Podcasts about municipal court

Question of Ethics Conversation January 23, 2025 EpisodeArtificial intelligence has the potential to reshape the judicial system. AI-powered tools, from legal research assistants to sentencing algorithms and customer service chatbots, offer efficiency but also introduce risks, particularly bias. Additionally, the confidentiality of court records and legal proceedings becomes a pressing concern, as AI systems require vast sums of data for training—potentially exposing sensitive information to breaches or misuse.While AI chatbots improve accessibility by guiding litigants through procedural questions, the possibility of providing incorrect information and the prohibition against providing legal advice highlights the need for careful human oversight.As courts integrate AI into their operations, how do we ensure transparency, accountability, and fairness? What ethical and legal questions arise?Today's Moderator Creadell Webb Chief Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer for the 1st Judicial District in Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaToday's PanelCourtney Whiteside Director of the Municipal Court in St. Louis, MissouriAlison Braaton Clerk of District Court in Grand Forks County, North DakotaAndrea Powers Human Resources Director of the Idaho Court System, BoiseAmy Emig Business Development Manager, Multnomah Circuit Court, Portland, OregonKelly Hutton Court Administrator, North Dakota Court System, Grand ForksPeter Kiefer Host, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast SeriesNickolas Brackley IT Specialist for the Oregon Judicial Department Circuit Court, SalemNorman Meyer Retired Clerk of the United States Bankruptcy Court, District of New Mexico andRoger Rand IT Manager for the Multnomah Circuit Court, in Portland, Oregon

November 21st, 2024, Question of Ethics Conversation  Copilot describes data literacy as understanding, interpreting, and using data effectively. It involves knowing how to read charts and graphs, understanding statistics, and being able to critically evaluate data sources for their reliability and relevance. Just as how literacy with words helps you comprehend and communicate in language, data literacy empowers you to navigate and make sense of the vast amounts of data we encounter daily. Problem Analysis is an often-overlooked component of decision-making. In this episode we discuss data literacy and how it intersects with ethics in the courts. Episode Moderator: Roger Rand, IT Manager, Multnomah County Circuit Court, Portland, Oregon Episode Panel: Courtney Whiteside, Director, Municipal Court, St. Louis, Missouri. Courtney is also the chair of the NACM Ethics Subcommittee. Stacy Worby, State Jury Coordinator, Alaska State Court System, Anchorage. Ellen Haines, Supervisor, IT Training & Data Analysis Department, Multnomah Circuit Court, Portland, Oregon Peter Kiefer, Host, Court Leaders Advantage Podcast Series, Auburn, New York. Jeff Chappell, Court Administrator, Municipal Court, O'Fallon, Missouri. Creadell Webb, Chief Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Officer, 1st Judicial District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Leave a question or comment at ethics@nacmnet,org Join the Question of Ethics Conversation held after the Subcommittee meetings every fourth Thursday of the month at 2:00 pm ET.

January 21, 2025, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode Last month we talked about the five biggest issues facing young workers. This month we will look at the five biggest opportunities young workers have in 2025. The five are: The opportunity to Develop Valuable Digital Skills & Technological Expertise Access to Continuous Learning and Development to expand their knowledge & skills The Chance to Build a Global Network of peers and mentors The ability to excel at Collaboration & Connectivity which enhances team dynamics, and The opportunity to find a career where they Feel Valued & Seen Today's Moderator: Erika Schmid, Supervisor, Multnomah Circuit Court, Portland Oregon Today's Panel: Samantha Wallis, Assistant Court Administrator, District Court, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho Daniel Meza Rincón, Deputy Juvenile Court Administrator, Utah Administrative Office of the Courts, Salt Lake City Victoria Murray, Business Intelligence Analyst & Supervisor, Maricopa Superior Court, Phoenix, Arizona. Carrie Summers-Nomura, Program Coordinator, Clackamas County Circuit Court, Oregon City, Oregon Courtney Whiteside, Director, Municipal Court, St. Louis, Missouri Leave a question or comment about the episode at clapodcast@nacmnet.org

Today, Hunter sat down with Scott Troxell to wrap up our conversation on Colorado Municipal Courts. This time, the conversation focuses on how Rifle Municipal Courts were giving people 6 Months sentences for thefts that the state only gave 10 day sentences.    Guest Scott Troxell, Attorney, Glenwood Springs, Colorado   Resources: 2017 ACLU Report on Colorado Municipal Courts https://www.aclu-co.org/sites/default/files/JUSTICE-DERAILED-web.pdf Coverage of Municipal Courts in Rifle by Denver Post https://www.denverpost.com/2024/12/24/colorado-legislature-municipal-court-bills/ https://www.denverpost.com/2024/09/22/colorado-municipal-courts-sentences-minor-crime/ ACLU Amicus Brief https://www.aclu-co.org/en/cases/mobley-v-city-rifle-amicus Rifle Changes Ordinance https://www.coloradopolitics.com/courts/colorado-supreme-court-dimisses-appeal-after-rifle-backs-down/article_1ff3e57e-9e04-11ee-9a8a-6b95521cebde.html  Current Colorado Supreme Court Issues https://www.aclu-co.org/en/cases/camp-v-city-westminster-amicus   https://www.aclu-co.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/2024-11-07_aclu_cff_amicus_br.pdf  Contact Scott scott@troxell-legal.com      Contact Hunter Parnell:                                 Publicdefenseless@gmail.com  Instagram @PublicDefenselessPodcast Twitter                                                                 @PDefenselessPod www.publicdefenseless.com  Subscribe to the Patron www.patreon.com/PublicDefenselessPodcast  Donate on PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=5KW7WMJWEXTAJ Donate on Stripe https://donate.stripe.com/7sI01tb2v3dwaM8cMN Trying to find a specific part of an episode? Use this link to search transcripts of every episode of the show! https://app.reduct.video/o/eca54fbf9f/p/d543070e6a/share/c34e85194394723d4131/home  

Today, Hunter sat down with Keri Williams to continue our coverage of Municipal Courts in Colorado. This time, they discussed how Pueblo Municipal Courts were giving people years in jail for contempt of court charges.   Guest Keri Williams, Attorney, Pueblo, Colorado   Resources: 2017 ACLU Report on Colorado Municipal Courts https://www.aclu-co.org/sites/default/files/JUSTICE-DERAILED-web.pdf Coverage of Municipal Courts in Pueblo by Denver Post https://www.denverpost.com/2024/07/21/pueblo-municipal-contempt-of-court-charges-jail-time/ https://www.denverpost.com/2024/08/01/pueblo-municipal-court-workplace-investigation/ https://www.denverpost.com/2024/09/11/pueblo-contempt-court-city-defends-investigation/ https://www.denverpost.com/2024/10/11/pueblo-judge-contempt-of-court-aclu-challenge/ https://www.denverpost.com/2024/12/10/pueblo-inmates-released-contempt-court-ruled-unconstitutional/  Contact Keri keri.williams@beckerlawgroup.net  https://www.beckerlawgroup.net/  Contact Hunter Parnell:                                 Publicdefenseless@gmail.com  Instagram @PublicDefenselessPodcast Twitter                                                                 @PDefenselessPod www.publicdefenseless.com  Subscribe to the Patron www.patreon.com/PublicDefenselessPodcast  Donate on PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=5KW7WMJWEXTAJ Donate on Stripe https://donate.stripe.com/7sI01tb2v3dwaM8cMN Trying to find a specific part of an episode? Use this link to search transcripts of every episode of the show! https://app.reduct.video/o/eca54fbf9f/p/d543070e6a/share/c34e85194394723d4131/home  

Today, Hunter sat down with Alison Gordon to continue our coverage of Municipal Courts in Colorado. This time, the discussion focuses on the extremely punitive Westminster Municipal Court.   Guest Alison Gordon, Associate Attorney, McCabe Law   Resources: 2017 ACLU Report on Colorado Municipal Courts https://www.aclu-co.org/sites/default/files/JUSTICE-DERAILED-web.pdf  Contact Alison Alison@mccabe-law.net  https://www.mccabe-law.net/   Contact Hunter Parnell:                                 Publicdefenseless@gmail.com  Instagram @PublicDefenselessPodcast Twitter                                                                 @PDefenselessPod www.publicdefenseless.com  Subscribe to the Patron www.patreon.com/PublicDefenselessPodcast  Donate on PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=5KW7WMJWEXTAJ Donate on Stripe https://donate.stripe.com/7sI01tb2v3dwaM8cMN Trying to find a specific part of an episode? Use this link to search transcripts of every episode of the show! https://app.reduct.video/o/eca54fbf9f/p/d543070e6a/share/c34e85194394723d4131/home  

Today, Tristan Gorman and Rebecca Wallace are back this time to discuss municipal courts in Colorado. This episode is the first of our four-part series on municipal courts in Colorado. This episode gives a general overview of problems in this courts and then dives into the outright denial of counsel happening in Grand Junction's Municipal Court.   Guest Tristan Gorman, Policy Director, Colorado Criminal Defense Bar Rebecca Wallace, Policy Director, Colorado Freedom Fund   Resources: 2017 ACLU Report on Colorado Municipal Courts https://www.aclu-co.org/sites/default/files/JUSTICE-DERAILED-web.pdf   Coverage by the Denver Post https://www.denverpost.com/2024/10/17/grand-junction-municipal-court-public-defenders-right-to-counsel/ Coverage by Grand Junction Daily Sentinel https://www.gjsentinel.com/news/western_colorado/grand-junction-municipal-court-accused-of-constitutional-violations/article_abbff94a-8d8b-11ef-af0d-a3597da2fba4.html CFF Website https://www.coloradofreedomfund.org/ CCDB Website https://ccdb.org/   Contact Hunter Parnell:                                 Publicdefenseless@gmail.com  Instagram @PublicDefenselessPodcast Twitter                                                                 @PDefenselessPod www.publicdefenseless.com  Subscribe to the Patron www.patreon.com/PublicDefenselessPodcast  Donate on PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=5KW7WMJWEXTAJ Donate on Stripe https://donate.stripe.com/7sI01tb2v3dwaM8cMN Trying to find a specific part of an episode? Use this link to search transcripts of every episode of the show! https://app.reduct.video/o/eca54fbf9f/p/d543070e6a/share/c34e85194394723d4131/home  

December 17, 2024, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode This month and in January we're looking at the 5 biggest issues and the 5 biggest opportunities facing young workers today. This month we will consider the five biggest issues which include: • Work-Life Balance • Job Security • Mental Health and Well-Being • Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) • Career Development and Growth Opportunities Moderator Erika Schmid Supervisor, Multnomah Circuit Court, Portland, Oregon Today's Panel Samantha Wallis Assistant Court Administrator, District Court, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho Daniel Meza Rincón Deputy Juvenile Court Administrator, State of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah Victoria Murray Business Intelligence Analyst & Supervisor, Maricopa Superior Court, Phoenix, Arizona. Carrie Summers-Nomura Program Coordinator, Clackamas County Circuit Court, Oregon City, Oregon Courtney Whiteside Director, Municipal Court, St. Louis, Missouri Leave a question or comment about the episode at clapodcast@nacmnet.org

Help Centers are provided by the Hamilton County Court system to provide legal assistance representing yourself in Municipal Court or Juvenile Court. The Help Centers are staffed with three full-time attorneys and two paralegals, and are supported by volunteer law students and volunteer attorneys in the community. These services are Read More Shared by United Resource Connection November 7, 2024

ONE STORY A DAY / Una historia para cada Día during Hispanic Heritage Month 2024 - Let's get inspired!! - ¡Vamos a inspirarnos! Lisette was born and raised in Lorain, Ohio. Currently, Lisette is the Chief Deputy Clerk of the Lorain Municipal Court.  Prior to that she was an Administrative Assistant to retired Lorain County Common Pleas Judge, Mark A. Betleski for 16 years.  Lisette is a proud graduate of Lorain County Community College.  Lissette presently sits on two non-profit boards, one being the Lorain County Safe Harbor/Genesis House, which provides services for Lorain County victims of domestic violence and the other is the Ohio Hispanic Veterans Memorial, which will be the first Hispanic Veterans Memorial in the State of Ohio.  Lisette is serving her second term to the Lorain County Democratic Central Committee and appointed to the Lorain County Democratic Executive Committee.  Lisette is the Past president and treasurer to the Lorain County Federation of Democratic Women Club and the past vice president to the Lorain City Democratic Women Club.  Lisette is actively involved in her church community and sits on Finance Council.

September 17th, 2024 Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode The world-renowned technology advisory firm, The Gartner Group, has come out with its Nine Future Work Trends for 2024. These are trends that Gartner has said will reshape the future of work. They are driven by the need to attract and retain top talent, reduce operational costs, and enhance productivity.  The trends are: · Skills Will Become More Important than Degrees and Certificates in Recruitment and Selection · Career Stereotypes Will Collapse in the Face of a Changing Workforce · Employee Conflict Resolution will be the Next “Must Have” Management Skill · The “Cost of Work” Crisis Will Reach a Breaking Point as employees calculate the cost of traveling every day to and from a brick & mortar courthouse · The Four-Day Workweek Becomes Routine · We will stop talking about DEI.  It just becomes the Way We Work  · Generative Artificial Intelligence Experiments Will Likely Yield Hard Lessons & Painful Costs.  These experiments will emphasize the need for good training on how to use Generative AI.  · Artificial Intelligence Will Create Work Opportunities.  Entirely new classes of specialists will be needed to effectively use AI · Climate Change Protection Will Become the New “Must-Have” Employee Benefit.   In this episode we are going to take a look at the job skills of the future and how we are going to find candidates that possess them.  We will look at the shifting focus from degrees and certificates to skills and competencies.   This approach will allow for a more inclusive and diverse workforce by valuing practical skills and experience over formal education and training.  We will look at one specific future skill that will be in high demand, that being workplace mediation.  As workplaces become more diverse and remote work continues to grow, misunderstandings and conflicts will also likely grow. Effective mediation will be essential to keep an organization working smoothly. Today's Panel · Hilarie Gaylin Certified Coach, Trainer, Facilitator, and Organizational Consultant · Tim Rupert, Human Resource Officer, Municipal Court, Toledo, Ohio · Jason James, Court Administrator, Municipal Court, Dalton, Georgia · Dana Bartocci, Human Resources & Development Director Minnesota Judicial Branch Saint Paul, Minnesota · Jamie Velazquez, Organizational Development Analyst, Superior Court, Orange County, California

August 20th 2024 Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode The 2024 NACM annual conference brought together court professionals from across the country to share best practices, address common challenges, and discover innovative solutions.  Titled Leadership Opportunities & Challenges for Our Nation's Courts: Leading Leaders into the New Tomorrow, it convened a dynamic mix of professionals, including many emerging voices in the field, who are passionate about the future of our judicial system.  From discussions on the latest technological advancements like AI to strategies for enhancing access to justice, the conference provided a rich platform for learning and collaboration. This month we are asking young court professionals the question, “What was your biggest takeaway from this year's NACM Conference?”  You will hear directly from young attendees about valuable insights, practical tools, and inspiring connections.  Whether you are a seasoned administrator or just starting on your career, this episode will allow you to understand what were the most impactful takeaways from the NACM 2024 Annual Conference.  Today's Panel       Carrie Summers-Nomura, Program Coordinator, Clackamas County Circuit Court, Oregon City, Oregon Tiffany Totah, Court Administrator, Municipal Court, Victoria, Texas Lizzie Alipaz, Court Administrator, Municipal Court, Timnath, Colorado LaTricia Kinlow, Judicial Branch Administrator, Municipal Court, Tukwila, Washington MiHa Kapaki, Court Administrator, District Court, Grays Harbor County, Washington  Samantha Wallis, Deputy Trial Court Administrator, Supreme Court, Coeur D'Alene, Idaho

