Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary

Be calling to order the Joint Committee on Ways and Means and Judiciary. This afternoon we will hear from the Judiciary on their budget requests. Good afternoon. Happy New Year.

Good afternoon. Happy New Year. Chair Dela Cruz, Vice Chair Moriwaki, Chair Rhoads and Members of the Committee. Brandon Kimura, I'm the Director of our Policy and Planning Department of the Judiciary.

With me today are Rod Miley, the Administrative Director of the Courts Daylen Heather, Deputy Administrative Director of the Courts and a number of our Oahu administrators throughout the Judiciary, and also Retired Chief Judge Kim, who now serves as our Chief Court Administrator in the Third Circuit on the Big Island.

Thank you for the opportunity to present an overview of the Judiciary's mission and functions and biennium Budget Requests as you're aware, the Judiciary's mission as an independent branch of government is to administer justice in an impartial, efficient and accessible manner in accordance with the law.

This slide provides a few examples of how we pursue this mission in our trial courts across the state. We have several specialty courts such as Women's Court, Truancy Court and the Early Education Intervention Program, Driving While Impaired Court, Community Outreach Court and more. Courts also seek to enhance access to the justice system.

We do this in a number of ways and a few examples are listed here including self help Centers and access to Justice Rooms. We which have since 2011 led to the assistance of almost 38,000 individuals across the state at almost no cost to the public.

Small Claims Online Dispute Resolution, which allows those without attorneys to initiate small claims cases valued at $5,000 or less online and outside of business hours and we also allow e reminders of upcoming hearings for parties, lawyers and anyone interested in a particular case. This brings us to our biennium budget requests.

In total, the Judiciary's operating Request is for 6.17 million in FY26, 6.25 million in FY27, 17 permanent positions, 1 temporary position, which is an increase of less than 3% overall for operating budget. Of the total 18 positions that we request, 9 of them are to continue current staffing and this slide provides an overview of the full time equivalent positions we're requesting, but I will describe each of these a little more along with the accompanying funding requests over the next three slides.

Our first request is to make the Women's Court permanent. We're nearing the end of a three year pilot and the expiration of resources that were established by Act 243 in the 2022 Legislature. Women's court acknowledged that when women enter our justice system They've had similar experiences of trauma, abuse, mental illness, substance use disorders, and unhealthy relationships.

And Women's Court helps. Women's Court provides comprehensive substance use treatment. Excuse me, substance use treatment opportunities and resources to address the issues, hold women accountable, lead them to change their behavior and help them to move forward.

The request is to convert our seven temporary positions that were established by the prior act to permanent and add an eighth position, which would be a substance use counselor, and also for accompanying funding for all eight positions. Our second request is to expand the Truancy Court and Early Education Intervention Program on Oahu.

We have initiatives to reduce truancy throughout the state. This request is specific to Oahu. We're requesting approximately 180,000 in both years of the biennium to expand the program from approximately 30 schools which are currently in central and leeward oahu, to approximately 40 to 60 schools over two phases.

The first phase would be on the Windward district on Oahu. The second phase would add the Honolulu area. And typically how the how it expands is that we reach out to the district working with the DOE. We invite schools who are interested to contact us.

And if they are interested, then we will work with them and set that up. Which is why I say 40 to 60 schools, depending on how many are interested and who's interested. We're requesting funding only for this. Where you're inclined to repurpose existing positions to this higher need to this modern need.

Our next request in this area is to make our driving while impaired court permanent. We're again requesting funding only. We're repurposing existing vacant positions to this higher purpose. Since launching in 2013, 85 have graduated. We have 12 currently enrolled. For those who have joined and participated in the program, we have a 1% recidivism rate after two years.

For those who are eligible but didn't join, there's been a recidivism rate of 21%. This is for repeat or high blood alcohol content offenders. And so that's why it's not offered to all who are offended a driving while impaired offense.

This is not the cases that come before the court. It's for actual services to the offenders or what is this for?

These do come as cases before the court. And so based on whether they're eligible and they qualify and they decide to participate in the program. If they do, if they're eligible and they decide to participate, then we provide additional services and work with them over a period of time.

And so especially because these are higher risk folks, we really need to address the underlying substance use issues that they have.

So the 200 some odd $1000, is it for expansion?

