Imagine if you had a crisis in your family or business and you sought to have it resolved in one of Vermont's courts - Superior, District, Family, Small Claims or Probate - only to find out that the court(s) were closed. Hopefully, it will never come to this. Not unlike other branches of Vermont state government, the judicial system, the third branch of government, must also contend with the wise utilization of the state's scarce financial resources. This is not the first time that the Vermont judiciary system has had to face a crisis of funding. It occurred in 1990, when the court suspended jury trials in civil cases. Even though justice was not denied to those who had petitioned the court for justice, nonetheless, it was delayed for years in some cases.

However, the problem with funding for the courts for at least the next several years does indeed appear to be precarious. Vermont Chief Justice Paul Reiber addressed the Vermont General Assembly on Feb. 19 in a seven-page report. He noted: "As evidence of the problem, we have recently had to institute a system of periodic court closures and furlough days."

The Supreme Court has been and continues to work closely with the executive and Legislature on this serious funding issue. Those citizens of Vermont who are not involved with the judicial system most likely do not have any idea of how serious a problem this independent branch of state government must contend with. Nevertheless, for many Vermonters, businesses, as

Advertisement
well as non-Vermonters, the court is where they can have their voice heard.

And to place this point in perspective, below are the number of cases added in just one year, 2008, in the state, Bennington County and Windham County:

Superior Court, state, 19,710, Bennington County, 1,359, Windham County, 1,668; Probate Court, state, 3,926, Bennington, 323, Windham, 312; District Court, state, 20,530, Bennington, 1,447, Windham, 1,751; Family Court, state, 23,322, Bennington, 1,534, Windham, 1,801. Total: State, 67,488, Bennington County, 4,663, Windham, 5,532 Source: Vermont Commission on Judicial Operation

According to Chief Justice Reiber, the annual number of cases added has not changed significantly from prior years, other than there has been a decrease in cases heard in the Superior Court. However, an increase has occurred in the District and Family courts. For clarification, the state's Superior Court deals with civil and jury cases, as well as appeals and review. A large percentage of its cases, 60 percent, are classified as small claims. Whereas, the Probate courts hear cases that deal with trusts and estates as well as guardianship and adoptions. Vermont's 14 District courts have been designated for felony, misdemeanor, suspension and traffic. The largest caseload is in the Family Court. Here, domestic, juvenile, mental health, child support and Relief from Abuse (RFA) are heard. The Supreme Court, the state's court of last appeal, constitutionally has two functions; to adjudicate cases that are brought before its five justices and to administer the state courts. The Supreme Court several years ago recognized that there was a problem and in response instituted changes that would make the judicial system more efficient, accessible and less costly.

The list of changes, nine categories in all, dealt with reduced jury service, court reporting, greater use of technology and others. These changes have brought $5.9 million in savings to the state - but it is not enough. The funding crisis has become worse in 2009 and is expected to be critical in fiscal 2010 and 2011.

In 1999, there were three vacancies within the state's judicial system. As of 2009 there are 30 unfilled positions.

Chief Justice Reiber's colleague on the Supreme Court, Justice John Dooley, noted last fall in his report, Judicial Funding in Time of Budget Crisis, "If we are to avoid the second option, an irrational dismantling of the courts to maximize the short-term budget savings, those who work in and use the courts must speak out. I urge you to join the debate; the future of judicial institutions depends on it."

The seriousness of this issue, the funding of our courts together with the ramifications, cannot be fully addressed in a 700-word column. The second part of the discussion (next Saturday) will address the backlog in the various courts, and the goals of the recently formed (November 2008) Vermont Commission on Judicial Operation.

It was once said, "Delay is the most deadly form of denial." Let's hope that this quote will not be relevant to Vermont's Judicial System. Don Keelan lives in Arlington.