with an
  automation driven program
• Project management practices critical
• Establish single court spokesperson then
  coordinate with city, law enforcement
  spokesperson
• Be aware of, alert to program assumptions
• Level of program interest political issue
• Citizen perceptions of the court, staff customer
  service, staffing levels, work volumes, policy
  issues

36
37
Challenges

• Automation a blessing and a curse
• Push/pull of court law enforcement
• Court based enforcement defaulting a case,
  issuing warrants, collections agency, tax
  intercepts
• Coordination with vendor, and partners for data
  availability and definition
• Level of court involvement in vendor selection,
  contract oversight

37
38
Our Response

• Mobilize
• Get/remain involved at the table
• Watch and monitor
• Create triage mechanisms
• Analyze customer entry points for resources
  needed (IVR, web, on site)
• Determine statistics to publish
• Automation FTE(s)

39
12 Steps You Can Take to Prepare for Photo
Enforcement

• Partner the presiding judge and court
  administrator on program philosophy.
• Get the court involved in planning and
  preparation.
• Run workload scenarios.
• Establish performance and counting methods for
  workload.
• Prepare cost analysis process and measures.
• Prepare technology.
• Review rules, statutes and legal requirements.
• Map out the process and flow and timeline.
• Consider political climate with local leaders,
  legislature, media/press.
• Create written procedures, business rules, and
  policies or procedures.
• Anticipate requests for information data and
  statistics.
• Establish a single point of contact for your
  court to speak about the program.

39
40
Todays Successes

• Technology based operation
• Standardized citation content
• Collaboration court and partners
• Use of FAQs
• Creation of specialized calendar
• Assistance from the AOC
• Sharing experiences with other courts

40
41
Ethical Issues and Scenarios

• Should your judges be trained by the photo
  enforcement vendor on how the equipment operates?
• Can court staff attend a vendor demonstration?
• Should court employees attend a vendor sponsored
  users conference?
• Can the court limit the data that is released
  about the courts photo enforcement cases?
• Legal information versus legal advice, where does
  court staff draw the line in explaining the
  process (what is process service? Who made the
  rule to require a hearing on site?)
• Should a judge speak to a civics group regarding
  a photo enforcement initiative?

41
42
Photo Enforcement Specialty Court or Problem
Solving Court?

• Problem Solving Court
• Behavior change desired
• Speed reduction desire
• Public safety goal
• Behavior related driving school

• Specialty Court
• Cases sent to special docket/calendar
• Locally based program
• Case type specific

43
Q - A

• Questions?
• Comments?

44
Resources

• Daniel Edwards
• Phone [phone]
• Email dwedwards_at_scottsdaleaz.gov
• Janet Cornell
• Phone [phone]
• Email jcornell_at_scottsdaleaz.gov
• www.ncsconline.org - for article copy
• http//www.ncsconline.org/WC/CourTopics/pubs.asp?t
  opicTraffi