It's to. It's to Fund the current positions, but it's to Fund the current positions because we're going to make it permanent. But as we make it permanent, it'll be knowing that it's permanent, we'll have an opportunity to expand.

So this is just to make it permanent. Make them permanent.

This is just to make it permanent. I mean, at the outset it's to make it permanent. But while it's more permanent, we can expand it because we know it's going to be around year over year.

For the two positions.

For two positions. Oh, I'll go back. The next set of requests are related to the new Wahiawa District Court. We're looking forward to opening the facility in the spring of 2026. These are remaining requests to ensure that upon opening it can fully serve the needs of those in the community as planned.

In short, we plan to create a full service district court that can serve as a hub for other rural courts on Oahu. We will include customer service filings, two courtrooms that we hope to run every day as opposed to the one courtroom that we have now in a leased space that doesn't run every day.

We will have criminal, civil and traffic and also full probation services out of this facility. And so it's going to be a much higher use facility that will be a hub for the area for that side of the island and also be a model for other rural courts going forward.

The first specific request we have this year is for supplemental security costs. These would be contracted security, primarily interior. Again, because it's going to be a much busier building with more traffic and people there and probation services. We'll need it to be. We'll need to ensure that it's secure to me, to meet best practices, we'll need at least one sergeant and three deputies.

In terms of sheriffs, we're seeking this as a contracted security, as an alternative, albeit less than optimal, just to ensure that we have a safe space and that it can open fully and serve people that it needs to. The second request related to Wahiawa is for an IT technician. This we're seeking. I'm sorry, the second.

The second request is for a janitor. This we're seeking a position and funding because the courthouse will be two stories over 38,000 square feet and include many other uses such as probation and drug testing and higher traffic. We need an additional janitor. So this would be the third janitor for the facility.

The third request for Wahiawa is to redescribe is funding only because we plan to redescribe a position for an IT technician that'll be dedicated to the facility because many of the hearings are by zoom, two courtrooms and numbers of staff and externals who want to have an IT tech on site so they can respond as needed.

Next request related to Wahiawa are four district court clerks and two bailiffs. Again, this is for funding only. We'll repurpose existing positions or redescribe. These were defunded during the pandemic. For the bailiffs in particular, we're going to redescribe them to make them hybrids and so we can be more flexible.

And Wahiawa is not only a hub for court users, but it's also a hub for our judiciary. So that Wahiawa, whether it's the IT tech mentioned earlier or our district court clerks and bailiffs, they can be the hub.

And as Ewa District Court may need services or Kaneohe may need assistance, our staff can move out from Wahiawa instead of having to come from town. But having these folks out there permanently in Wahiawa will definitely help that district court. The last request specific to Wahiawa is funding only for three social workers to move out to Wahiawa.

We plan to have seven total out there for a full probation services unit including supervision, drug testing, pre sent investigation, driver's ed, community service and other things. So this would be funding only for the social workers. The next request or last request on this slide is for an additional district court judge in Kona and staff.

The first and only Kona District court judge position was added nearly 40 years ago. Since then, the caseload is multiplied to an annual amount of approximately 60,000. So this we're seeking a position, positions for the judge and the staff and funding in this Bill.

And we'll also have a separate Bill in our judiciary package to increase the statutory authorization for a judge. Next batch of requests. We have three technology focused requests to enhance cybersecurity. Address infrastructure that's near the end of life. The first is funding for 458,000 for cybersecurity tools.

And that will Fund four positions that we are going to redescribe to this higher need and modern priority. They were defunded during the pandemic along with others. We're redescribing it now because this is what we need now. We'll create a cybersecurity unit in our IT Department. The second request here is.

Question Chair. So you have the amount in, but you don't have a number of positions highlighted in. Ours is blank.

We are for the cybersecurity area. We're only requesting funding. So the four redescribed positions is just to explain to you what we're. What we would plan to do, but we're not asking for any amendment on the positions front.

Great, thank you.

Yep. Next request is funding approximately 1.2 million to upgrade our judiciary email accounts from a very basic version to one that has enhanced threat protection features. This would bring us the same account that the same level that the Executive branch has and I believe the Legislature funded last year.

