File Photo by Gabriel Christus/Aurora Sentinel
AURORA | Aurora’s municipal justice system lacks the prosecutors, public defenders and administrative staff needed to handle the volume of cases that end up in court, according to a study completed by the National Center for State Courts and published this week.
In March 2023, the Aurora Municipal Court contracted with the center, which evaluated the different types of cases handled in municipal court; the amount of time spent on cases, broken down by the type of case and employee; and the relationship between the workload and number of employees in each office controlled by the city.
Among other conclusions, the study’s authors found that “every position analyzed does not have enough (full-time employees) to process the current workload.”
They estimated the court would need to bring on about 10 prosecutors, three public defenders and three courthouse employees to promptly process cases.
“All departments did have a staffing deficit,” Court Administrator Candace Atkinson said during the July 11 meeting of the council’s public safety committee, where the center’s findings were presented and discussed. “As we improve our case management systems, that’s likely to shift a little bit, but that’s where we were as of the time of this study.”
The findings of the study were included in the agenda packet for Thursday’s committee meeting. Besides highlighting the shortage of employees, the study’s authors also raised concerns about the court’s antiquated system for sharing and managing case information, writing that “the case management system, reliance on paper files, outdated technology and equipment significantly impact court operations.”
Court staffers described their efforts to move toward electronic recordkeeping during a council study session Monday — information technology manager Kyle Peterson told the council that the court is currently in the process of “going fully paperless.”
File Photo by PHILIP B. POSTON/Sentinel Colorado
In response to a survey included in the study, attorneys and other employees of the municipal justice system expressed frustration with how entities handled case files, with all offices but the Public Defender’s Office using paper records.
“Because there are so many steps and staff involved in creating a paper case file, locating the file can take hours, depending on where it is in the process,” the study states. “Scheduling a case is not linear and requires multiple back-and-forth conversations between offices. Handwritten notes on the paper files are also hard to decipher, adding to case processing time.”
An outdated operating system used throughout the court is, apparently, another source of problems.
“The court’s database is locally run via an antiquated DOS system. If multiple programs run simultaneously, computers crash, and work is lost,” the study’s authors wrote.
Staffing problems that survey respondents blamed in part on sub-par pay and benefits were also cited as contributing to “delayed dispositions.” Atkinson did not describe and council members did not ask about case delays caused by the problems described in the study.
The study’s release also comes as the council considers handing off to counties all domestic violence prosecutions in the Aurora Municipal Court, a category of cases that the study said represents about 5% of all cases filed as well as 29% of the time spent on all cases by prosecutors and 51% of time spent by public defenders.
Council members who attended the committee meeting questioned the extent to which the findings could be used to model what workloads might look like if the city halts the prosecution of domestic violence.
While the study’s authors indicate that such a study should be redone when “factors affecting the study change significantly,” Atkinson said the city could simply subtract the cases and associated investments of time from the data provided.
In response to a suggestion from chief public defender Elizabeth Cadiz that the city invite the National Center for State Courts to weigh in at a study session about how ending domestic violence prosecutions would impact the workload model, Atkinson said she did not think it was necessary and that “they made sure to give us the tools (so) that we could do it ourselves going forward.”
Councilmember Danielle Jurinsky, who chairs the public safety committee, said she agreed that what the court had gotten from the center was sufficient.
She also indicated that the city will be ending its prosecution of domestic violence, despite the fact that council conservatives voted Monday to direct city leadership to come up with a plan for doing so that was framed by supporters as an exploratory step.
“It’s literally ‘when’ we get rid of (domestic violence) cases. It’s no longer an ‘if,'” Jurinsky said.
The city has yet to reach an agreement with overlapping counties on how those cases would be handed off, with Arapahoe and Adams counties both warning that they lack the resources to handle Aurora’s domestic violence caseload.
We will never “get rid of domestic violence” cases. We will pay for the proceedings through alternative taxing. The conservatives will congratulate themselves for reining in costs, while we pay higher taxes for county courts or whatever venue they move to. We should learn something from the fact that the council put the outsourcing of domestic violence cases out to bid and received zero bidders…
I believe that moving domestic violence cases to the county courts is a mistake. During my many years as an officer, I was involved in lots of DV cases. Control of those cases at the local level was more efficient. Municipal court judges were well equipped to address the offenders, and especially repeat offenders. Cases at the county level don’t get the same attention as they get at the municipal level where DV cases are the most serious cases heard. Municipal courts allow efficient next day court appearances. Additionally, it is a hardship for some victims to travel to the county courts. Especially those that would have to be addressed in Brighton. Despite what city council thinks, these cases should be maintained at the municipal court level where victims can be better served.
I’ve argued it before and will do so again, the Counties can and should send Aurora resources to help with the domestic violence caseload. They should task prosecutors for rotations through Aurora’s Courts as well as public defenders. Assign new employees for some year long rotations. They should also send money, perhaps half the money they estimate it would cost to take over this responsibility, a responsibility which has always been theirs but which Aurora voluntarily and graciously assumed. The Counties need to subsidize this or find it entirely landing in their laps. This equitable solution would also address the transportation issue. This conundrum is easy to resolve with a bit of leadership from Council and maybe from Chief Judge Day and Chief Pyublic Defender Cadiz. Get this simple matter handled, and handled now so the Court Administrator can find time resources to address the technology shortcomings.
Aurora fought just last year to keep DVs. If they think of the cases as the country’s responsibility, why’d they send the presiding judge down to the capital to keep them.
All it’s gonna take is a few $$
Course the city gonna continue to pay out settlements.
They didn’t release the full study because the court system is failing. It’s so old and outdated that Aurora muni is literally avoided by lawyers like the plague. That’s the real reason they couldn’t replace the PDs. No one likes to practice law in Aurora. The judges are corrupt. The system is old. People are delayed and delayed from justice. Victims never see court because the CA can’t keep staff and they don’t train who they have. The court system is a literal ish show.
“The court’s database is locally run via an antiquated DOS system.”
Time for someone to be fired.