The Rich Zeoli Show- Full Episode (06/19/2024): 3:05pm- Juneteenth: The Republican Party that fought to end slavery at its founding in the 1850s, is still fighting for individual liberties in 2024. Contrary to the progressive myth, there was no “party switch” where Republicans abandoned the principles of freedom and equality. Rich notes that Democrats continue to block school choice, for example, which would allow for all children—regardless of race or socio-economic status—to be guaranteed a high-quality education. 3:40pm- Karoline Leavitt—National Press Secretary for the 2024 Trump Campaign—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to discuss Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's upcoming campaign rally at Temple University's campus in Philadelphia, PA on Saturday, June 22nd. You can find information and tickets here: https://event.donaldjtrump.com/events/president-donald-j-trump-to-hold-a-rally-in-philadelphia-pennsylvania 3:55pm- Grabien's Tom Elliot reveals his latest supercut masterpiece: a montage of media members claiming President Joe Biden is mentally sharper than ever—despite video and audio evidence suggesting that can't possibly be true. 4:05pm- Pastor Bill Devlin calls into the show! To learn more about Pastor Devlin and his organization Widows & Orphans here: https://www.widowsandorphans.info/pastor-william-devlin 4:10pm- According to a report from Amy S. Rosenberg of The Philadelphia Inquirer: “The warning has gone out in Margate about rowdy teens. But this warning is to the parents: You're the ones who will now be ticketed. Police in Margate say they will begin enforcing an existing ordinance that allows them to issue summonses to the parents of juveniles observed unsupervised after the 10 p.m. curfew or otherwise breaking local laws. The tickets will require appearing in Municipal Court and could result in fines up to $1,000 and up to 90 days of community service—which may have to be performed alongside the child.” You can read the full article here: https://www.inquirer.com/news/new-jersey/margate-police-ticket-parents-jersey-shore-teens-20240617.html 4:40pm- According to a report, Los Angeles City Council has decided to remove U-Turn signs because they are “homophobic.” 5:05pm- On Tuesday, President Joe Biden announced an executive action providing a pathway to citizenship for 500,000 undocumented migrants married to U.S. citizens. Because the crisis at the U.S. Southern border has not yet been resolved, won't this policy encourage more migrants to enter the country unlawfully? 5:10pm- While speaking with Jim Acosta on CNN, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas pivoted when asked about polling which indicates 62% of Americans are in favor of deporting migrants who entered the U.S. unlawfully. 5:20pm- Why is fascism routinely described by American media outlets as a right-wing political philosophy? Rich explains that fascism is a tyrannical form of governance that requires the existence of a powerful, centralized government. American “right-wing” political philosophy, however, is strongly tied to libertarianism—and a limited form of government that doesn't infringe upon individual liberties or inherent rights. Consequently, fascism—like communism—is more closely aligned with far-left ideology despite the media's portrayal. 5:40pm- Rebecca Beitsch of The Hill writes: “House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) is threatening to subpoena New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) in his quest to gain information about a top prosecutor on the Manhattan hush money trial of former President Trump. In a letter to James last month, Jordan demanded information about Matthew Colangelo, a former employee of hers who, in his current role with the Manhattan district attorney's office, gave the opening statements in Trump's New York trial.” You can read the full article here: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4727586-jim-jordan-threatens-ny-ag-subpoena-hush-money-prosecutor/ 5:50pm- During Tuesday's Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigation hearing, Sen. Josh Hawley grilled Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun. 6:05pm- Juneteenth: The Republican Party that fought to end slavery at its founding in the 1850s, is still fighting for individual liberties in 2024. Contrary to the progressive myth, there was no “party switch” where Republicans abandoned the principles of freedom and equality. Rich notes that Democrats continue to block school choice, for example, which would allow for all children—regardless of race or socio-economic status—to be guaranteed a high-quality education. 6:40pm- Replay: Karoline Leavitt—National Press Secretary for the 2024 Trump Campaign—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to discuss Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's upcoming campaign rally at Temple University's campus in Philadelphia, PA on Saturday, June 22nd. You can find information and tickets here: https://event.donaldjtrump.com/events/president-donald-j-trump-to-hold-a-rally-in-philadelphia-pennsylvania

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 2: 4:05pm- Pastor Bill Devlin calls into the show! To learn more about Pastor Devlin and his organization Widows & Orphans here: https://www.widowsandorphans.info/pastor-william-devlin 4:10pm- According to a report from Amy S. Rosenberg of The Philadelphia Inquirer: “The warning has gone out in Margate about rowdy teens. But this warning is to the parents: You're the ones who will now be ticketed. Police in Margate say they will begin enforcing an existing ordinance that allows them to issue summonses to the parents of juveniles observed unsupervised after the 10 p.m. curfew or otherwise breaking local laws. The tickets will require appearing in Municipal Court and could result in fines up to $1,000 and up to 90 days of community service—which may have to be performed alongside the child.” You can read the full article here: https://www.inquirer.com/news/new-jersey/margate-police-ticket-parents-jersey-shore-teens-20240617.html 4:40pm- According to a report, Los Angeles City Council has decided to remove U-Turn signs because they are “homophobic.”

LaDoris Hazzard Cordell was the first lawyer to open a law practice in East Palo Alto, CA, a low-income community of color. In 1978, she was appointed Assistant Dean for Student Affairs at Stanford Law School, where she implemented a successful minority admissions program. In 1982, Governor Jerry Brown appointed her to the Municipal Court of Santa Clara County making her the first African American woman judge in northern California. In1988, Judge Cordell won election to the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. In all, she' spent nearly 20 years on the bench. From 2010 to 2015, she served as Independent Police Auditor for the City of San Jose. In 2015 she was a member of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Transparency, Accountability, and Fairness in Law Enforcement. She's also served as Vice Provost & Special Counselor to the President for Campus Relations at Stanford University; served on the Palo Alto City Council; was the Independent Police Auditor for the City of San Jose; and is the co-founder of the African American Composer Initiative. She is the author of the 2021 book: Her Honor: My Life on the Bench...What Works, What's Broken, and How to Change It. And, she's appeared on CNN, MSNBC, NPR, CBS-5 television and Court TV. Judge Cordell take us back to childhood and her early inspirations; walks us through her illustrious academic and judicial career; helps unpack the latest with convicted-felon Donald Trump's sentencing options in the New York election-interference/hush-money trial; discusses the need for an enforceable code of conduct for the Supreme Court in the wake of new disclosure violations and conflicts of interest with Justices Thomas and Alito; discusses her book; and shares how music has impacted her life. Got somethin' to say?! Email us at BackroomAndy@gmail.com Leave us a message: 845-307-7446 Twitter: @AndyOstroy Produced by Andy Ostroy, Matty Rosenberg, and Jennifer Hammoud @ Radio Free Rhiniecliff Design by Cricket Lengyel

March 28, 2024, A Question of Ethics Conversation Join Kevin Bowling as we discuss the ethical issues surrounding the burgeoning topic of courts' use of artificial intelligence (AI).  Kevin discusses a definition of AI and specifically generative AI, existing practical uses in the courts, some misuses of IA, the need for policy and data governance, ethics issues, and the need for transparency to promote public trust and confidence.  Kevin also publicly acknowledges the work of Roger Rand and Casey Kennedy, the entire Joint Technology Committee, as well as gives a sneak peek of the, soon-to-be-released, NACM AI Guide.   Moderator  Kevin Bowling, Retired Circuit Court Administrator, Ottowa County, Michigan   Joining in the Conversation     Courtney Whiteside Director, Municipal Court, St. Louis, Missouri Creadell Webb: Chief Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer; First Judicial District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Erika Schmid, Supervisor, Multnomah County Circuit Court, Portland, Oregon Stacy Worby: State Jury Coordinator, Alaska Court System, Anchorage

This Week in Rowlett - May 20, 2024 MEMORIAL DAY COMMUNITY GATHERING: Join us this Monday, May 27 at 12noon for a Memorial Day Community Gathering at Veterans Park in Downtown Rowlett. We are so heartened to see the outpouring of support for Memorial Day in our community and would like to thank the Kiwanis Club of Northeast Dallas County for organizing this gathering at Veterans Park. We hope to see all of you there! https://www.facebook.com/CityofRowlettTexas/posts/pfbid0qZn5KqVFtkqoohx2RzFgDND7qrPEXvbJXfA4EuSPcuxnMTN9Wiv4haiiMsu5SRr5l In observation of Memorial Day, City of Rowlett offices & facilities, including the Community Centre, Library, Municipal Court, and Animal Shelter, will be closed on Monday, May 27. Trash service will be delayed by one day that week. https://www.rowletttx.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=2481 SPRING SMART YARD WINNERS: Congratulations to Joe and Susan Henchal, who were recently named as the Rowlett Smart Yard Winners for Spring 2024. Joe and Susan started their habitat journey by reaching out to the Texas Discovery Garden and learning from their leaders. The Henchal's garden has evolved over the years from their eagerness to learn and passion for pollinators. Thank you for your outstanding efforts to build a pollinator-and-environmentally friendly garden! https://www.rowletttx.gov/1933/Rowlett-Smart-Yard COUNCIL MEETINGS THIS WEEK: Join us at Rowlett City Hall for this week's council meetings! The City Council Work Session starts at 6pm tonight. Then tomorrow night, Tuesday, May 21, the City Council Regular Session starts at 7pm. SPRING FARMERS & CRAFTS MARKET: The Spring Farmers and Crafts Market continues Thursdays in Downtown Rowlett. We had to cancel last Thursdays market due to weather. If mother nature cooperates, we'll try it again this week! Swing by the Downtown Rowlett Green after work every Thursday from 5:30pm to 8:30pm to enjoy a variety of food trucks and visit with local vendors, while shopping for crafts and more! There's Face painting every 3rd Thursday and live music every 4th Thursday of the month! https://www.rowletttx.gov/2170/Farmers-and-Crafts-Market-2024 SUMMER READING REGISTRATION: Let the Games Begin! Registration for the Summer Reading Challenge at the Rowlett Public Library is now open! Mark your calendars for an unforgettable start to a summer filled with reading, adventure, and fun! Pre-register the whole family and earn prizes for reading! Make sure you sign up before the Summer Reading Kick-Off Party on June 1. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfor_u6nkrUjmbuNgESBHvaXtrKQFcZAvJgA7Ol1QEcbZ5WJQ/viewform And just a heads up, there will be no Youth Library Programs in May at the library. Children's programs are taking a break this May as Library staff prepare for a full summer. SENIOR TRIP TO PEROT - FRIDAY, MAY 31 Hey Seniors, are you ready for another Dart adventure? On Friday, May 31 we will be taking the train to the Perot Museum in Downtown Dallas. The cost is $5. Contact the RCC front desk at 972-412-6170 to sign up! SENIORS BOWLING: And speaking of activities for seniors...did you know that there's a Senior Bowling Bunch, every 3rd Thursday at 12 Noon at the Rowlett Bowl-a-Rama? Join fellow seniors for a fun-filled afternoon of bowling! $5 entry fee. Please note that shoe rentals are not included in the entry fee, and pre-registration is required. Call the RCC at 972-412-6170 to sign up! PET ADOPT-A-THON There's a Pet Adopt-a-thon on Saturday, June 1! Visit the Rowlett Animal Shelter 9:00am to 12 Noon for food trucks, craft vendors, and FREE adoptions! All adoptions include a FREE city registration, microchipping, and giveaways. The first 10 adoptions also receive free spay/neuter services. We can't wait to introduce you to your new best friend! https://www.rowletttx.gov/969/Special-Events JUNETEENTH BLOCK PARTY: And coming up, it's the Juneteenth Block Party on Saturday, June 15 from 4pm to 7pm in Downtown Rowlett. Celebrate with fantastic food vendors, free giveaways, an activity-filled kid zone, and live music! https://www.rowletttx.gov/2180/Juneteenth-Block-Party FIREWORKS ON MAIN: Fireworks on Main is back! Make your plans now! Join us this 4th of July for Fireworks on Main at Pecan Grove Park for a night of dazzling fireworks, live music, kids' activities, and tons of great food! And back by popular demand, the Emerald City Band returns as the headlining musical act! For more info and details, visit Rowlett.com to make your plans! https://www.rowletttx.gov/780/Fireworks-on-Main  

May 21st Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode Although they are not universally accepted, court self-service centers can help prepare self-represented litigants to navigate the exotic terrain of the courtroom.  They can also expedite court proceedings and weed out inappropriate arguments.  Less obvious but equally as important, the information these centers provide helps boost the public's trust and confidence in the courts. We well know that the public's perception of courts has been woefully lagging over these last several years.         A basic tenet of self-service centers, in fact, a tenet of all public-facing court staff is “we cannot give legal advice.”  Yet this prohibition is more nuanced than it first appears.   There are a host of questions that seem more procedural than legal.  Questions many self-represented litigants may not even know enough to ask about.  How much should courts tell litigants? How much information should courts volunteer even if the litigants don't know to ask?  This month we are going to look at what courts can, do, and should tell litigants.  This episode presents several situations in which self-represented litigants often find themselves.  These are situations that do not immediately appear to involve giving legal advice.  Rather they seem, on their face, procedural.  But they are obscure enough that only individuals who have been in the system might know their implications.        Today's Panel  Nathan Devries, Supervising Attorney, Self-Help Services Unit, Superior Court, San Bernardino, California; Robby Southers, Managing Attorney for the Self-Help & Dispute Resolution Center, Franklin County Municipal Court in Columbus, Ohio; Jena Elsnes, Program Manager, Minnesota Judicial Branch's Self-Represented Litigant Program; Danielle Trujillo Court Administrator for the Municipal Court, Littleton, Colorado

Singles Going Around- Early Bird Gets The Worm..The aftermath of this years RSD.. Got some great releases and found some other favorites. Let the good times roll.Nancy Sinatra- "Bang, Bang"The Yardbirds- "Psycho Daises"Captain Beefheart- "Click Clack"Dr John- "Huey Smith Medley"The Ramones- "Needles and Pins"The Monkees- "Auntie's Municipal Court"Lightnin' Slim- "Sweet Little Woman"Small Faces- "Get Yourself Together"Van Morrison- "Saint Dominic's Preview"Bo Diddley- "Diddley Daddy"Lee Hazelwood & Nancy Sinatra- "Sand"The Grateful Dead- "Friend Of The Devil"The Yardbirds- "The Nazz Are Blue"Dr John- "Iko Iko"The Monkees- "Valleri"Captain Beefheart- "I'm Gonna Booglarize You Baby (Full Length Version)The Yardbirds- "Got Love If You Want It"*Thank you Mike.