The third in the technology area is funding for network switches that are nearing their end of life and to replace 140 over the biennium and some in the first and some in the second year of the biennium. The next is a cost increase from DAGs for risk management. The DAGs has advised us the cost has increased.

And the last on this slide is a number of requests related to the Criminal Justice Research Institute. This is to continue the work of Act 147 of 2023 requesting funding and continuation of the permanent position and the temporary position that were in Act 147 of 2023.

The foundation has been created for the CJRI to aggregate the data, report and analyze and centralize the data. They've collected 15 years of data from the DLE. The AG and Judiciary partnered with agencies to begin mapping the data to draft pipelines and they've begun training staff to do so. Last slide on our operating requests.

This slide represents or it displays approximately 680,000 to restore funding for 12 positions that were defunded during the pandemic. The exception of the restoration is on the bottom right corner of this slide. The Office of the Public Guardian that we're requesting funding and positions.

The Office of the Public Guardian has a extremely heavy caseload and these social service aides, which will be two on Oahu and one on the Big island, will help the Office of the Public Guardian cover their cases and help the Guardians cover more ground. We currently have seven total guardians across the state.

The Big Island has only one and that guardian covers the entire island and also the island of Kauai. Our guardians on Oahu cover Maui Molokai and Lanai because we don't have any guardians currently there. So social service aides will help them cover more ground. Last slide here relates to our capital improvement Program requests.

Our Highest priority is 4 million in bond funds to design a new South Kohala District Court. Current facility carries significant concerns for safety, space, temperature and noise. With jealousy windows in the courtroom. It's simply inadequate to serve the needs of the court of the community.

Our second priority is 900,000 in bond funds to replace an AC chiller on Kauai. It's near the end of the life cycle. And the third is for 5 million in lump sum bond funds to continue work to extend the life of facilities occupied by the judiciary.

We have our two very busy courthouses on Oahu in downtown are 40 years old each. The Supreme Court and the ICA buildings are approximately 150 years old each. That concludes my presentation. Thank you for the opportunity available for questions.

Question. The South Kohala District Court, is that, that's new, the 4 million, is that the same place or are you, are you. Is that for district design and planning? What is this? What is the. It is design.

Design. It's just design.

And so is it going to be the same place?

It's on the same plot of land. There's a, there's an empty space next to it. It's all, it's already state land. So we plan to build a new facility right next door adjacent to it so that while it's in construction, the current one can continue to operate.

And then you're gonna move out., demolish the other. Or you can still.

Then we'll move out, I think we'll defer to DAGs on what they would like to use the facility for.

It's a nice facility and I think the region needs accommodations for other state accommodations as well.

Yeah, it's a, it's a workable facility, just not right for our needs Members.

Any other questions?

Sure. Thanks, Chair. So the judiciary puts out a number of purchase of service contracts for legal services, for Low income people, for immigrants, things like that. The prices, the amounts that we're paying don't seem to have kept up with inflation. Are you at all concerned about having just not having any bidders for those contracts anymore?

We are. We, we work with these partners regularly and so we try to support them wherever we can. We are aware and mindful that the rates are, have not, have not increased. We do issue the RFPs and thankfully they bid on it. So we're able to provide services. But we were supportive of an increase if there is funding available...

...

We're concerned and we don't want it to come at the expense of other judiciary priorities.

But have you made a request in this budget for increased funding for those purchase service contracts? Because that makes it sound like it's not really a priority for you.

No. Last year was it last year when we tried to do that and then the house or two years ago, but the house didn't agree. So lots of times when the Department asked, several times. And then they can't get it passed.

Yeah, I hear we're supportive. And you folks did a few years ago when that didn't go through, it was converted to us an actuarial study. And so we put the actuarial study out to bid for folks to bid on that. And it was essentially as was put in the statute, it was to have an actuarial study on the increase in cost of living for service providers. That was what we had written and we'd redone it two or three times and no one had bid on the actuarial study. So we don't even have that, unfortunately.

Okay, so at this point there's nothing has happened since then. Correct. So how do you get through that? I mean you've put it out. No one's willing to take the, take the bid for the amount of money offered.

Well, for that one in particular, that was limited to that year and that was really the actuarial study. We, I think we're not alone. And that money would have been good for a provider, but that was how that money has lapsed.

