|
|
|
Officials' Report on
Current Status Barb Birger and I attended the Audit Review Hearing this morning at 7:30 a.m. when the “Report of the State Auditor” was released and discussed. >Chapter 3, “Court Reporter and
Transcript Cost” has three recommendations consisting of: “Recommendation No. 14:
The Judicial Department should review the current system for compensating court
reporters, evaluate various methods, and report on and make recommendations for
implementing the most cost-effective method of compensation. This should
include: a.
Adopting a method to track transcripts prepared in-house and eliminate any
overlap in compensation for transcripts prepared during normal business hours: b. Requiring
court reporters to submit annual income attestation documents, compiling and
analyzing these documents, and adjusting court reporter salaries as
necessary:” Judicial Department Response: “Agree. To be implemented by March 2003. At the request of the Chief Justice, the office of the State Court Administrator, last fall, began an evaluation of various methods of court reporting and a review of court reporter compensation, including transcripts. We will present a report to the Joint Budget Committee regarding these matters in March, and will also send a copy to the Office of the State Auditor.” “Recommendation No. 15:
The Judicial Department should conduct an analysis of the various methods of
court reporting used both nationwide and in Colorado to determine which is the
most cost-effective and reliable.” Judicial Department Response: “Agree. To be implemented by March 2003. As noted in our response to Recommendation No. 14, we are in the process of completing this analysis and will submit a copy of our report to the Office of the State Auditor in March.” “Recommendation No. 16:
The Judicial Department should reassess the current transcript fee structure by: a. Evaluating the rates set for transcript originals and copies including the purpose for the revenue generated by the transcript fee. b. Evaluating the feasibility of setting rates based on methods other than a per page rate. c. Evaluating
the transcript fee and fee revenue in conjunction with an evaluation of court
reporter compensation.” Judicial Department Response: “Agree. To be
implemented by March 2003. As noted in our response to
Recommendation No. 14, we are in the process of reviewing transcript fees and
will submit a copy of our report to the Office of the State Auditor in March.” As you can see from reading the excerpts from the report, we still are unclear exactly what our future holds for us. You can view the report in its entirety by visiting the web site of the Office of the State Auditor at www.state.co.us\auditor. A few of Jerry Marroney’s comments
consisted of the following: On page 70 of the report, they talk
about a Canadian study where they charge using a “volume of text” method
rather than the page rate method. Richard Matt and I sent Jerry, in the
form of an ASCII, five transcripts to run through this Canadian software to
compare the costs. We sent to him criminal, civil, juvenile, water, and
domestic cases. Three of the five transcripts would have been more
expensive if charged using the volume of text method instead of our $2.35 per
page rate and the two would have been within $25. Reporters have not received a page
rate increase since 1996 at which time was $.10 per page. To date,
Colorado’s page per rate is third or fourth from the bottom. Jerry stressed the importance of real
time reporters and the benefits it provides to judges, attorneys, clerks, and
the backlog of transcripts particularly to the Court of Appeals. He spoke
about tying the real time into ICON, which would have numerous benefits for the
judicial system. He stated, “The best mechanism is real time…” He stated that he has checked into the
State purchasing all equipment and therefore the State receiving all transcript
monies from reporters and informed the legislators that that is “too
expensive.” An alternative to this could possibly be taking the State
transcript monies and allowing us to charge for private transcripts and continue
to purchase and maintain our own equipment. After the hearing Jerry spoke briefly
to Barb, Betsy (lobbyist), and myself. He has a report that is due to the
Joint Budget Committee Analyst by the end of March. He has set a meeting for next week
consisting of four chief judges, district administrators, Barb Birger, Richard
Matt, Betsy Clark, Joyce Martin, and myself to discuss the drafts for review and
input to be made to the JBC analyst at the end of March. Keep in mind that our State budget
deficit could possibly reach $1 billion dollars and cuts are not just happening
to us. Layoffs and cuts are happening throughout the entire state. We will do our best to keep you
immediately informed of any information we learn next week. Thank you. Please feel free to call (303-441-3749) or email me if you have additional questions or concerns. Susie DeWitt |
|
Website Designed, Maintained, and Hosted by CourtReps The appearance of external hyperlinks in this home page does
not constitute
|