Learn about the latest in local public affairs in about the time it takes for a coffee break! Brian Callanan of Seattle Channel and David Kroman of the Seattle Times discuss the launch of public comments on Seattle's Comprehensive Plan, another expansion of the Seattle Preschool Program, new land use legislation from Councilmember Tammy Morales, prioritizing where sidewalks are built in Seattle, and new concerns arising for the city's Municipal Court. If you like this podcast, please support it on Patreon!

March 19th Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode In April of 2022, we hosted a podcast episode on “The Great Resignation.”  At the time large numbers of employees were resigning, or (after being furloughed for some period) were deciding not to return to work.  The assumption back then was that this was a temporary phenomenon. Once COVID receded, people would return to work, and things would get back to normal.  It is now a year and a half later.  COVID is receding, (or at least we think it is). Yet many courts still struggle with staffing shortages.  And this is not just limited to courts.  The World Bank has predicted that over the next decade, the number of people of working age in the U.S. (between 15 and 65) will decline by over 3 percent. This is a prospect that courts will find increasingly challenging.  This month we're going to look at ongoing staff shortages and the battle courts are having to recruit new talent.  Not every court is short-handed; not all positions suffer from chronic vacancies.  On the other hand, I can't think of a court administrator who has not told me their court struggles to find court reporters, interpreters, and IT staff. Today we are going to delve into several questions:     Who is struggling to hire new employees?  Are there types of employees that are more challenging to recruit? Has your court experienced operational challenges due to staff shortages? What are job candidates asking for these days regarding working conditions? Are you exploring new ways to recruit employees?   Today's Panel          Audrey Anger: Assistant Court Administrator for the City of Olathe, Kansas Danielle Trujillo: Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in Littleton, Colorado Dana Bartocci: Human Resources & Development Director, Minnesota Judicial Branch, St. Paul, Minnesota MiHa Kapaki: Court Administrator & Probation Director, Grays Harbor District Court, Montesano, Washington Creadell Webb: Chief Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Officer, 1st Judicial District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  Leave a question or comment about the episode at clapodcast@nacmnet.org

Learn about the latest in local public affairs in about the time it takes for a coffee break! Brian Callanan of Seattle Channel and David Kroman of the Seattle Times discuss a push for Seattle Police Department pay raises, a public safety tour led by Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell, a lawsuit from the King County Sheriff regarding Burien's new camping ban ordinance, problems with a new processing system at Seattle's Municipal Court, and the challenge of Tanya Woo's new concurrent roles as councilmember and candidate, If you like this podcast, please support it on Patreon!

In this episode of Legal Beagles, our host Gary sits down with Pro Se Jimmy Jones to discuss his ongoing battle against municipalities over traffic tickets. Jimmy shares his experience navigating the legal system, his strategies for challenging tickets in court, and the progress of his federal court case. Tune in to hear insights from a pro se litigant fighting for justice on the roads.Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-5882193 YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqs_hlmHECejgCAvQCa-r5Q X: https://twitter.com/zeus02377 Telegram: The BigSib Chat

Learn about the latest in local public affairs in about the time it takes for a coffee break! Brian Callanan of Seattle Channel and David Kroman of the Seattle Times discuss Mayor Harrell's new Comprehensive Plan proposal, King County's fentanyl crisis plan, a victory for state Republicans as three voter initiatives get passed into law, challenges for Seattle's Municipal Court after the City Attorney removes a judge from 150 criminal cases,  and a question from our patrons about homeowner's associations' ability to skirt the City's density plans! like this podcast, please support it on Patreon!

Judge Lee Wendell Loder graduated from Morehouse College in Atlanta, GA; Samford University's Cumberland School of Law in Birmingham, Alabama; and Emory University's Candler School of Religion in Atlanta, GA. He is currently enrolled at Emory Law and working toward completion of an LLM (Master of Laws). He has also done further study at Case Western Reserve's Weatherhead School of Management in Cleveland and at Birmingham-Southern College. He serves as a Municipal (Special) Judge on the City of Birmingham's Municipal Court. Through his practice, he has handled a number of significant cases involving consumer and civil rights, including an often cited bankruptcy case establishing homeowner's rights to notice before foreclosure; a case making it easier for elderly Jefferson County residents to claim property tax homestead exemptions; and a heavily relied on local case establishing property exemption rights for land owned by churches and religious entities. He served as President of the Birmingham City Council in early 2004. His service was featured in Black Enterprise magazine's top ten municipality edition. He also served as an ambassador for the American Council of Young Political Leaders on its delegation to Tanzania/Zanzibar and he has hosted a Birmingham delegation of policy and business leaders from South Africa on behalf of ACYPL. He is Lead Pastor of the Gifted City Church and co-founder of Bestow Schools. He is married to Adrianne Ragland-Loder. He has two children, Kimya Adrianne Imara Loder and Kamaya Adrianne Amadi Loder, and one granddaughter, Kailani.

Interviewer: JOSHUA ROSE. Philadelphia is a city grappling with complex dynamics surrounding policing, criminality, and a commitment to rehabilitation. HELENA VON NAGY, an Assistant District Attorney in the Municipal Court, delves into the intricacies of Philadelphia's criminal justice system, narrating her day-to-day experiences working at the heart of Philadelphia's legal landscape. She sheds light on the multifaceted world of criminal justice in the City of Brotherly Love.

December 19th, 2023, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode The struggle to equitably and effectively allocate court resources is a challenge that faces every state.  Everywhere the question is the same: how do you allocate funds fairly to courts of different sizes and may even perform different operations such as having a Treatment Court? How do you not disadvantage suburban and rural courts when taking into account the size of each court, its caseload, the demand for service, the degree of innovation, the staffing needs of justice partners like the prosecutor, the public defender, probation, and law enforcement, allocation history, and special circumstances?  Additionally, many court budget staffing discussions are not held on a statewide level, they are local discussions where a court might find itself competing with the police, sanitation, or parks and recreation.  What do these courts use to convince funding bodies to provide new resources?  Add to the mix the specter that some funding bodies (often cities) place their own agenda on courts to be revenue generators.  Is the answer a preset formula that with each new judicial position comes a designated number of additional staff?  Is there another, possibly a better methodology?   This month we're going to explore the struggle that suburban and rural courts endure in the competition for new budget resources.    Here to discuss this issue are Angie VanSchoick:  Town Clerk and Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in the town of Silverthorne, Colorado Stacey Fields: Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in Crestwood, Missouri Danielle Trujillo:  Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in the City of Littleton, Colorado, and Frank Maiocco: Court Administrator for the Superior Court in Kitsap County, Washington

October 26, 2023, A Question of Ethics Conversation Episode   Today's Question of Ethics Conversation looks at several ethical challenges regarding employee performance. It discusses four questions many supervisors face in their oversight role. Can you, as a supervisor, remain friends with colleagues once you have become their boss?  This is an especially critical question when it comes time to promote someone, and you promote your ‘friend'. -Are performance reviews good or bad? Are they useful tools for supervisors and managers? -Is it ethical to use a personal relationship to get promoted in the workplace?      Is it ethical to treat each worker differently instead of having the same rules for everyone? (i.e., working from home)?   This Question of Ethics Conversation looks at how technology plays a role in workplace culture for court users, for one's co-workers, and on a court's institutional knowledge.   Today's Moderator Samantha Wallis: Deputy Trial Court Administrator, Supreme Court, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho Today's Panelists Lizzie Alipaz:  Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in the town of Tinmath, Colorado Peter Kiefer: Retired Court Professional Norman Meyer:  Retried Clerk for the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico Erika Schmid: Supervisor for the Multnomah County Circuit Court, 4th Judicial District, Portland, Oregon Karl Thoennes: Court Administrator, 2nd Judicial Circuit, Sioux Falls, South Dakota Creadell Webb: Chief Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer; First Judicial District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Help Centers are provided by the Hamilton County Court system to provide legal assistance representing yourself in Municipal Court or Juvenile Court. The Help Centers are staffed with three full-time attorneys and two paralegals, and are supported by volunteer law students and volunteer attorneys in the community. These services are Read More Shared by United Resource Connection November 24, 2023

November 21st, 2023, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode Suburban and rural courts often face distinctive issues.  These issues are different from those of truly small courts, but also different from the issues faced by massive metropolitan court organizations. It is tempting to always talk about big problems in big courts. It is easy to forget that two-thirds of the courts in our country are benches made up of fewer than 10 judges.   Today's episode is going to revisit a relatively recent phenomenon: remote hearings. But it is going to look at it from the perspective of courts that are sometimes overlooked: suburban and rural courts.   As recently as 2019, remote hearings were an oddity.  Few courts offered them; few parties asked for them. Then came COVID and remote hearings became a regular part of many court calendars.  The long-term future of remote hearings is still a question mark. Most litigants, attorneys, and the general public seem to enjoy the convenience of appearing remotely. Judges seem less enthusiastic.   Appearance rates are up; more cases are being cleared.  But, technology glitches, scheduling problems, and the casual nature with which some litigants treat remote hearings dampens that support.  How do suburban and rural courts address the challenges that come with remote hearings. Here to discuss this issue are Angie VanSchoick:  Town Clerk and Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in the town of Silverthorne, Colorado; Stacey Fields: Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in Crestwood, Missouri; Danielle Trujillo:  Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in the City of Littleton, Colorado; Frank Maiocco: Court Administrator for the Superior Court in Kitsap County, Washington

Two Lexington residents seek to become Mansfield Municipal Court judge: https://www.richlandsource.com/2023/10/24/two-lexington-residents-seek-to-become-mansfield-municipal-court-judge/ Today - Two residents from Lexington are in the spotlight as they vie for one of two new judgeships on the Mansfield Municipal Court. Support the show: https://www.sourcemembers.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

August 24, 2023, A Question of Ethics Conversation Episode Today's Question of Ethics Conversation looks at workplace culture and technology. It focuses on the ethical challenges to workplace culture and technology as it pertains to Canon 1.1 of the NACM Model Code of Conduct which states that a court professional faithfully carries out all appropriately assigned duties, striving at all times to perform the work:           Diligently - characterized by steady, earnest, and energetic effort.         Efficiently - capable of producing desired results with little or no waste (as of time or materials)          Equitably - dealing fairly and equally with all concerned          Thoroughly -  in a complete or thorough manner          Courteously - marked by respect for and consideration of others          Honestly – without cheating, genuine, without frills          Openly -exposed to general view or knowledge          Within the Scope of the court professional's authority.   According to the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM), an organization's culture defines the proper way to behave within the organization. This culture consists of shared beliefs and values established by leaders and then communicated and reinforced through various methods, ultimately shaping employee perceptions, behaviors and understanding. Organizational culture sets the context for everything an enterprise does. Because industries and situations vary significantly, there is not a one-size-fits-all culture template that meets the needs of all organizations.   Workplace culture has a profound effect on any organization as these statistics bear out. 53% of working Americans who have left a job due to workplace culture report leaving because of their relationship with their manager. 94% of people managers agree a positive workplace culture creates a resilient team of employees. 97% of executives agree their actions have a direct impact on workplace culture.   Technology is a tool, but it can have a dramatic effect on workplace culture. "Technology can be used to enhance information and operations, improve public access to court information and services, and reduce administrative costs while increasing efficiency in case processing.” This Question of Ethics Conversation looks at how technology plays a role in workplace culture for court users, for one's co-workers, and on a court's institutional knowledge.   Today's Moderator Creadell Webb: Chief Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer; First Judicial District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania   Today's Panelists Courtney Whiteside: Director, Municipal Court, St. Louis, Missouri Karl Thoennes: Court Administrator, 2nd Judicial Circuit, Sioux Falls, South Dakota Peter Kiefer: Retired Court Professional Samantha Wallis: Deputy Trial Court Administrator, Supreme Court, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho Ceclia Garner: Court of Court, General District Court, Richmond, Virginia

Shelby Municipal Court still in hot water after recent state audit: https://www.richlandsource.com/2023/10/02/shelby-municipal-court-still-in-hot-water-after-recent-state-audit/ Today - we dive into the ongoing accounting issues at Shelby Municipal Court. This topic has been a hot button issue, not just for the Ohio Auditor of State but also for some members of the City Council.Support the show: https://www.sourcemembers.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Municipal Court officials refuse to comment on efforts to cancel JusticePoint's contract without lining up an alternative provider. A legal ruling allows the services to continue — for now. Story by Wisconsin Watch's Jonmaesha Beltran and Devin Blake of Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service, produced in collaboration with The Appeal. Originally published on July 27, 2023.

August 15th, 2023, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode Leaders deal with multiple circles of individuals.  Two that you as a court administrator or Clerk of Court deal with are 1) those who report to you and 2) those you either report to or deal with as fellow stakeholders.  Those reporting to you include your team, and the larger office or court staff.   The next circle centers on your Presiding Judge, and your bench; it includes your funding body such as your City Council, County Board, the state administrative office, or the state legislature.  It extends to your fellow justice partners such as the Sheriff, the Prosecutor, the bar, and community organizations.   The leadership skills needed to deal with both circles include team building, mentoring, strategic thinking, organization, persuasive speaking, and concise effective writing.  But you deal with your fellow stakeholders (principally your judges), differently than with your court staff.  Your judges are leaders in their own right; usually, they have their own vision which or may not align with yours; they are well-educated and may not be particularly interested in your counsel.  In addition, many judges may have developed their own concepts of managing people, they are used to handing down orders from the bench and having them obeyed, many are elected so they have their own specific constituency, and court staff often have a direct informal pipeline to individual judges.  Rick Pierce described the role of the administrator dealing with this circle as being an “influencer.” This month we're looking at leaders as influencers of others in power. What is this environment really like? Are there different skills necessary or just different ways of applying the skills you have?  What is your mindset when working with your bench?   Today's Panelists Rick Pierce: Judicial Programs Administrator, Pennsylvania Administrative Office of the Courts   Melinda Brooks: Grants and Special Projects Manager, Municipal Court, Franklin County, Ohio   Ellen Procida-Fisher: Operations Manager, Superior Court, Cape May, New Jersey,   JoShonda Guerrier: Interim Chief Administrative Officer, Juvenile Court, Fulton County, Georgia, and   Lori Tyack: Clerk of Court for the Municipal Court, Franklin County, Ohio