So thank you. So I apologize, I didn't look to all of your budget items, but I remember that last year, the year before we passed a Bill to increase court appointed fees and guardian ...fees. But I heard that you folks didn't implement it because it wasn't in the budget. So are you folks asking, is it in your budget now? Will you folks be able to raise fees?

We, we are in the process of that. And thank you, Senator, for the question. I'll just clarify a little bit. So I think it was two or three years ago we did get funding in the budget. It was 2.3 million to increase the fees there.

We are now seeking through a separate Bill in our judiciary package, statutory change to raise the fees. Meanwhile, we're, we're working through our contracts to increase them where we can because some of them, as you know, on Oahu is by contract and not through, they don't pay the exact same rate as a statute. So we're, we are actively working through that.

Folks aren't paying per the statute. The sounds like illegal to me for judiciary.

The Statute has a provision in us that allows to pay something that approximates it.

Okay.

But we will. To your. To your point, we will have a separate Bill in a judiciary package this year. And I appreciate the question.

On this slide here, which is table 15 on your CIP, Mr. Kimura, do you feel that your lump sum for CIPs is enough for 5 million, especially for repairs at district court in the First Circuit? And Ewa?

Thank you, Senator, for the question. Ewa is in need of quite a bit of care. We appreciate the support.

And I say Ewa because I did a site tour and it's more structural. I mean, they do. The staff does what they can and the judges. So I'm just curious if you have enough to articulate the needs to provide for those type of repairs. Yeah.

Thank you. For Ewa District Court in particular, the Legislature funded a few years ago, you know, some things for the roof, which was very, well, much appreciated. One of the biggest challenges with our Ewa District Court is that the foundation, there's a really big problem. And so until that is resolved, we're reluctant to make other.

Other things where we're looking at the estimate of how much it would be to address the foundation. Part of that is because if it is a soil issue, then it's even more complicated because it's not just rebuilding or buttressing the foundation, if you will. It may just not be a great site for that.

We do share the site with DoH and I think other government offices. So we're sort of in a not wait and see, but we're assessing whether to stay there or find some near nearby site where they can work. So since our CIP request a few years ago for the roof, we are continuing to kind of see what. What we can do with what we have.

Thank you. This is located where?

The Ewa District Court is.

By Office of Elections down there in Pro City.

Yeah. Right next to the cemetery, right?

Yes.

Yeah, yeah.

Right on the border of your district, then, Senator Wakai.

Yeah. So in follow up to that with the new Wahiawa District Court, we'll say in the event that it's not good to operate at Ewa, could you transfer cases up to Wahiawa?

If Ewa becomes inoperable, then I think that would be something they would have to look at. But in the. I don't think we're planning or intending to do that.

I tried that already.

I think looking at whether there's another area in the nearby Ewa, because we want to serve Communities locally, especially for the district courts.

Property is small.

It's very small. It's small. Even though there's really a parking lot to it.

There's probably about 15 stalls.

So, yeah, if not, okay. With regard to how much, how much do you depend, how much does the judiciary depend on federal funding grants, some kind of programmatic or entitlement money is there. How much do we depend on the Feds?

For our direct funding? Our direct grants from the feds we receive. We currently have about a little under 2.8 million in federal grants.

2.8 million out of a total budget of 120.

Our total operating is around 200 million.

200. Okay. Yeah. So.

But that's a General Fund, so.

So you're not too concerned if, I mean, I just don't know what to expect from the Federal Government in the coming months.

We, we are concerned in that, you know, these are, the grants are important projects because they're usually trying to either help us do something that we can't get other General funds for or to be on the cutting edge and move ahead some way. So these are really important things to us.

Another aspect is that even if we're not losing the federal funding directly, many of our providers, whether it's to our probationers or in family court or other things that, you know, as part of the justice system, rely on quite a bit of federal funding.

And so is there a contingency plan of some kind?

We're working through that in terms of assessing how our services, how much our services rely on it, not only directly, but indirectly through our providers.

Any other question? Go ahead.

So the specialty courts, I mean, you're making that an area of priority. Do obviously the judiciary believes they work. How do you know they work? Is there data that supports it or is it more anecdotal or how do you determine whether it's the specialty courts or ones you want to move ahead with?

