MINUTES Members Present Staff Chair Backes called the meeting to order noting that there were three items on the agenda that needed action from the Board. The items were on the agenda of the May 1 meeting which was cancelled. Judge Backes opened discussion on the proposed policy relating to reporting to the juvenile offender database maintained by the attorney general's office and the accompanying reporting form. Greg Wallace reminded the Board that the draft policy and revised form were a result of the Board's decision to report only what was required by law and to have the state court administrator's office issue the form instead of the attorney general's office. The previous policy draft had the attorney general develop and distribute the form. That form contained several data elements that are not required by law, such as place of employment. The Board had agreed to leave the parent and child signature line on the form to prevent the need to serve the form on the parties. After discussion, MARY HALL MOVED TO ADOPT THE POLICY AND THE FORM. HARLAN DYRUD SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH PASSED. The chair then opened discussion on the proposed juvenile education plan. The plan attempts to combine the goals of in-state and out-of-state education for juvenile court personnel. Under the plan, in-state education serves as the primary education tool for the judiciary. The Education Commission has endorsed the concept by including juvenile court officers under its mandated education rules. Court officers are now required to attend three of four state sponsored education sessions in a biennium. Greg stated that the out-of-state portion is part of the plan, but is really a budget issue for the Council of Presiding Judges. The plan calls for ten out-of-state professional development opportunities for juvenile court personnel in a biennium. This biennium there were 22 requests for juvenile court personnel, that number was cut to 10 through the budget process. The Council of Presiding Judges had asked for a plan on using those slots. The directors had developed the enclosed plan. They felt that opportunity to go out-of-state for professional development should not be dependent on which district they worked in, but that all court officers should have equal change. The plan calls for half of the opportunities to be dedicated to probation officers who would attend programs designed specifically for direct line workers. The other half would be dedicated to the heads of the office who could attend programs aimed more at administrative matters, such as implementing programs. After the last training session on The Balanced Approach, the directors had suggested that on-site visits to courts who have implemented The Balanced Approach if such a visit is part of a state team. Greg mentioned that he had discussed the plan with Keithe Nelson who had some concerns. He had questioned the need to send juvenile court officers out-of-state, wondering what they could get on such trips which cannot be delivered in-state and whether the money should be spent to bring programs in-state. Judge Backes stated that the number of positions could cause some concern. Mary Hall responded that out-of-state opportunities give workers exposure to new ideas and fellow workers that cannot be duplicated in-state. She pointed out that "Keys to Innervisions" and "The Balanced Approach" started with court officers going out-of-state. Harlan Dyrud stated that he has seen workers come back with more enthusiasm, more dedication, and a recommitment to their jobs and that the recommitment can affect the entire staff. Greg explained that the issue of out-of-state travel would be taken to the Council of Presiding Judges as a budget issue. After further discussion, HARLAN DYRUD MOVED THAT THE JUVENILE POLICY BOARD ENDORSE THE PLAN. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED AND PASSED. Judge Backes then opened discussion on a proposed contract with Kevin Thompson from North Dakota State University, Fargo. Under the contract, Dr. Thompson will develop and perform an audit of current practices to see if factors such as length of probation affect reappearance rates. He will also audit the "Keys" program and help develop a system of evaluating programs used by the courts. Judge Backes pointed out that the Board had previously endorsed the concept of an evaluation. Greg Wallace stated that the matter was before the Board for approval or endorsement of the scope of the study. The approval of the contract was up to the state court administrator. MARY HALL MOVED THAT THE BOARD ENDORSE THE EVALUATION PROJECT. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED AND PASSED. The next face-to-face meeting is scheduled for September 11, 1998, in Bismarck. If action is needed on items before that date, telephone conference calls will be set up. Having no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Telephone Conference Call
May 7, 1998
Members Absent
Judge Norman Backes, Chair Judge Everett Nels Olson
Justice William Neumann Judge Benny Graff
Mary Hall Judge Donald Jorgensen
Harlan Dyrud
Greg Wallace