Our guest on this episode is Lawrence Eichen. Among other things, he is a self-employed attorney, a speaker, and a coach. While he has been successful he endured internal conflicts he will discuss with us. He has over 25 years courtroom experience dealing with civil and criminal matters. He also is quite skilled at conflict resolution as you will discover. Wait until he tells us about his negotiation formula, E=MC5. We learn that Lawrence became plagued by Imposter Syndrome. He tells us why he came to have this syndrome in his life as well as how he came to overcome it. As he explains, Imposter Syndrome is not a mental disorder, but rather it is truly a phenomenon. He will discuss why he would describe this condition as a rash and he talks about the “ointment” he created to address it. Overall, I very much loved my time with Lawrence. I hope you will find this episode relevant and interesting as well. About the Guest: Lawrence D. Eichen, Esq. (Pronounced “Eye-ken”) Lawrence Eichen is a self-employed Attorney, Professional Speaker, and Coach. He has over 25 years of courtroom experience handling a wide range of civil and criminal matters. Mr. Eichen is also a highly skilled Mediator adept at conflict resolution. Mr. Eichen's litigation and mediation experience led him to develop a winning negotiation formula E=MC5 , which is a proven method to obtain excellent negotiation results. He has resolved well-over 1,000 cases during his career. Lawrence's resultoriented approach to success, stems from his experience inside and outside of the courtroom, including his own journey of self-discovery. Although he had substantial outward success practicing law, internally, Lawrence often found himself experiencing Imposter Syndrome (a phenomenon whereby one fears being exposed as an “Imposter” for not being as competent or qualified as others think). By addressing chronic doubt and rethinking internal messaging, he developed the ability to defeat imposter syndrome. As a result, he became a more confident attorney, a better business owner, and a more peaceful person. He now engages audiences by delivering inspirational speech presentations, which include providing practical advice and techniques on the topics of Mastering the Art of Negotiating and Defeating Imposter Syndrome . In addition, as a certified Rethinking Impostor Syndrome™ coach, he provides individual and group coaching to professionals, executives, and small business owners. Mr. Eichen is a licensed Attorney in New Jersey and a member of the New Jersey State Bar Association, New Jersey Association of Professional Mediators, National Speakers Association; and Association & Society Speakers Community. He is also certified in EFT (Emotional Freedom Techniques) and a member of the Association of EFT Professionals. A lifelong all-around competitive athlete, in his spare time “Ike” (as his sports buddies call him) can be found playing golf, tennis, or ice hockey. Ways to connect with Lawrence: My website is www.FirstClassSpeaking.com LinkedIn profile is ,https://www.linkedin.com/in/lawrenceeichen/. About the Host: Michael Hingson is a New York Times best-selling author, international lecturer, and Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe. Michael, blind since birth, survived the 9/11 attacks with the help of his guide dog Roselle. This story is the subject of his best-selling book, Thunder Dog. Michael gives over 100 presentations around the world each year speaking to influential groups such as Exxon Mobile, AT&T, Federal Express, Scripps College, Rutgers University, Children's Hospital, and the American Red Cross just to name a few. He is Ambassador for the National Braille Literacy Campaign for the National Federation of the Blind and also serves as Ambassador for the American Humane Association's 2012 Hero Dog Awards. https://michaelhingson.com https://www.facebook.com/michael.hingson.author.speaker/ https://twitter.com/mhingson https://www.youtube.com/user/mhingson https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelhingson/ accessiBe Links https://accessibe.com/ https://www.youtube.com/c/accessiBe https://www.linkedin.com/company/accessibe/mycompany/ https://www.facebook.com/accessibe/ Thanks for listening! Thanks so much for listening to our podcast! If you enjoyed this episode and think that others could benefit from listening, please share it using the social media buttons on this page. Do you have some feedback or questions about this episode? Leave a comment in the section below! Subscribe to the podcast If you would like to get automatic updates of new podcast episodes, you can subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts or Stitcher. You can also subscribe in your favorite podcast app. Leave us an Apple Podcasts review Ratings and reviews from our listeners are extremely valuable to us and greatly appreciated. They help our podcast rank higher on Apple Podcasts, which exposes our show to more awesome listeners like you. If you have a minute, please leave an honest review on Apple Podcasts. Transcription Notes **Michael Hingson ** 00:00 Access Cast and accessiBe Initiative presents Unstoppable Mindset. The podcast where inclusion, diversity and the unexpected meet. Hi, I'm Michael Hingson, Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe and the author of the number one New York Times bestselling book, Thunder dog, the story of a blind man, his guide dog and the triumph of trust. Thanks for joining me on my podcast as we explore our own blinding fears of inclusion unacceptance and our resistance to change. We will discover the idea that no matter the situation, or the people we encounter, our own fears, and prejudices often are our strongest barriers to moving forward. The unstoppable mindset podcast is sponsored by accessiBe, that's a c c e s s i capital B e. Visit www.accessibe.com to learn how you can make your website accessible for persons with disabilities. And to help make the internet fully inclusive by the year 2025. Glad you dropped by we're happy to meet you and to have you here with us. **Michael Hingson ** 01:25 Thanks for joining us today, we get to talk to Lawrence Eichen. And he's got a great story. He's an attorney. And we will say away from the lawyer jokes I mostly promise. But but you never know. You know, if you want to tell some you can, Lawrence , I'll leave that to you. But he's got a great story. He's a negotiator. He's a speaker. And we get to talk about a lot of things including imposter syndrome, which is something that I find pretty fascinating to to learn more about. So we'll get to that. But Lawrence, welcome to unstoppable mindset. Thanks for being here. Lawrence Eichen 02:00 Oh, my pleasure, Michael. And I'm really looking forward to our conversation. **Michael Hingson ** 02:04 Well, so let's start. And as I love to ask people to do why don't we start by you maybe just telling us a little bit about you growing up and in all the things that younger Lawrence was? **Lawrence Eichen ** 02:15 Okay. Well, let's see, I grew up, I'm the youngest of four children. So I have three older sisters. I grew up in Rockland County, New York. So um, you know, still feel like a New Yorker more than somebody from New Jersey, even though I've lived in New Jersey probably for over 30 years now. And I grew up, basically, I guess, typical stuff that you did as a kid back then was, you know, you go to school, you come home, you put your books down, and you go outside, and you play sports. And that's really what we did growing up. And I was lucky to grow up in a neighborhood where there was about eight of us. And we played everything, you know, every every day and on the weekends, really, whatever sport, you know, season was, was going on, we did it and we made up our own games like Well, kids do. And basically, you know, that my childhood was, you know, was a little bit stressful at times, because there was some real dysfunction in my family growing up. But, you know, for the most part, I'd say it was a typical, like, you know, middle class, suburban, family upbringing, you know, school and sports was really what I what I did as a kid growing up. **Michael Hingson ** 03:33 As a kid, did you get to spend much time in the city? Did you guys go there very much. Did you go any games or just spend any time in the city? **Lawrence Eichen ** 03:42 No, I really didn't get into the city as a kid, really. Our family didn't do stuff like that. I didn't get into see too many games. You know, I grew up was a Knicks fan, and a Rangers. Rangers fan. I'm still a Rangers fan. Very much these days. I try not to be a Knicks fan. It's hard to watch the Knicks. But actually, they're doing halfway decent this year. And I was a Mets fan. But I didn't really get into too much into the city as a kid growing up at all. So I was really more relegated to the television, watching sports. And just as a family, we never really went into New York City. So it wasn't until later on in my life, you know, more college years and post college years that I took advantage of the city because we were only about you know, 45 minute drive, you know, without traffic. And you can get into New York City, which was you know, a phenomenal experience once I did eventually get into this city. **Michael Hingson ** 04:44 Did you take the train in? **Lawrence Eichen ** 04:47 Often I would take the train in. I actually eventually was working in the city at 1.1 port one port early in my free law career and used to commute by Train into the city, which is not a fun experience for anybody who's a commuter into New York City knows that. **Michael Hingson ** 05:07 Yeah, it can be a challenge. Although I'm amazed that when we lived back in New Jersey, and I would go into the World Trade Center and into the city, I would often meet people who came everyday from Bucks County, a lot of the financial folks and so on would come from Bucks County, Pennsylvania, and they had two hour train trips. And either they had discussion groups or cliques that that communicated and spent all their time on the trains together, or people were in working groups, and they did things on the train. But it was a way of life and they didn't seem to be bothered by two hours on the train each way at all. **Lawrence Eichen ** 05:44 You know, it's funny, you do get into a routine, so I can identify with that, because you become numb to it after a while. And back when I was doing it, and I'm sure a lot of people that you were talking about doing it, you know, there were no, you know, iPhones and iPods and things that are so convenient now to take advantage of listening to a podcast and all this other stuff, you basically read the newspaper, or you read a book. And you did as you say, you know, you get acclimated to it, and I kind of think of it as just becoming numb to it. But looking back, you know, for me, it was sometime when I first commuted in, it was door to door about an hour and 45 minutes. And both ways. And it really does take a toll after a while on you because you realize, you know, you really spending a lot of time and energy commuting. And I didn't have like a group of people that I was commuting in maybe maybe I would have enjoyed it more. I was just like your typical commute or just taking a seat and trying to make the best of it. So for me, I don't miss it at all. I don't miss the commute into the city by train at **Michael Hingson ** 06:59 all. Yeah, I can understand that. I know. For me, it was about an hour and 20 minutes door to door unless there was a train delay. But I took a car from where we lived on trails in court and Westfield to the New Jersey Transit Station, which was part of the Raritan Valley line, then we went into Newark, to the past station then took the PATH train in. So it was broken up a little bit. But for me, again, as you said, iPhones, were starting to exist a little bit, but not a lot. So I really didn't have access to a cell phone a lot when I was traveling into the city. So I did read a lot, and spent a lot of time doing that. And I enjoyed it. But still, it it was a lot of time that you couldn't spend doing other things. But with the fact that for me, it was broken up with a couple of trains that everything else, I guess, you know, I survived it pretty well and can't complain a whole lot. **Lawrence Eichen ** 08:01 You know, you're reminded me I can remember muting in 1986. And the Mets were in the World Series and being on the train. And when I took the New Jersey Transit, there was no Midtown direct from where I was taking it from, you had to go down to Hoboken and then catch the PATH train to the World Trade Center. And I can remember being on those commutes when the Mets were playing. And you could just somebody had a radio, you know, somebody on the commute had a transistor radio. And that would be the only way that you knew what was happening in the game. And like he could almost, you know, overhear those what was going on by somebody else's radio. But it was it was just so interesting. Looking back now how limited access was to immediate information that we take for granted today. You know, there was no Internet, there was no as I said, No iPhones No, none of the stuff that exists today. But you know, like anything else, you just kind of you didn't know what you were missing? Because you were just living it at the moment. **Michael Hingson ** 09:06 Yeah, and of course, the real question is, was that a blessing or a curse? And I'm not convinced. Either way on that because we are so much into information and so much immediate gratification. Is that a good thing? And I think there are challenges with that too. **Lawrence Eichen ** 09:21 Yeah, I would agree with that too. Not to mention, it's very difficult to have a conversation with certainly with younger people that are glued to their phones like 99% of the time. It's like if you get somebody make eye contact with you. It's almost like a moral victory sometimes. So I agree with you that the access to information can you know get out of whack and out of balance and I think there is a real loss certainly in interpersonal communication with people that are just looking at their phones down, you know, they're looking down you see pictures all the time. If you see photos or just the even videos on the internet, you'll see a group of kids, you know, walking home from school together, and there's like 20 kids all walking together. But every single kid is just looking down at their phone, there's no interaction between them, or they're even at a sporting event, right. And you see people like looking at their phones and not even watching the live sporting event that they're at. So **Michael Hingson ** 10:21 go figure. And, you know, for me, I, I like to interact, although when I was traveling into the city, you know, I just had a seat and my guide dog was there. And I read a lot. We weren't part of a group. But if anyone would ever wanted to carry on a conversation, I was glad to do that as well. But I, I'm amazed, and I actually said it to somebody on one of our episodes of unstoppable mindset. I said, I was amazed at how kids in the back of a car would be texting each other rather than carrying on a conversation. And this person said, Well, the reason is, is they don't want their parents to know what they're talking about. Yeah, that itself is scary. You know? **Lawrence Eichen ** 11:06 I can understand that. And it's kind of funny. And texting, you know, look, people text right in the house, right? You take somebody else has downstairs, you know, there was a lot I will say texting, there are some really amazing benefits of texting. There are no it's not, I'm not against technology and the advancement of technology. It's just, you know, in the right place in the right time. It's, **Michael Hingson ** 11:28 it's it's communication. And that's an issue to deal with. Well, so where did you go to college? **Lawrence Eichen ** 11:36 I went to college, SUNY Albany, in the beautiful town of Albany, New York, which is really known for cold winters. So I can still remember walking home from the bars back then, you know, the drinking age back then was 18. So when you went into college, you know, you were it was legal to drink. And the bars would stay open till four in the morning. And I can remember walking home when I lived off campus, you know, at four o'clock in the morning, and literally just the inside of your nose freezing, the mucous lining of your nose would raise on the way home, it was that cold and windy. So yeah, that would I don't miss those cold winters. But College is a whole different store. **Michael Hingson ** 12:25 Well, yeah, there's a lot to be said for college. I've spent time up in Albany, we visited Lockheed Martin up there and some of the military facilities where we sold tape backup products. And I remember being at one facility, and we were talking about security. And the guy we were talking to reach behind him and he pulled this hard disk drive off of a shelf, and there was a hole in it. And I and say said, Let's see this hole. He said, This is how we make sure that people can't read discs, we take discs that have died or that we want to get rid of all the data on and we take them out in the in the back of the building, and we use them for target practice. And the trick is to get the bullet to go through the whole dry. That's funny. Yeah, the things people do for entertainment. I'll tell you, Well, what, what did you do after college? I gather you didn't go straight into law. **Lawrence Eichen ** 13:24 No, I didn't actually I started out as a computer programmer, because my degree was in computer science. So I worked as a programmer for a few years. And then, you know, long story short is made, made some stupid decisions, quit my job when I really shouldn't have and then did some other jobs in the computer field, like selling computer software. But I wasn't very happy doing that. And ultimately, that's when I decided to go back to school full time and go to law school. So I worked for about four years after college before I went back to law school. **Michael Hingson ** 14:07 Why law? **Lawrence Eichen ** 14:10 Hey, hey, I'm still asking myself that question. Why? Well, there you go. No, really, it's one of those things for me it was my one of my older sisters is an attorney. So I think there was that connection to law. And my aunt was a judge in New York In New Jersey also. So there were some family, you know, connections. I probably had some other cousins that were attorneys also but I think I honestly for me, it was like I really didn't know what to do with myself. A friend of mine was studying to take the LSAT, which is the entrance exam to get into law school. And no, I think I just thought to myself, You know what, maybe if I go to law school, I can sort of like salvage my career. I really didn't know what to do with myself. And, um, you know, I came to find out that many people that end up in law school really are ending up there because they don't know what else to do it themselves. I'm not that person that went to law school, like with this dream from childhood to be a lawyer and all that. It was more like, I don't know what else to do. And it was a way for me to rationalize, well, maybe I can do something and still salvage a career. And so I just took the exam with the idea that well, let me see how I do. If I do well on that, you know, then I guess I'll apply. And if I apply, I'll see if I get in. So you know, one thing led to another, I did do well on the exam. And once I did well, on the exam, I was kind of guaranteed to get into law school based on my score on the entrance entry exam. And so I applied to a couple places got in and then you know, that I ended up going to law school. Where did you go, I went to Rutgers law school in New Jersey. And the reason it worked out for me was that by that time, I had moved to New Jersey. And the reason I moved coming and really coming full circle had to do with the commute that I was doing into New York City, which was so long that I had decided, even before I was going into law school, I had decided to move closer down the train line, so it wouldn't take me an hour and 45 minutes to get into the city. So I moved into New Jersey and my commute into the city was like less than an hour at that point. And the fact that I was a resident of New Jersey allowed me to go to records, which was a very good law school, but it was a state school. So you could get a very good tuition, and a good bang for your buck. And so that's why I chose Rutgers. **Michael Hingson ** 16:46 And besides you wanted to root for the Scarlet Knights, right. **Lawrence Eichen ** 16:51 Well, I can't say that I was thinking that at the time I it's funny because I you know, I think of it as like, you know, the devils came into the I think a bit more like the devils came into the New Jersey and started to win and won a Stanley Cup even before the Rangers Did you it was really hard to swallow that pill. And when I mean when the Rangers did, I mean, the Rangers hadn't won a cup and like 50 some odd years, but then the devils come in as an expansion team. And then I think they won three cups before the Rangers finally won a cup in 1994. But I was still even though a New Jersey person. I was still always rooting for New York teams. **Michael Hingson ** 17:31 Well, yeah, and I rooted for the Knights just because they usually were doing so poorly. They needed all the support that they could get. Yeah. And I understood that but one year, they did pretty well. But there they definitely have their challenges. And you mentioned the Knicks. And of course we are are always rooting for the Lakers out here and I'm spoiled i i liked the sports teams. I like for a weird reason. And it's the announcers. I learned baseball from Vince Kelly and the Dodgers. And I still think that Vinnie is the best that ever was in the business of basketball. I learned from Chick Hearn out here because he could describe so well and he really spoke fast. Other people like Johnny most and some of the other announcers in the basketball world, but chick was in a, in a world by him by itself in a lot of ways. And so they they both spoiled me. And then we had Dick Enberg, who did the angels for a while and also did football. So I'm spoiled by announcers, although I do listen to some of the other announcers I listen to occasionally. Bob Euchre, who, you know is still doing baseball, Chris, I got to know him with the miller lite commercials. That was a lot of fun, but still, I'm spoiled by announcers. And so I've I've gotten loyal to some of the teams because of the announcers they've had and learned a lot about the game because the announcers that I kind of like to listen to really would help you learn the game if you spent time listening to them, which was always great. **Lawrence Eichen ** 19:07 Yeah, you've rattled off some real legends of the announcing world. I certainly Dick Enberg you know even in the in the east coast with New York and New Jersey. He got a lot of thick Enver just because he was a national guy, but I grew up really to me. So you say? I think you said Vin Scully. You thought it was the best in the business? To me more of Albert was the best in the business because I grew up with him doing Ranger games doing NIC games. He was the voice of the Knicks and the Rangers right and he was just great. And he you know, his voice is great. And so to me, he was like the the guy you know, everybody always tried to imitate **Michael Hingson ** 19:46 motivate dude. And I remember listening to Marv Albert nationally and he is good and it was a good announcer no question about it. Vinnie was was a different kind of an announcer because one of the things that I really enjoyed about him was when he and originally was Vin Scully and Jerry Daga. And then Jerry died and some other people Don Drysdale for well then partner with me. But when Vinnie was doing a game, he did the first, the second, the fourth, fifth and sixth, the eighth and the ninth innings. And then he was spelled by whoever is his co host was, if you will, but he did all of the announcing it wasn't this constant byplay. So they really focused on the game. And I've always enjoyed that. It's amazing to listen to TV football announcers today, because they're all yammering back and forth and plays can go by before they say anything about the game. **Lawrence Eichen ** 20:42 Yeah, there's a real art to that. And the chemistry for sure, when you get a really good team and a really good broadcaster, actually, what's coming to mind is, I forgot his last name. He just he retired maybe three or four years ago from hockey. He was like the voice of they call them doc. I forgot. I forgot. Yeah, I **Michael Hingson ** 21:00 know who you mean, I don't remember his. **Lawrence Eichen ** 21:02 Yeah, I forgot his name. But when he would do a hockey game, and you notice, I'm always bringing things back to hockey because hockey is like my favorite sport. But when he would do a hockey game, and he would only get him like it was a national game. It was such a difference in the game, because he was the best in the business just the best. When he retired, if, you know, like I said, maybe three, four years ago, I guess it's been it was like a real hole, you know, in the in the, in the announcing business, not that the other guys aren't good also, but he was just so great at it. **Michael Hingson ** 21:39 Yeah, well, they're always those few. And it's pretty amazing. Ah, the fun one has, but even so, there's still nothing like going to a game and I would take a radio when I go to a game or now I probably would use an iPhone and listen to it on some channel, but still listening to the announcer. And also being at the game, there's just nothing like that. **Lawrence Eichen ** 22:05 Oh, yeah, by the way, here's the beauty of technology when we were talking about technology, right? There's never a reason I always say this, there's never a reason for two people to have a conversation where you stop not remembering anything anymore. Right? Because what you know, while you're talking, I'm just Googling who that announcer wasn't It's Doc Emrick. His last name right? It was Mike, Doc Emrick Mike doc being his nickname. And, you know, that's where that's where that's where technology's great, right? Because this is the way you know, usually when I get done playing, I play tennis during the winter. And we after we play, we usually have a beer or sit around. And invariably the conversation turns to sports and you start talking about stuff. And nobody can remember anything, you know, for 9070 or 80. Or 90, you know, it's like who won this, who was the most valuable player? And like, you know, usually you sort of like kinda like say, I know, I can't remember then somebody remembers to look at their phone. And then next thing, you know, the conversation continues because the information has been supplied. whereas years ago, you just sort of had to leave the conversation. Like that was the way it is like everything was left in the air. Nobody could remember. Now this is no no excuse for that. **Michael Hingson ** 23:13 Yeah, absolutely. It's it's kind of amazing the way the way it goes, I'm when I go to family gatherings, there are always people looking at stuff on their phones. And there's discussion going on. And the bottom line is that people are talking about one thing or another and somebody's verifying it or getting more information. And I can't complain about that. So that that works out pretty well. And it's good to kind of have that well for you after going to college and going to Rutgers and so on. What kind of law did you decide to practice since there are many different ones? **Lawrence Eichen ** 23:49 Yeah, when I first came out of law school, I went into personal injury law. I took a job as a defense attorney. It was known as being in house counsel for an insurance company. And the reason I took that job is I always felt when I eventually went to law school, my mindset was, I envisioned myself as being somebody who would go into court. So there's when you come out of law school, there's really a couple of different positions that you can get, we can get very good experience early on in your legal career. So for me, it was either going to a prosecutor's office, you know, somewhere and prosecuting or being a defense attorney and working as an in house counsel for an insurance company, because there's just a volume of litigation in either way. I chose to go the route of the defense insurance position. I just didn't see mice. I just never visioned myself as a prosecutor for some reason, so I just never even explored that. So for me, it was really just a couple of choices and that's the one that I It shows and it gave me the opportunity to just defend cases where if somebody will either got into a car accident and you were sued by the other driver, you know, as part of your insurance policy, you were entitled to a lawyer who would defend you. And so I was that guy that would take on the defense of cases where other people were being sued as a result of car accidents, or slip and falls that might occur on a commercial property. I was also involved in those type of cases. And so let's say you were a contractor or something, and you were sued for some kind of negligent condition on some property somewhere, somebody fell, got injured, they sue everybody, then your insurance entitled you to have an attorney, defend, and I would do that as well. So that's really what I started out doing. **Michael Hingson ** 25:57 So that is a, you know, the whole issue of Defense's fascinating course, what did your aunt the judge, think of you going into defense? Or did you? Did you ever get to talk with her about it? **Lawrence Eichen ** 26:10 No, actually, you know, here's the thing is, I really probably would have went a totally different direction in my career is that when I was in law school, I had a chance to work with a very prominent New Jersey defense attorney, criminal defense attorney. And I could have worked as his law clerk or intern, I can't remember it while I was still in law school. But the problem was, he appeared regularly in front of my judge, my judge, my aunt, who was so there was this apparent conflict of interest, not that I would, you know, not that anything improper would occur. But my aunt was very concerned that how can she be in a courtroom deciding cases? Even if I wasn't in the courtroom, and he was the one in the courtroom, I was at his office? How could it happen? You know, if somebody ever found out that I worked in his office, then there's this appearance of a conflict. So I couldn't take the position with him. And I really wanted to because at that time, I found criminal defense. Very interesting, because criminal law in itself is very interesting, the issues, evidence and criminal procedure and all that stuff. So to answer your question, or about what am I and say, it really was, like, not even a discussion about it, you know, just something that I chose to do and just went a totally different direction. **Michael Hingson ** 27:48 I'm fascinated by what, what's going on now with Clarence Thomas, in the Supreme Court. Are you keeping up with that whole thing? **Lawrence Eichen ** 27:58 Actually, I just read an article on that yesterday. So yes, and interesting, absolutely disgusted about what's going on, even before that article came out, that talks about a conflict of interest. I mean, here there's **Michael Hingson ** 28:14 no there's no ethical guideline, apparently, for the the Supreme Court Justice is like there is even for lower federal judges or federal, federal people. **Lawrence Eichen ** 28:24 Yeah. But you know, Michael, here's the thing. That doesn't need to be in that particular there. What I'm what I'm saying is, yes, it would be better if there was some real, strict enforceable guidelines. I'm not against that. What I'm saying is, the judge himself should recognize just how ridiculously inappropriate that is. That's why even without actual laws, the judge himself ethically should be thinking, You know what, this probably doesn't look too good that I'm going on luxury, all paid vacations with one of the largest donors, who's, you know, a conservative minded individual. And now I'm ruling on cases that ostensibly might be certain areas of the law that are very favorable to these positions. Maybe I shouldn't be doing things like this, because it looks like a conflict of interest. And that's the thing about