For our specialty courts, put them in two categories. One category would be where we've modeled it after other programs on the mainland. So veterans treatment court, mental health court, drug court. Those are very common in other jurisdictions. And so we. Part of being common is that they're well studied and so we bring over their evidence based approaches.

Our staff will visit sites as needed or go to conferences. There's a drug court conference where a lot of staff from across the country go to those kinds of things.

So those, because they're based on evidence based practices and we from time to time have whether it's an audit or an assessment as to our fidelity to those practices. That's how we know whether they're working and we maintain statistics. The second category would be more of the homegrown type of programs.

And in this category we have things such as girls Court or women's court or women's Court. We believe we're one of, if not the only state that's designed a program like this. And here, because we have judges and social workers who are experienced from other treatment courts, they bring over these evidence based practice mindset. And so we're going to continue to assess them as needed as well.

Do you think they actually save money or do they just make, I mean there's, it's becoming more efficient. Is saving money too. But is it an actual money savings or is it just a more efficient way to deal with those cases?

I'm sorry, I don't gather the question.

Do having specialty courts actually save money?

I think they. Thank you, Senator. I think they do save money. And one example is maybe this will just be the first of other examples. But for our women's court as an example, we're requesting the first seven positions during the pilot were a little under 700,000.

I think it was 695 for the cost of the entire actual which were positions and other services and funding like that. Our request this year that'll be eight positions will be just about 705,000.

And the reason we can get an extra position for just a little bit more money is because we're going to bring some of those services back in house. And that's what the substance use counselor, instead of contracting out some of that, we'll be able to do some of that in house.

That's just one small example that I don't think fully answers your question. But in the bigger scheme of things, when we're keeping folks out of jail, which can be very costly, and when we're keeping folks from coming back again and again and again, which can be very costly, we believe we are, we are saving money.

And so DWI court as an example where we have a very, very low recidivism rate for those who participate. And again, if you don't participate, you're highly likely to end up in jail at some point because these are high risk folks with a substance use disorder, we're keeping those folks out of jail not only for that current offense but also going forward for future offenses.

Okay, how about the truancy court that. How's success being Measured in the truancy court.

For that one, What a key measure of success there is the number of petitions that are filed. So we. The reason we're able to do the truancy court is because over the last 10 or 15 years or so, the number of youth and juvenile that we are detaining in our facilities is plummeted to by over 80%.

And so our social workers have a little more time to get out there, be proactive, engage with the youth much earlier on. So the idea for truancy court came from, how can we engage with these youth earlier on before it becomes a problem, before they stop going to school, start getting into bad habits, start hanging with the wrong crowd. Let's engage with them early. And a second aspect is that the.

When kids were not attending school for days, weeks, at the beginning of the school year, it was a problem. But between the schools or the Attorney General's Office or others, they weren't getting them to court and they wouldn't until the late in the school year. And by that time they lost a year.

So here we're engaging with the schools earlier, with the counselors, and once there's a problem, they identify the youth, they identify the family. Our social workers can work with them directly, get them back in school, figure it out. It's what turns out. It's often clothing or school supplies or transportation.

We're finding more recently that for middle schoolers, they're staying up late on social media. We can talk with them and talk with the family. And what we consider as a measure of success is that they're back in school and we don't have a truancy petition filed in our courts.

So that's a big deal for Kauai, since we do the entire island of Kauai for truancy court, our truancy type initiative, last year, they engaged with 37 families and 32. For 32 of the 37, no petition was needed to be filed.

So what about your stats for the mental health court?

For mental health court, I think there's a few different areas. Thank you, Senator. For mental health court specifically, which is at the circuit court level, that actually is modeled after things on the mainland.

So we do keep things on that you may be asking, but forgive me and correct me if I'm wrong, if you're asking about the Act 26 type of work.

You can answer it any way you want to know how you. For the success. It doesn't sound like it's successful.

For the, for the Act 26 type of work. And this is to.

Why don't you describe what.

I'll, I'll describe Act 26. Act 26.

If this is not a budget question, then maybe this is something that we can take a bit sharing.

Question on overtime. Okay. I'm just curious. 3rd Circuit Court, is there a difference? Not a difference, but a separation of your overtime which includes we're at 1.2% and you're at what, over time, $203,000. Is there a difference between Hilo and Kona or the divisions or where does the overtime happens?

