SAVE Commission's findings - La Follette School of Public Affairs ...

CHAPTER
FOUR
GOAL #22
Judicial
Branch
Efficient operations
and effective planning
Actions
22.1
Courts should plan for
the future like other
branches of government.
22.2
The court system
should embrace
technology for efficiency
and service.
lthough it is one of three separate but
equal branches of government, the judicial
branch has not had the same extent
of management scrutiny as the executive
and legislative branches. However, the
Commission’s responsibility to look at efficiency
and technology caused it to view
the courts even in its limited tenure.
The Commission was told the courts offer
the same opportunities for efficiency, cooperation,
planning, management systems and
technological improvements as other branches.
State and local governments spend at least
$227.8 million annually for the judicial system.
Taxpayers pay again when they go to court for
a legal fix that might have been avoided through
mediation.
SYSTEM EFFICIENCY
Technology provides opportunities for
greater efficiency in tracking and moving cases
through the civil court system and the criminal
court system (especially its overworked cases
that move from police officer, to district attorney,
to court, to corrections facility or home
monitoring). It also offers new challenges that
may redefine the work of all involved.
The courts should use existing technology
to streamline work. Innovations such as
electronic bulletin boards, satellite courthouses,
E-mail and electronic record keeping, computerized
scheduling, video conferencing, data
searches and more, coordinated through the
new Public Information Utility, can help those
responsible for prosecuting and passing judgment.
Video conferencing especially, already in
the experimental phase, will save time and
travel for all parties. Lawmakers and citizens
should view high-tech tools as essential courtroom
investments, although that might have to
be discussed in line with new revenue sources.
Technology also can prevent problems.
Law enforcement should be able to access digitized
visual information, case law and other
resources to reduce mistakes in prosecution
decisions made out on the street, lake or field.
This could save money by improving efficiency
and reducing the state cases that get dismissed
or are lost. The same data also would be available
to state attorneys, making them more efficient.
However, archaic laws, professional attitudes
and procedures may discourage efficiency.
Paper, procedures and personal appearances,
not electronics, drive the legal system. The legal
profession and the Legislature need to address
these issues.
Also important to savings is how the system
is organized and operates. “Turf protection,”
jurisdictional barriers, and lack of administrative
sophistication and coordination affect some
courts. Some serious problems of inefficient
case management exist. The judiciary and clerks
offices should address their own inefficiencies
before others step in.
As recommended to the Commission, civil
and criminal information should be more comprehensively
systematized and available to all
in the system at any time. There are successes,
but the record could be better.
The Commission also heard about the
waste and problems in the assignment of multiple
social workers to the same child or family.
These frequently are working directly for, or
under contract to, different agencies: corrections,
schools, courts, welfare and more. The
average number of social workers per child was
four. The common sense approach is one per
child.
58 CITIZEN • COMMUNITY • GOVERNMENT — WISCONSIN: THE 21 ST CENTURY