the legal profession, that doesn't have to be an actual conflict of interest. It just has to be the appearance of a conflict of interest, and then it becomes unethical and inappropriate. So even if nothing nefarious was going on, because there's no proof of that, right. Nobody has any proof that it would definitely happen. It doesn't even have to reach that level. It just has to reach the level of this doesn't look right. And for doing this for 20 yours, right? Is that what I think I heard are in the article for 20 years. Yeah. It's disgusting. It's absolutely disgusting. **Michael Hingson ** 30:08 Well, what seems to me is even more interesting is he never reported it. And that's where I think it becomes even more of a striking dichotomy or paradox, if you will, because even if there's not a conflict of interest, even if he wanted to do it, why wouldn't he report it? **Lawrence Eichen ** 30:26 Well, that's the that's, that's, that's what makes it even more revolt, revolting and disgusting. Yeah, he's sweeping it under the carpet. And why would you be sweeping it under the carpet? Like, what are you afraid to disclose? **Michael Hingson ** 30:39 I have grown up, especially as an adult, with a great respect for the law. I've been blind and a member of the National Federation of the Blind, which is the largest organization of blind consumers in the country. And the founder was a blind constitutional law scholar Jacobus tenBroek, who was very famous in the 50s and 60s for being an innovator with tort law and other kinds of things. And I've read a lot of his writings. And the law always fascinated me. And then I've been involved in actually in working with Congress and working with state legislatures, when, for example, we were trying to get insurance companies to insure blind and other persons with disabilities, because back in as late as the early 1980s, insurance companies wouldn't insure us. They said, We're high risk, where we have a greater and a higher mortality rate. And somebody finally asked the question, where's your evidence? Because you do everything based on actuarial statistics and evidentiary data. And they were told, well, it exists, can we see it Sure. never appeared. Why? Because it never existed. They weren't doing decisions on persons with disabilities based on evidence and statistics. They were doing it based on prejudice. And so we did get to work with state and and then and well, not so much the Congress I'll but state legislatures, and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, and finally, now there's a law in every state, you can't discriminate, but it's just the it always has fascinated me to be involved in the law in one way or the other. And I've done it in other kinds of places as well. And thoroughly enjoy it. But it is very frustrating when something comes along like this, where somebody's playing games that they don't need to play. **Lawrence Eichen ** 32:36 Yeah, that's, you know, there's just that's why the whole that's why honestly, you know, without getting too much political conversation, because we could go down a rattle. Yeah, we **Michael Hingson ** 32:46 don't want to do that. Yeah, I'll **Lawrence Eichen ** 32:48 just say that. That's why people get so outraged when they see things that clearly show something's unfair, right, or something is just inappropriate, it touches everybody's inner sense of what's right and what's wrong. Yeah. And when things look clearly inappropriate, clearly unfair. You know, everybody gets incensed about it, or should get incensed about it, because we're all trying to live, we all seem to live with an internal compass of what's right, what's fair, you're born with that, you know, they they did a study, I remember reading about this years and years ago, and I will butcher this a little bit, but I seem to recall, there was a study on like, I'm gonna say, one year old, or two year old, something like that. And maybe it was even younger, I don't remember, but it was very infant or toddler type study. And all they were doing was like giving one infant or toddler like three balls, and then giving another one too. And then or they both start with three, and then they take one away from the other one. And the whole study was just showing that even these babies or infants or toddlers who can't speak, they knew they had the sense of something was not fair. You know, and that's what the conclusion was. And again, I don't remember the study. But the idea is that it's just that it comes with each of us. It's like part of you the hardware that you're wired with is a sense of fairness, and justice, even at the earliest parts of your existence. And that's why when we see things as adults that are so unfair or inappropriate, it just triggers a natural reaction with us. of you know, something should be done about this. This isn't right. And so that's where I'm coming from. **Michael Hingson ** 34:51 Well for you, you did personal injury, Injury, love and how long did you do that? And then what did you do? **Lawrence Eichen ** 34:58 I did that. Probably We are at that particular place for about two or three years, after a while you're like a hamster in a hamster wheel, because you have so many cases to handle at one time. And like I remember a friend of mine once telling me like, the good for you, like when you win a case, as a defense attorney in that situation, you know, it's not like you make any money for yourself, right? You're a salaried employees. So it's not like you, you know, you, you feel good that you won the case. But a friend of mine, I'll never forget, he said to me, the good feeling only lasts until the time you get to your car in the parking lot. And then you close the door and get into your car to drive back to the office, you start realizing about how many other cases you have to do tomorrow and the next day. And so you're like a hamster in a hamster wheel. Because even if you resolve a case, or settle a case, you get a couple of more, the next day to replace the volume of cases that you have to always have. So it's sort of a little bit of a burnout, or canvio. For at least for me it was and so I went on to I switch sides and went to a plaintiff's firm, and did personal injury from the plaintiff side, and also did some workers compensation, and then got into some other areas like municipal court or minor criminal matters. So I did all that probably for about, you know, I'm guessing, you know, looking back maybe 10 years in those areas of the law. **Michael Hingson ** 36:29 And what did you do? **Lawrence Eichen ** 36:32 Oh, yeah, what did I do after that? Well, **Michael Hingson ** 36:34 I took let's see, I took a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away. **Lawrence Eichen ** 36:38 Yeah, I have an interesting story. Because I took a little turn. After I did, I worked in a firm for a lot of years, I really became disenchanted with practicing law, and I decided to try something completely different. And it's a long story. So I won't waste the time how I got into it. But I did end up becoming a financial advisor. While I while I had my attorneys license, and became a financial adviser, and I worked for a couple of financial firms, one happens to be one of the largest ones, that you would recognize their name. And I did that altogether, probably for about, I'm gonna say maybe four or five years. And I you know, even though I was relatively successful at that, a really became like, clear to me, after not, not even that long, I realized, like, this isn't really for me, but I was trying something different to see if I would just enjoy it more than practicing law. And so I didn't eventually, then that's when I went and just decided to practice for myself and opened up a shingle and went back to practicing law. **Michael Hingson ** 37:54 For me, was that more rewarding? Because you are now doing it for yourself? I would think so. **Lawrence Eichen ** 37:59 Yeah, it was it was a that was something somebody had suggested to me that I should try that before I totally give up on the practice of law. So and I would say that it is a lot better working for myself as an attorney than working for other attorneys that I will definitely tell you is much better, because it's the feeling that whatever you do is going to go into your own pocket, and being able to control your own time and all that stuff. I mean, there's added other stresses that come with working for yourself, for sure that aren't there when you work for a firm or company. But the trade off for me was I didn't have to worry about anybody else telling me what to do. And I'll just figure it out and do it myself. And so it was sort of more of an entrepreneurial endeavor working for yourself than working for a firm or company. And I **Michael Hingson ** 38:53 think you told me that you you practice in Morristown. I do practice in Morristown? New Jersey. Yes. So did any of the dogs from the seeing eye ever come and say we want to see we want to sue our trainers or anything like that? **Lawrence Eichen ** 39:06 No, but I did I do. I do see those dogs routinely walking around. And in fact, there's as if I don't know if you've been there since they put up this statue. I've heard about it. Yeah, there's a there's a statue like right in the green the center of town of, of a seeing eye dog with somebody leading, you know, the **Michael Hingson ** 39:28 dog leading buddy and the original CEO, original seeing eye dog. Yeah. **Lawrence Eichen ** 39:33 Yeah. It's a great, it's a great it's a really nice, nice statue. And it's it's definitely symbolic of that institution that is, you know, world renowned and has done really great things with their **Michael Hingson ** 39:44 own hands. Oh, absolutely. It's the oldest guide dog school in the United States. Alright, did not know that. It's been around since 1929. I think it is. So it's been? Yeah, it's getting closer to 100 years old. **Lawrence Eichen ** 40:00 Yeah, I've met people over the years when I used to have a Labradoodle. And we used to take it to a dog park in Morristown, and there have been times, I'd say, I've probably met three or four people over the years, that had labs that they owned, that had failed out of the Seeing Eye Institute, you know, so you know, not every dog that goes to become a seeing eye dog makes it makes the cut. And eventually, these dogs, they're still phenomenal. The thing about the person that ends up getting that dog, you know, gets a phenomenal pet, because dog is probably better trained than any other dog around. But for some reason, it didn't make the cut as a seeing eye dog. But I've met several other owners with their dogs, that were what we used to say, you know, the ones that didn't get make the cut, but they were really beautiful dogs and very friendly. And **Michael Hingson ** 40:56 I don't know, I don't know where the concept was created. But what I think we've all learned over the years is that the dogs that don't make it don't fail, because just not every dog is cut out to be a guide dog, or in specific case of seeing is seeing eye dog, the the generic term is guide dog and seeing eye dogs are seeing eye because that's the brand of that school, but they're they don't fail. What what they do is they get what people now call career change, which is appropriate, because it's just not every dog is going to make it as a guide dog. In fact, the percentage is only about 50% Make it because the reality is there's a lot that goes into it. And it's an incredibly grueling and demanding process. So the ones that that don't succeed it that oftentimes go find other jobs are there, other jobs are found for them. Some become breeders, but some go on to do other things as well, which is, which is great. But you're right. Any of those dogs are phenomenally well trained, and are a great addition wherever they go. **Lawrence Eichen ** 42:06 Yeah, and I like the way I'm gonna think of that from now on going forward, and it's career change for them. It's good. **Michael Hingson ** 42:13 So what kind of law did you start to practice? And do you practice now? **Lawrence Eichen ** 42:19 Well, I started to get more into initially, when I went into practice for myself, I did a lot more Municipal Court type cases, and Special Civil Part type cases municipal court, meaning, you know, minor, anything from like traffic tickets to DWIs, those are all handled in the municipal courts in New Jersey. So that could also be like simple assaults, harassments, some temporary restraining orders, things of that nature, and special civil court cases or more like, you know, matters that are like, typically, people might know that as small claims court matters that were traditionally $15,000 or less, now they've raised the limit. But those are quicker cases, you know, so you can get more volume, the idea for that, for me was I could get, get my hands on a lot of cases, get some experience, doing some new things. And get, you know, I was never somebody who liked to have cases that lingered for years and years. And so I came from having a lot of cases that were in the file cabinet for two, three years. And it'd be like, I can't take looking at these cases anymore. So for me, I like, you know, if I had a case, I have it for a couple of months, and it's done. And then there's something fresh and new. So that just appealed to me. And Municipal Court work. What was nice about that is a whole different feel of that to where you're just kind of going in, you're negotiating most of those cases are just resolved through negotiating. And so I was always a pretty good negotiator. And the idea was, you know, what, it's, it's sort of like a personality or, you know, just just being able to develop a good relationship with a prosecutor, let's say, or the municipal court system. And so they're all different to that. The other thing about municipal court, which is probably shouldn't be this way, but the reality is, you know, every municipal court and in each town right, every town basically has their own Municipal Court for the most part until there was a lot of consolidation. But generally speaking in New Jersey, most towns have their own Municipal Court, but you go into one town, it's a whole different field and if you go to another town and so kind of kept things fresh, in a way it was it was like always new and different. The cases were always being new, relatively speaking, because they're turning over a lot. So that's what I did for the most part, and then I got myself over the years into some other stuff, some commercial litigation matters. A couple of matrimonial things, and guardianship matters and a bunch of other stuff I'm probably forgetting. But for the most part, I was doing mostly Municipal Court work and Special Civil War work. **Michael Hingson ** 45:13 But you got involved somewhere along the line and resolution conflict and doing a lot more negotiating, which is a little bit outside regular law practice, but still a fascinating thing to get into. **Lawrence Eichen ** 45:24 Yeah, I did, I did some work as a mediator. And I still volunteer, actually, as a mediator for Morris County. Most of those cases that I would handle these days, on a volunteer basis is handling disputes that come out of the municipal court system, where sometimes you get these crazy fact patterns between neighbors give you a classic example, there'll be a lot of, you know, the dog is barking, or the neighbors, one neighbors parking in the spot of some other neighbor, or there's ex girlfriends with the same boyfriend, and everybody's fighting, and there's harassment. And there's all sorts of crazy stuff that comes out of municipal court. And some of these cases, you know, they kind of farm it out to mediation, and say, maybe this can be resolved through mediation and avoid going on to the main calendar. And so they give it a chance to resolve through mediation. And so I've done a lot of volunteer work in that regard, and just trying to help people resolve it amicably and be done with, done with whatever the dispute is, and draft up some paperwork to make everybody stay accountable. And so that's sort of like a give back that I've done, you know, for the community, so to speak. And it's been rewarding in the sense that a lot of these disputes, even though they seem minor, from, you know, from the outside, if you think about it, and I think we've all been there, you know, where you have a neighbor, or a tenant or roommate, then it's not going well. And it's incredibly stressful to live through those times when you got to come home every day. And it's either your roommate, or your, your immediate neighbor, upstairs, downstairs, or even across the street, or whatever the case may be. It's incredibly stressful to have to live through issues that are unresolved that get on your nerves every day, right? It's hard enough to live your life working and raising kids and all that stuff that most people are doing, and then to have those added disputes lingering out there. So they may seem minor in nature, but when they're resolved, every single person feels a sigh of relief in those situations as they can just get on with their life, **Michael Hingson ** 47:47 do you find that you're able to be pretty successful at getting people to move on? And so you negotiate and you come to an agreement? And do people generally tend to stick with it? Or do you find that some people are just too obnoxious to do that? **Lawrence Eichen ** 48:03 Oh, actually, I've actually been very successful on that, at least the case is, I can't speak for anybody else's doing it. But from my experience, I had been very successful. In fact, they used to refer the hardest cases to me, because I had the reputation of being able to resolve these things. And so yeah, I would say, my track record in those disputes, I'd say was very high to get people to resolve only a couple of times I can remember, you know, where it was just like, there was just no way this thing is gonna get resolved, then we gave it our best shot. And they were going to have to go into court and just try to get it resolved that way. But most of the time, you know, over 90% of the time, they would actually resolve it. And what I would do is I would really make, I would take the extra time to make it known to them that they're signing a document, you know, that we're going to draft up that is going to hold them accountable. Now, I you know, I think there was only one time that I had them sign off on a document that later on one of the parties violated it. And it had to come back to court for some other reason, you know, for that reason, but most of the time, once they really go through the process and recognize that it's in their best interest to resolve it. It gets resolved, they sign off on it. And that whole process seems to work because they don't really break that promise. At least. I never became aware of more than one case since I was doing it. I did it, you know, for 20 years. So it's a lot of times that I've done mediations and I think there was only one case that came back after we resolve it. **Michael Hingson ** 49:49 You developed a process I think you call it E equals MC five. **Lawrence Eichen ** 49:55 Yes, my formula for negotiation excellence. Yes. **Michael Hingson ** 49:57 What is that? **Lawrence Eichen ** 50:00 Actually, that is a formula that I came up with several years ago really based on my experience negotiating. And I designed it and modeled it after Einstein's theory of relativity, right, which is equal MC squared, you physics **Michael Hingson ** 50:15 guy, you **Lawrence Eichen ** 50:16 know, I'm not a Pinterest guy, I'm not, I wasn't, I did like, Man, I did like math, for sure. And that's why I went into computer science actually, probably because it's the same logic, you know, and solving problems. But physics, even though it's interesting was never my thing. But I did remember that formula did stick in my head for some reason. And when I used to talk about negotiating, and just, you know, talking to other people about a client's other attorneys, whatever you get into these conversations, I realized that I had a lot of the same initials as the Einstein formula. And so I thought, You know what, I think I can make this work by coming up with something simple, to say to that's memorable. And so equal MC to the fifth is really, it stands, the E stands for excellence, with the idea in order to get the results where we're shooting for, right, we're shooting for excellence. Okay, so that's the thing we're shooting for getting excellent results. But we're shooting to get excellent results on a consistent basis. Because the idea is anybody can show up and get an excellent result once in a while. And I've done that many times, I'll show up into court, I get an excellent result. It's not because I was doing anything fantastic. It's just the happen to ask for something. And you know, the prosecutor or the other attorney, or the judge, granted, whatever I was asking for, it wasn't because of anything great I did, or any kind of great negotiating I did. So you can get excellent results. Once in a while anybody can do that. It's about getting it on a consistent basis. And that's what the formula is really designed for, because the M in the formula stands for mastering. And we're going to master the five c, core components. And those five C's stand for commitment, confidence, courage, compassion, and calmness. And those five core components, all starting with the letter C, if you can master those five, you will get exponential results. That's the idea of having it to the fifth power, you get extra exponential negotiating results. Because if you think about it, if you're negotiating in front of somebody, and you sit down at a table, or conference room, or wherever the hallway or on the phone, and if you have a mindset where you are committed to your position, right, you're confident, you have the courage to ask for what you need to ask. And sometimes it does take courage to ask for things. And you have compassion, meaning whoever you're negotiating with, right, they can say whatever they want, they can be obnoxious to you, they can be insulting, it doesn't matter, you're going to stay in a position of compassion. And you can be calm, as you're handling objections, and push back. If you have all five of those things working for you. Just imagine your mindset when you're negotiating, you're gonna get excellent negotiating results. And so that formula is something that I talk about when I give presentations on mastering the art of negotiating. And I apply that formula, I go through each of those components, obviously in more detail and give examples and strategies and tips how to improve in each of those particular areas. And again, the concept is by mastering them. And you don't even have to master all five to see dramatic results. If you just, you know, master one or two of those and improve a little bit on the other ones, you'll see tremendous, tremendous results. So it doesn't you don't have to master all five. But the goal would be to be mastering all five of those and then you really see excellent results on a consistent basis. That's where their formulas **Michael Hingson ** 54:20 and I would think to a large degree calmness, as you point out, is not only one of those, but would probably in a sense be the most important to get some of the emotions to die down and get to really look at what's going on. **Lawrence Eichen ** 54:37 Yeah, I mean, that's a very good point. And you know, I I fluctuate between which one is the most important but the reality is, you know, they're all important. Yeah. being calm. Absolutely. There's times in a negotiating situation where calmness is so effective because as especially when you're negotiating, and you know, you don't want the other side to, you know, see you getting all anxious and nervous and stressed out, right, you want to be calm, just because you don't want to tip your own hand necessarily. But also, you don't want to fuel a potentially explosive, a volatile situation, depending on what you're negotiating about, right? Because we negotiate about all different things. And we could be negotiating, as I was talking about earlier about disputes between neighbors, those are certainly highly charged, very emotional. There's a lot of resentment and bitterness and anger and a lot of those types of disputes. Or you could just be negotiating on a very, you know, straightforward contract dispute, that may be so emotionally charged, but there's a lot of money involved and you want to be calm. When somebody's saying no or giving objections, you might be thinking internally, oh, my God, I really need this. To settle I need this deal. You know, I need to close this deal, I but you don't want to let that on, you want to be able to sort of like playing poker, right? You know, when you have a great hand, you don't want to let it on. When you don't have a great hand, you don't want to tip your hand either. You need to be calm at all times. And so to your point, yes, calm this is very effective. I like to think of calmness as a trait of leadership, right? Because when you're calm when you're negotiating, I always like to say that, often times, whether you're negotiating with a client, or customer or your spouse, business owner, anybody that you're negotiating with many times during a negotiation, the other side needs to be led to the conclusion that you want them to reach. So being calm is a position of leadership. And if you have very good points to make, and you have a lot of good reasons why whatever they're objecting to your position meets those objections. When you're calm, you're going to be way more effective in presenting your side, and you're going to simultaneously allay their fears and their concerns that they're raising with their objections, by your calmness, it's an energy, that if they see you not being all stressed out and bent out of shape, about their position, and you're really calm and effective in presenting yours, it can help persuade them into arriving at the conclusion where you're already at. So it's it's leadership, you're you know, that's why objections are really an opportunity for you to be a leader, it's an opportunity for you to lead that person back to where you want them to go. And, you know, it's like sports, right? Who do you want taking the the last shot of the game? You want the guy who's going to be calm under pressure, not the person who's going to be reacting and stressing out so much. **Michael Hingson ** 58:17 One of the things that you talk about I know and you've, you mentioned, to me is the whole idea and the whole issue of imposter syndrome. Can you talk a little bit about that? **Lawrence Eichen ** 58:27 Yeah, sure. Yeah, imposter syndrome is a very interesting issue. I definitely relate to it personally, because I felt impostor syndrome for so many years, in my legal career. And first of all, what it is if anybody who's listening or watching is not familiar with it, it's basically this fear of being exposed, that you're a fraud or you're an imposter. And a hand in hand with that is usually this fear that you're going to be found out to be not as competent or not as qualified as other people think you are. So that's where this this this concept of being an imposter, right? And a lot of what goes with impostor syndrome. So for somebody who's experiencing it, is that they tend to attribute their successes, their achievements to external factors, rather than owning their own achievements. And what do I mean by that, like external factors, that could be like luck, or chance, you know, somebody might get a great result. And they might just attribute that success to Well, I just happen to be in the right place at the right time, or I just had the right connection. I knew the right person. And when they say they say things like that to themselves, they're really disowning their own skills, their own qualifications, and they're attributing this success to something external from themselves. And that external factor is not just luck or chance, it could also be, you know, their personality, their charm. You know, for me, I can even share an example when I used to go into court and get a great result. Sometimes driving home in the car, or driving back to the office, I should say, I'm replaying what went on. And I'm thinking, you know, I got the result, because I was personable, I was making the judge laugh a little bit that day, I was, you know, I was diminishing my own skill, or my own competency. And I was kind of thinking, the reason I got the result was probably because he liked me more than the preparation, I did more than the arguments that I made. And that's a classic example of like diminishing your own skills, and attributing your success to that personality or charm. And you can extend that to gender, race, ethnicity, age, even even handicap, you know, why? Why is somebody in the position they are in? Why did they get the results? Well, maybe it's because let's say for women, very common, women might think, Well, I only got this high profile position, because there's no other women in the company that are in these high profile positions. So even though the woman might be completely qualified and skilled and competent, she might be thinking to herself if she's dealing with impostor syndrome type issues. So you might be thinking, the only reason I got it was because I'm a female, I'm a woman, and had nothing to do with my skills and competencies. And so again, it's externalizing our own successes, and attributing them to external factors. That's just what it is. That's sort of the definition of impostor syndrome. **Michael Hingson ** 1:01:48 So it sounds like you've had to deal with some because you just talked about it when you're driving back from trial and so on. So is it something that you have had to contend with? **Lawrence Eichen ** 1:01:58 Yeah, many times. It started with me, honestly, when I was in law school, I didn't have a here's the thing I didn't know it's called impostor syndrome. So I only found that out, maybe I don't remember when, maybe 510 years ago, I'm guessing. But I never heard of that. But I had the symptoms of this stuff without knowing what it was. But when I was in law school, the first way I used to feel like an imposter was because I was a computer programmer. Right? So I was really a programmer. And now I was in law school with all these law students who in my mind chose to be there. Because they wanted to be lawyers. I'm in here thinking I didn't know what else to do with myself. I'm really a programmer. I'm not really a person who reads books and studies like that. I'm a programmer. So I started to feel that in law school, and then when I was practicing law, even having graduated from law school and passing the bar and being qualified to be a lawyer, would now when I was in court very early on in my career, I'm worried when I'm in front of a judge, like, he's gonna ask me questions, and I don't know the answers to them. And I'm going to look foolish and stupid and not smart enough. And it was like kind of bringing back childhood stuff, because my father used to make me feel that way. And it was like, oh my god, now I'm in front of all these older men that are going to be quizzing me and making me feel like I don't know anything. So there was that fear, like I was going to be found out. You know, that's that feeling like, Oh, my God, I'm fooling everybody that's part of imposter syndrome is like, you're you feel like you're fooling everybody. And so I was always believing I was getting away with it. When I would go to court, even though I got good results. Those results weren't being owned by me the way I was describing earlier, they were really being attributed to external factors. So I'm just going along all the time believing that I'm this, you know, impostor, I'm not really a lawyer. So like, when I would be negotiating with prosecutors and other attorneys that have more experienced than me, I'm on guard thinking, Oh, my God, I'm gonna look so foolish. And somebody's gonna finally go, ah, we are not really a lawyer. What are you doing here? You're a programmer, you know, or something like that. And like, of course, that would never happen. But I'm thinking in my head, like, there's this feeling like I'm going to be exposed. So yeah, to answer your question definitely experienced it a long time without knowing what it really was. **Michael Hingson ** 1:04:28 He regarded as a