That one. I, I, I can get back to you.

Unless, curious, is it because there's a lot of vacancies or

I can speculate, but I shouldn't. So unless Judge Kim has something, I think we can get back to you. Yeah, we'll get back to you. Thank you, Senator.

You can send it to the Committee. thank you.

Thank you. Well, I did have a CIP question or two. The, it's no longer in District 13. I think it's moved over to District 12. The courts. Circuit Court in downtown Honolulu Here. For years there were questions about the elevators and the secure, the security perimeter. Are those, how far along is that? And is that part of the lump sum that you're requesting.

For the elevators? In particular, thanks to the Legislature, we believe that we have sufficient funding. It is getting underway and so we'll of course keep you folks updated as that moves. But we believe at this point we have sufficient funding for all of the elevators at Kaahumanu Hale.

We did also receive funding from you, thank you, for the security to upgrade the security station that is in progress and we're communicating with Dags as well. But I don't have a, we don't have a current funding request. If it is something that is manageable within the lump sum, that's the kind of thing that it would take care of.

Okay. See? No other questions. How about in 2022 we got rid of six full time equivalent social workers for probation services? Do you have those, do you have those back yet? Or is that something you requested in this budget, in this supplemental budget? zero, this is the real budget, the Budget, Sorry.

I don't know about that. Those specific positions because I have to look up the position numbers. But three of the three that we're seeking for Wahiawa this session are our social worker position. So I don't know if the position numbers line up exactly, but those were defunded during the pandemic. Okay.

And then with regard to the Office of Public Guardian, can you, can you just explain a little more what that does and whether we're funding it? Are we funding it adequately and are we. Are you having any trouble hiring at Kokua Kanawai? It's like a three part question, sorry.

Funding adequately

And for those who don't pay super close attention, this sort of thing, what does it do? Why is it important?

You know our Office of Public Guardian Administrator Roland Lee, I believe is available. Or maybe he's a, he's an excellent advocate about the office is.

Afternoon. If you can just state your name.

Good morning, Senate. Good afternoon, Senate. My name is Roland Lee. I'm the Director for the Office of Public Guardian.

So yeah, my question is. Well, several parts, but what is. What, what, what is your, what does your office do and why is it important?

So our office makes decisions for incapacitated adults who have no friends or family to do that for them. And so our office is court appointed to become guardian.

So this includes mental health cases too?

This includes mental health cases, developmentally disabled, brain injuries, people who are elderly, dementias. So people who don't have the wherewithal and have been assessed by a Doctor to be incapacitated.

Okay. And I guess there was, there was a request to increase the funding for that. This. But in this budget for that office. Did I misunderstand?

Yes. The request here is to add three FTE and funding for social service assistance. That'll help the guardians cover more ground. Okay. So it's not exactly guardians.

And then the Kokua Kanawai. Are you, are you having trouble getting those or. I can't remember whether they're even paid or not.

So usually the court will ask the petitioner to pay for the Kokua Kanawai and that that position is to help the court make a decision on whether or not to do a guardianship appointment.

I see. Okay. All right.

Okay. Any other questions?

Question to the first question that that Chair Rhodes had with regards to the Inca. Incapacitated person. Do you contract out the services for? Who takes care of them then? So our office, if you're managing the case. Yeah, the person.

Yes, thank you.

What do you do with.

Thank you for the question. Our office makes decisions and usually if the person has funding and depending on the amount of funding that the person has, our office will oftentimes manage the funding for the person to contract for services.

So for example, the person might need long term care and so if the person has funding for that or if they don't have funding, then we would apply them to benefits such as Medicaid long term care and SSI. And with that funding we would manage it and pay for foster homes or nursing care so that that's our office doesn't provide the care.

That's understandable. Thank you.

One last question. Thanks. So we passed a Bill last year on judicial security. Judges and other court personnel were receiving threats. Is that Bill working and is there going to be a budget request associated with it or something that you're absorbing in the budget already?

Thank you. It is something we're absorbing. It is very, very helpful. It's much appreciated. We continue to have an increase in physical threats towards our judges and we're really grateful that it's there because it's a tool.

Okay. No further questions. Adjourned.