RULES OF COURT
STATE SUPREME COURT
[April 1, 2020]
IN THE MATTER OF THE SUGGESTED AMENDMENT TO JISCR 13—LOCAL COURT SYSTEMS
The Judicial Information System Committee, having recommended the suggested amendment to JISCR 13—Local Court Systems, and the Court having approved the suggested amendment for publication;
Now, therefore, it is hereby
(a) That pursuant to the provisions of GR 9(g), the suggested amendment as shown below is to be published for comment in the Washington Reports, Washington Register, Washington State Bar Association and Administrative Office of the Court's websites in April 2020.
(b) The purpose statement as required by GR 9(e), is published solely for the information of the Bench, Bar and other interested parties.
(c) Comments are to be submitted to the Clerk of the Supreme Court by either U.S. Mail or Internet E-Mail by no later than September 30, 2020. Comments may be sent to the following addresses: P.O. Box 40929, Olympia, Washington 98504-0929, or email@example.com. Comments submitted by e-mail message must be limited to 1500 words.
dated at Olympia, Washington this 7th day of April, 2020.
For the Court
GR 9 COVER SHEET
Proposal to Amend Judicial Information System Committee Rule 13
Concerning Local Court Systems
A. Name of Proponents: Judicial Information System Committee (JISC)
B. Spokesperson: Chief Justice Mary Fairhurst
The JISC proposes to modernize Judicial Information System Committee Rule (JISCR) 13, which has remained unchanged for more than 43 years despite dramatic changes in court technology.
JISCR 13 requires counties or cities wishing to establish automated court record systems to provide 90 days' notice of the proposed development to the Judicial Information System Committee (JISC) and the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) for review and approval. Several courts have provided notice of their intent to implement or replace a local electronic court record system.
The suggested rule provides guidance to counties, cities and the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) when a local jurisdiction intends to establish or replace an alternative electronic court record system in lieu of using the statewide court record system for their case management needs. The suggested changes to JISCR 13 will facilitate statewide data sharing in support of judicial decision making and public safety.
The suggested rule defines "electronic court record system," clarifies that JISC approval is required for new or replacement alternative electronic court record systems, provides for increased notice of proposed systems, provides a process for communication and planning between AOC and courts planning alternative electronic court record systems, requires courts with alternative electronic court record systems to comply with the JIS Data Standards for Alternative Electronic Court Record Systems by sending court data to the statewide data repository, and provides for dispute resolution by the JISC.
This suggested rule represents a consensus developed by a stakeholder work group that met four times for three hours each to present an agreed upon proposal to JISC. The work group proposal was approved by JISC on a 14-1 vote.
Chief Justice Fairhurst called for volunteers to the JISC Rule 13 workgroup. She then appointed the following eight members: Frank Maiocco, Court Administrator for Kitsap Superior Court; Judge David Svaren of Skagit County Superior Court; Judge Donna Tucker of King County District Court; Judge Scott Ahlf of Olympia Municipal Court; Howard Delaney, Court Administrator for Spokane Municipal Court; Paulette Revoir, Chair of the CLJ-CMS Project Steering Committee; Dawn Marie Rubio, State Court Administrator; and Vonnie Diseth, AOC Information Services Director.
D. Hearing: None needed.
E. Expedited Consideration: Not requested.
RULE 13 ELECTRONICLOCAL COURT RECORD SYSTEMS
The purpose of this rule is twofold: to provide guidance to the local court and the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) when a local court intends to establish or replace an alternative electronic court record system in lieu of using the statewide court record system and to facilitate statewide data sharing in support of judicial decision making and public safety.
(a) An "electronic court record system" is any electronic court records technology system that is a source of statewide court data identified in the JIS Data Standards for Alternative Electronic Court Record Systems ("JIS Data Standards").
(b) Counties or cities may establish or replace local alternative electronic court record systems with the approval of the Judicial Information System Committee (JISC). Counties or cities wishing to establish or replace a local alternative electronicautomated court record systems shall provide advance notice of the proposed development to the Judicial Information System CommitteeJISC and the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)Office of the Administrator for the Courtsat least 90 days prior to the start of the procurement processcommencement of such projects for the purpose of review and approval.
(c) Upon receipt of notice, AOC, on behalf of the JISC, will transmit to the local jurisdiction an information packet including, but not limited to, the JIS Data Standards, corresponding Implementation Plan, information on the IT Governance process, and the statewide data repository onboarding process. The local court and AOC will meet to discuss the information packet and ongoing obligations.
(d) After meeting with AOC to discuss the information packet, the presiding judge will certify that they accept the obligation to comply with the JIS Data Standards and the corresponding Implementation Plan, to provide a system that will send the data to the statewide data repository, and to maintain and support the court's local system and the integration with the statewide data repository.
(e) Individual courts are responsible for arranging resources for implementing and maintaining locally procured electronic court record systems and for programming and testing local systems that interface with the statewide data repository.
(f) The court will supply data to the statewide data repository in accordance with the JIS Data Standards. Any exchange with the statewide data repository will contain the full and complete set of data in accordance with the JIS Data Standards. If state and local timelines do not align, the JISC may approve a temporary reduced set of data that the court must provide and method of transmission until the data exchange with the local electronic court record system is fully tested and operational. Any reduced set of data approved by the JISC prior to the effective date of this rule will remain in effect until the data exchange with the local electronic court record system is operational.
(g) As soon as practicable after selection of an electronic court record system the court will provide a project schedule and a detailed plan for integration to the statewide data repository and will also provide ongoing updates and changes to the schedule and plan.
(h) Any unresolved disputes arising from this rule may be referred to the JISC for resolution, including possible sanctions.
This rule recognizes that early and frequent communication and collaboration between the local court and the AOC is essential for success. This rule also acknowledges that the Judicial Information System Committee (JISC) and the AOC set statewide information technology (IT) priorities through a JISC-adopted IT governance process.