Washington Supreme Court Justice Barbara Madsen is a trailblazer. The first woman to be popularly elected to the Court in Washington state history, and the third woman to serve on the Court, she is committed to public service and equal justice. While on Seattle's Municipal Court bench, she helped develop a Domestic Violence Coordinating Committee to comprehensively address violence in the family and as Presiding Judge of the Municipal Court, she increased opportunities for women and attorneys of color to receive appointments as pro tem judges. She shares her remarkable journey from public defender and city attorney to her state's highest court with host M.C. Sungaila.

July 18th, 2023, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode As one progresses higher in an organization the challenges of leadership can become a regular test.  Increasingly responsible positions can draw leaders away from the very people they first came to rely on.  The demands of those you report to can outweigh the needs of the people who support you.   How do you keep grounded with the people who depend on you for Leadership?  And what happens when things do not go well?  Not every plan succeeds.  How do you lead when the court must close a project or endeavor because it is not achieving the expected results?  Finally, great leaders are intuitive.  They possess the emotional intelligence necessary to provide staff with the motivation they need to continue working toward an organization's mission.  What part does emotional intelligence play in Leadership?   This month we're looking at leadership in the courts.  Keeping in touch with staff, leading when a plan is not successful, and the role of emotional intelligence.    Today's Panelists    Stacey Fields, Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in Crestwood, Missouri   Katie Hempill, Office Administrator for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C.   Lizzie Alipaz, Clerk of Court for the Municipal Court in Timnath, Colorado Janet Cornell, Consultant and Retired Court Administrator and Rick Pierce, Judicial Programs Administrator for the Pennsylvania Administrative Office of the Courts

June 20th, 2023, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode Is there another concept in court administration that has been discussed, studied, and analyzed more often than Leadership?  For many the image of a leader that immediately comes to mind is the person who confidently says, “follow me, I know the way.”  It implies that the leader can always be relied upon to “have the answers.”   That image, however, doesn't always work.  Sometimes the outcome is being negotiated and cannot be revealed, sometimes the solution is dictated by someone else.  Examples that come to mind include how to manage flex time and remote work, how to absorb a 10% budget cut, or how to oversee diversity, equity, and inclusion in your court.  This month we're looking at leadership in the courts and how we handle day to day challenges. Today we are going to ask folks who deal with questions of leadership on a daily basis.   Today's Panelists    Stacey Fields, Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in Crestwood, Missouri. Stacey has worked in the judiciary for 12 years. She has been a member of NACM for 5 years and serves on the Conference Development Committee.   Katie Hempill, Office Administrator for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. Katie .  Katie received her bachelor's degree in International Relations from Marshall University and graduated this May with her master's degree in Government studies from the Harvard Extension School.   Lizzie Alipaz, Clerk of Court for the Municipal Court in Timnath, Colorado. Lizzie speaks Spanish, English, German, and Portuguese. She received her Juris Doctor Degree from Universidad Católica Boliviana and Universidad Privada de Bolivia.   Janet Cornell, Consultant and Retired Court Administrator. Janet has over 35 years in court leadership including service in general and limited jurisdiction courts. She is a founding and contributing member to http://www.courtleader.net. She has a Masters in Public Administration from Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, and is a Fellow of the National Center for State Courts, Institute for Court Management in Williamsburg, VA, along with certificates from the Leader Coach Institute, Scottsdale, AZ, and the Leadership Institute for Judicial Education, Memphis, TN.   Rick Pierce, Judicial Programs Administrator for the Pennsylvania Administrative Office of the Courts. Rick has served in the field of court administration for the past 29 years. Prior to his appointment at the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Rick was the district court administrator for Cumberland County. Prior to his 4 ½ year tenure as court administrator, he was the assistant administrator for the 9th judicial district from 1988-1997. A graduate from Washington and Lee University, Pierce received his Masters in Public Administration from Shippensburg University in 1995.

April 27, 2023, A Question of Ethics Conversation Episode “Quiet Quitting.”  It is a topic that many of us have heard about.  In an era where it is a challenge to hire employees, is “Quiet Quitting” an emerging change in the contract between the court and employees or is it just a new term for some staff not doing their jobs?   In the past it has been given many names: “retiring in place”, “phoning it in,” or “checking out.”  What makes this iteration unusual is that it seems to be a mantra heard from younger workers.  Millennials and Gen Z workers have often uttered this expression.   -What is Quite Quitting?          -What are the ethical challenges the court faces to ensure professionalism diligence of staff?          -How can we ensure that we have a common understanding with staff?          -Is this a new term for an old problem?          -What Should we do about It? Today's Moderator Eric Silverberg: Court Administrator, Municipal Court, Tucson, Arizona   Today's Panel Courtney Whiteside: Director, Municipal Court, St. Louis, Missouri Kent Pankey: Senior Planner, State Supreme Court, Richmond, Virginia Norman Meyer: Retired Clerk of Court, United States Bankruptcy Court, Albuquerque, New Mexico Peter Kiefer: Retired Court Professional Tina Mattison: Deputy Court Administrator, Consolidated Justice Court, Tucson, Arizona Karl Thoennes: Court Administrator, Second Judicial Circuit Court, Sioux Falls, South Dakota Samantha Borden: Staff Assistant, Customer Solutions Division, Water Department, Tucson, Arizona

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Seattle Times politics and communities reporter, Daniel Beekman! They cover the Seattle City Council's defeat of a War-on-Drugs style bill, a judge ruling that Washington's ban on assault-style rifles can move forward, new polling from NPI showing Bob Ferguson with an early lead in the race for governor, Seattle Councilmember Alex Pedersen proposing a capital gains tax for the city of Seattle, Washington state pursuing permanent rules for working outdoors in wildfire smoke, and 1,000 misdemeanor cases being dismissed after Seattle City Attorney Ann Davison ends the city's participation in Community Court. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Daniel Beekman, at @DBeekman.   Resources “Passing Middle Housing and Climate Planning with Futurewise's Bryce Yadon & Marcella Buser” from Hacks & Wonks   “Seattle City Council narrowly rejects drug prosecution bill” by Sarah Grace Taylor from The Seattle Times   “WA ban on sale of AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles can go forward, judge rules” by Claire Withycombe from The Seattle Times   “Attorney General Bob Ferguson leads 2024 WA gubernatorial field, new NPI poll confirms” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   “Alex Pedersen proposes capital gains tax in Seattle” by Sarah Grace Taylor from The Seattle Times   “WA taking input on new rules for working outdoors in wildfire smoke” by Jasper Kenzo Sundeen from The Yakima Herald-Republic   AirNow Fire and Smoke Map    “1,000 misdemeanor cases to be dismissed after demise of Seattle Community Court” by Sara Jean Green from The Seattle Times   Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and the Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday topical show, I welcomed Bryce Yadon and Marcella Buser from Futurewise to talk about the For Our Future campaign's success in passing middle housing and climate planning bills for the 2023 legislative session. Today, we're continuing the Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Seattle Times politics and communities reporter, Daniel Beekman. [00:01:22] Daniel Beekman: Hey Crystal - thanks for having me. [00:01:24] Crystal Fincher: Hey - glad to have you again today. Wanna start off by talking about something that was in the headlines almost all week and made major news throughout Seattle - and that was the Seattle City Council defeating a drug prosecution bill that was proposed. What would this bill have done and how did this shake out? [00:01:45] Daniel Beekman: Oh, okay. So what the bill would have done was allow the Seattle City Attorney's Office to take charge of prosecuting gross misdemeanor illicit drug possession and public drug use, as defined by the Legislature in the session earlier this year - in a law passed to keep drug possession criminalized in the state statewide and to criminalize public drug use. So to make the Seattle City Attorney's Office the lead on dealing with any of those arrests - or prosecutions. And I was fascinated by this. I covered Seattle City Hall for seven years and I've been off that beat for a while now but this was - I think since I left being responsible for that beat at our paper - this was the meeting that I tuned into sort of the most interestedly. I was listening to it at home even though I didn't need to be working, because I was just fascinated by what was going on. And it seemed like this moment where there could have been a real shift in sort of Seattle and Washington State politics potentially, where for many years it was the Seattle City Council trying to push the envelope on what they would describe as progressive issues and legislation and then the State Legislature sort of following that - taking the lead of Seattle. And here - what was proposed, aside from the details of it and the important issues at play which we could talk about, but just in pure sort of politics - this was some Seattle City Councilmembers and the City Attorney saying the opposite of that, saying the state has made their decision going in a certain direction, we wanna follow it in Seattle. And so if the bill had passed that would have been a real sort of role reversal - in my mind, in that way - but it was interesting. And then of course, narrowly the legislation did not pass with Councilmember Andrew Lewis providing the swing vote and saying he was changing his mind at the last minute, but also saying that he wanted to come back and revisit the issue in the future - so sort of trying to play both sides of it. [00:04:16] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And as you've mentioned, this comes on the heels of the state legislation - their second shot at drug legislation following the State Supreme Court's Blake decision, which made personal possession not a crime, kept everything else like dealing and paraphernalia - all that kind of stuff - wasn't changed, but personal possession of a substance was decriminalized. Our legislature stepped in in 2020-ish, 2021 - one of those years - [00:04:46] Daniel Beekman: 2021, yeah. [00:04:48] Crystal Fincher: Thank you - pandemic time is interesting in my head. [00:04:52] Daniel Beekman: For sure. [00:04:53] Crystal Fincher: And made a possession a misdemeanor and included a sunset provision in that legislation. They also included a lot of funding in that initial legislation to implement diversion and support programs throughout the state - that largely didn't end up happening because the pandemic happened. A lot of those plans just weren't fully realized, weren't able to be implemented for health reasons, and for some lack of desire. So when they came back, they actually doubled down on the criminalization - made personal possession a gross misdemeanor instead of just a misdemeanor - they increased the penalty there. As well as making public use a gross misdemeanor. So localities are now faced with how to make their local laws jive with the state law. And a lot of different cities are contending with this in a lot of different ways. We saw overwhelming testimony from Seattle residents saying that while they absolutely agree that substance use, drug abuse, public use is a problem, that this way of solving it - through just prosecutions, criminalization, and the taking over of this locally in the City - marked a return to the failed War on Drugs that they weren't interested in. I think we do hear from a lot of residents that they want this addressed. They just want it addressed in a way that is likely to succeed and hasn't failed before, which some of these punitive, punishment-based policies have been doing. And to really give addressing the root causes of these problems a shot - where we saw the beginnings of the attempt to do that and fits and starts during the pandemic, but really wanting to move forward with this in earnest. And we'll see what happens. Mayor Harrell and Councilmember Lewis both signaled that they want to address this somehow, and maybe it needs some more stakeholdering, community feedback, and support in how to deal with this. So I expect to see legislation coming back that maybe tries to address some of the concerns that the community had, but it'll be interesting to see how this shapes up. [00:07:13] Daniel Beekman: For sure, yeah. The public comment was heavily against the legislation, but then, yeah - there were mentions by, I think, Councilmember Lewis, maybe others on - from the dais - about polling that showed it was popular amongst Seattle voters, and I didn't see that. And so I don't know how it was worded - and caveat - but it was interesting that they mentioned that. And then it also gets complicated because you can have a law on the books, whether it's at the City level or the County level - responsible for, in theory, for prosecuting - but if the police aren't prioritizing those arrests, either because they're told not to, or because they don't have the staffing to do so. And if the jail isn't booking people - then real life can be more complicated than a press release or what's written in the law. It wasn't clear even what would happen if the law had passed. I don't think it's totally clear what's going to happen now, so I'll have to keep watching it. [00:08:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. On that polling issue, there is an interesting occurrence afoot in Seattle. There is a firm - I don't know which firm is doing it yet - but have seen a few of these polls that have come out, and they really do not appear to be scientific polls. Maybe this is a different firm, and I haven't seen it, but I have seen a couple of these polls. It looks like they are targeting a political list, as opposed to randomly-selected residents or registered voters, however they're doing that. So I just underscore for people who are going to be covering polling, for the public looking at this - if you don't see all of the details about the poll if a poll is referenced, if you don't see what the methodology is and it's not done by a reputable firm - take that with an extreme grain of salt. There are some polls checking in that seem to be more public relations and marketing stunts than actual legitimate polls. We'll see. Again, there could be a poll that I'm unaware of here that is absolutely legit, but just always it's best to see that. And with this new legislation, it's going to be interesting to see what happens with this. I know there's been a lot of talk about standing up alternatives to just traditional - Hey, we're calling in a cop for this, maybe that's not the best way - looks like that is likely not the best way to address substance use disorder and issues like this. So one of my big questions is - okay, we're focusing on new legislation. But for funding that has already been provided for these alternatives - for stuff to stand up - what is being done to stand up existing capacity, existing programming, existing things that have already been greenlighted? But we'll see what happens. This is in the mayor's lap right now, so are there plans moving forward with this? I know they've talked about doing things under the umbrella of a new Department of Public Safety, but I think lots of people are asking - When is that going to happen? And when are we going to see some of the benefits of that happening? 'Cause although there's a lot of attention put on the pushback against some of these damaging policies, that's not the only thing that's happening here. There are people saying - No, we don't want to return to this bad, expensive process of before, but we do need to help this situation. We do need to stand up some things that have a better shot at working. And I'm wondering when that's going to happen. [00:10:39] Daniel Beekman: Yeah, and then my colleague Sarah Grace Taylor, who covers City Hall for us, has written about this question of Mayor Bruce Harrell. It was very clear that he - with public safety - he wasn't a proponent of defunding the police, but he was, expressed this both-and approach where we want more police officers - and we want the best police officers, the best training - but we also want the best alternatives and the best new kind of public safety person who's not a police officer, but we have not seen that yet. And he got some time at first to adjust to a new administration, but we're deep into his first term now. [00:11:23] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, we're waiting. Other news this week - a judge ruled that the ban, Washington's ban, on the sale of AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles can go forward. What was the controversy here? [00:11:36] Daniel Beekman: I think the various gun lobby organizations, or the Second Amendment rights organizations - they always sue whenever any jurisdiction passes any type of gun control or gun safety measure. And so they were always gonna sue in this case and claim there was an infringement on Second Amendment rights, and so it looks like the state won an initial victory. This was just, I believe, a ruling on whether there could be an injunction in the case - in other words, stopping the law from being in effect while the lawsuit itself is litigated. And the federal court judge, among other things, said - There are various standards for an injunction. And one of them I noticed he said - one of them is - is there gonna be a great harm to the public if I put this, or if I allow this law to keep going forward while we litigate this case? He said - No, there's not gonna be a great harm to the public if I allow this law to be in place while we deal with the lawsuit, because people are using guns to kill people. So that was one interesting piece, I think, from the ruling when I was reading up on it. But it's not the end of the story - the case is still active and who knows, maybe it'll go all the way to the US Supreme Court - we'll have to see. [00:13:05] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, we will have to see - as we've seen with so many things, whether it's the capital gains tax or lots of legislation, a law passes or residents of the state pass a new law. And it's fairly routine these days, especially in some of the biggest cases, to see legal challenges against them. And certainly the gun lobby signaled from the very beginning that they were going to be challenging this in court. There is another voter-passed initiative that is being challenged in court in Oregon also. So although we are passing some nation-leading gun control measures here and along the West Coast, it does have to pass legal scrutiny and be constitutional, both our state and national constitution. And the people who are making that determination are different ideologically than they'd been before, so it's gonna be interesting to see how this continues to carry through the courts - what is permitted and what's not - and the importance of crafting legislation that you do believe will stand up to legal scrutiny. So we'll see how this proceeds. Also wanna talk about a new poll that came out this morning in regards to the 2024 gubernatorial race that's gonna be happening here in the state - with Jay Inslee announcing that he is not going to run for reelection and a whole crop of new candidates in. This poll found that Bob Ferguson was the clear leader here. But as far as that, there's not much more clear beyond that. There's a lot of candidates really close to support - several statistically tied, basically, based on the margin of error of this poll - and about a third of people currently saying they're undecided as well as others. What did you find interesting in this poll? [00:15:01] Daniel Beekman: And of course, with the caveats - we're talking about poll caveats - but this is just one poll. I think the NPI polling, in my experience last couple of years, has been proven to be pretty good, but they are - they're a partisan outfit. And I think they're working with a good polling firm, but just to put that there - it's just one poll. But I would say - not surprising to see Bob Ferguson in the lead, considering that it's very likely that a Democrat would win the office, and considering that he's been so prominent as a State Attorney General who waged legal sort of combat against Donald Trump, and then has continued to be in the news a lot for various initiatives. And just name recognition alone - compared to Public Lands Commissioner Hilary Franz - I think people can debate what either of them has done in office, but I think just name recognition - a lot of Washingtonians don't know that there's even a position of Public Lands Commissioner, especially maybe in the more urban areas. So there's that. I don't know - I'm not covering this race right now - and with these stories that I'm not covering directly, I wanna be careful 'cause I just don't have the expertise of some of my colleagues. But as an outsider, I found the entry of Mark Mullet, sort of centrist Democrat, the most important thing here - just because he may also not have a ton of name recognition, but he's gonna try to pull, I would think, voters from both parties or independents to a center campaign. And whether that could give a Democratic frontrunner some problems, or give the Republican candidate some problems - I don't know - but that seems like the most interesting wild card so far. [00:17:04] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, I'd agree with that. And also absolutely agree with the caveat here - this is just one poll, not a suite of reputable polls that we can feel super confident in. Your point is well taken in that NPI has been performing well with their polling - they are a partisan outfit, but we've seen over the past year that they've been right in-line with other polls or actual results. In this, they found that Bob Ferguson was at 25%, Raul Garcia - a Republican who ran for governor before - at 17%, Semi Bird - who is a more MAGA-leaning Republican endorsed by Joe Kent - is there. I should mention Raul Garcia was supported by some more - what they would describe themselves as - moderate Republicans. Hilary Franz at 9%, Mark Mullet at 7%, and Not sure at 33%. Margin of error in this poll, as said before, was 3.5%. Really important - polls are a snapshot in time - that doesn't mean that this cannot, and I anticipate it will, dramatically change. This race and the dimensions of it, especially with Mark Mullet getting in, are very interesting. I think his theory of the case is, especially if he can - I think most people at this point in time are assuming that with Bob Ferguson's lead in terms of name recognition, which probably comes from him being so active as an attorney general and a lot of the lawsuits that he's brought, most notably against the Trump administration have helped his name ID. He also has a significant financial lead in - because he was able to transfer some of the money from his AG campaign to his gubernatorial campaign. Our state's Public Disclosure Commission is in the process of perhaps modifying rules in that area - which lots of people have done - Bob Ferguson is not the only person to transfer money here. But with that changing, he did rush to get in these transfers underneath, under the deadline of some impending change here. And so he was able to transfer a lot of money, is the fundraising leader by a significant margin. And that matters in the way races are run today. I wish it didn't matter as much, but it does. So a lot of people are looking at this as - okay, Bob looks really likely to get through, who's going to make it through against him? And big question mark - if it's a Republican, we have the dimensions of, I don't know, I would say regular or traditional given where discourse is at today, but a Republican versus Democratic general. But in our top-two system, it could be Bob Ferguson and Mark Mullet, it could be Bob Ferguson and Raul Garcia, Semi Bird, it could be Hilary Franz. Also, we are very early and it's not like Bob Ferguson is guaranteed. We saw an endorsement announcement that got a lot of attention - not much of it positive - with the announcement of former Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best endorsing Bob Ferguson's campaign and kind of poor reactions to that from both the left and the right. But we'll see how this shakes out. And he has a lot that he can certainly run on and advocate for and that people have been satisfied with, a lot that some, especially conservatives, have not been satisfied with - but we'll see how this shakes out. I certainly thought this was interesting, but it is just capturing a point in time. Lots can change - this is not set in stone - although I anticipate to see a campaign email from Bob Ferguson touting these results pretty soon. We will see. Also notable that you talk about Mark Mullet being a differentiating force, a unique force that can change the dimensions of this race. I found it notable that this past week we saw an email from Bob Ferguson going after Mark Mullet's record and pointing out things like he said he wasn't even sure he was gonna vote for the Democrat gubernatorial nominee before, when he was running that very heavily contested race against Ingrid Anderson, and some other controversial things that he had said and done. Which Bob Ferguson pointed out in wanting to say that we don't want a Republican-lite - as many people view Mark Mullet - we want a real Democrat in this seat. We'll see how the dimensions of this race proceed. It's going to be an interesting one. Also wanted to talk about a new proposal for a capital gains tax in the City of Seattle - coming from someone who I think some people were surprised to see - from Alex Pedersen. What did he propose and why is he saying this is warranted? [00:21:42] Daniel Beekman: I think as I understand it, he would take the - basically the logic of the capital gains tax that has been put in place on the state level and apply an extra couple of percentages to a similar tax just for Seattle. And then what he said that he would do - he said, call that a progressive tax, where people with more resources are being taxed. And then he would use those funds to then reduce or eliminate a water tax that's added to water bills for folks in the City of Seattle. So he - which he described as a, I think, as a regressive tax because it's flat, it's not graduated. And so I actually thought it was a classic Alex Pedersen maneuver. He, I remember even - I think, I want to say when he was first running and when he was, worked for Tim Burgess back in the day, he's been - always talked about our regressive tax system and wanting to change that. But also, he's talked about that as wanting to raise revenue, not necessarily to put towards new programs and things, but to reduce other taxes. And this water tax is - it plays, I think it plays to his base of northeast Seattle homeowners. So it felt like a very Alex Pedersen thing to do - to me - in those ways. [00:23:09] Crystal Fincher: No, that tracks. And to your point, this is a very popular idea in the City of Seattle across the board. He points out that regressive taxes are those taxes that place a disproportionate burden on the lowest income households. Like even though we don't have an income tax, he points out utility taxes, property taxes, sales taxes. Those are all taxes that we pay in greater amounts because we don't have a property tax. And the people who are paying the most are those at the very bottom, those who can least afford it. Meanwhile, the people at the very top, the wealthiest 1%, are not paying their fair share - is what he's saying, it's what public polling shows is very popular in Seattle. We just had the capital gains tax passed at the state level and it did survive legal scrutiny. Our State Supreme Court found that it was a constitutional tax - it's not classified as an income tax, which is currently unconstitutional in Washington state. So we'll see if this has legs, if this can proceed, how this proposal will go - but it looks like this is going to be really interesting. Seattle would be the first locality in the state to pass this capital gains tax. So we'll see what happens with this, but it's gonna be interesting. [00:24:31] Daniel Beekman: I saw somebody - I haven't looked into this much, but I've been wondering - oh, is this just gonna sail through the City Council because it's panned as a progressive tax in the city - even though Alex Pedersen on some issues is on the more conservative side, will the more lefty councilmembers get on board with it. And I saw a piece of criticism - just on social media - sort of making the case that because the City has a utility discount program that maybe mitigates the effect of the water tax or water bills on lower income folks, that really choosing that as a place to reduce the regressive tax or give back that capital gains money to taxpayers is actually - would be disproportionately benefiting people who aren't low income. And so I don't know - that was interesting. And yeah, I don't know. Like I said, I would need to look into it more, but we'll see what that conversation looks like. [00:25:34] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, we'll see what this conversation looks like. And again, this is one of those tax that applies to a very narrow slice of people at the top. We've seen organized and well-funded opposition to this. I anticipate we'll see this at the city level too, but the percentage of people who that actually represents is much smaller than normal. Usually we're under 5%, perhaps under 1%. We'll see what the number is for that in Seattle. I assume it's gonna be slightly higher than it may be for the statewide average - but we'll see how that continues, what the reception of this is, and how this is gonna play out. So another story this week, which is timely to discuss - as particularly the East Coast right now is inundated by wildfires raging throughout Canada, even some Western wildfires that have some smoke spreading to the Pacific Northwest interior right now - wildfire smoke in areas that are hundreds of miles away, sometimes thousands of miles away even, is becoming a reality that we're dealing with because of climate change. And so our Department of Labor and Industries is considering implementing some new rules governing how and whether people can work in severe wildfire weather events that are very harmful to people's health. I think this is something that more people are realizing and learning as we deal with smoke more regularly, but breathing in wildfire or particulate matter - sometimes you see it referenced as PM2.5 - is very harmful to health, including - extended exposure can damage the heart, nervous system, respiratory system, and cause cancer or respiratory disease. Sometimes people just initially notice eye irritation, coughing, lung irritation - but these can cause and exacerbate major, major healthcare issues, exacerbate asthma and different things like that. So whether it's kids at school or people at work, this is having a big impact and Labor and Industries is stepping up and stepping in to say there need to be some requirements for employers about this. You can't just put your employees out in smoke no matter what that is with no protection and proceed on. So it's mandating some protection at some levels, at different thresholds - employers providing KN95 or better masks, mandating how people can work, mandating the wearing of masks to protect people's health potentially if wildfire is really, really - if the smoke is really heavy and I think we pass some of the highest threshold levels here. How do you see this and do you think this is gonna make a difference? [00:28:20] Daniel Beekman: Yeah, I think that it does seem like common sense to try to grapple with it because these smoky summers, whether here and now we're seeing it in New York - which is interesting to see people there in New York City deal with something that we've already been dealing with for a while deal with it - but they're here to stay. It seems like it's a new normal of some sort. So employers and workers are already dealing with these things and trying to figure out how to handle them, I think, at least on an ad hoc basis. But figuring out what regulation should be makes sense and can maybe make a difference. And it does remind me that - this wasn't smoke, but last summer I did a story about how Seattle's library branches without air conditioning closed more than 130 times due to heat and concern about workers being too hot for too long inside. And just - I think that was totally unprecedented and I think points to the fact that we're dealing with a sort of new ball game here with our changes in weather, whether it be the results or symptoms are smoke or just the heat itself, and adjustments need to be made - whether it's putting air conditioning in more library branches, or whether it's coming up with new regulations for working outside when it's smoky. [00:29:38] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And just underscoring that this is a rule-making period here - it's a period where they're collecting comment from a lot of people. So if you have thoughts or feelings about this - we will include the link in the resources here - and please get in contact with Labor and Industries to share your opinion. Some people are saying the thresholds as currently stated are too high and adverse health effects can happen much lower than the thresholds and need protection. There are also some industry organizations saying that they wanna make sure that this isn't too burdensome on - perhaps farmers and others - saying that they need to clearly understand what they are. And hopefully paperwork requirements aren't onerous, but it does seem like it is necessary to provide some protection to employees here and make sure everyone understands what the risks and thresholds are, and taking action to mitigate and support employees through this. Also, another element that was making news in the City of Seattle is 1,000 misdemeanor cases are going to be dismissed after the demise of Seattle's Community Court at the request of Republican City Attorney Ann Davison. What happened here? [00:30:54] Daniel Beekman: Again, I think some of this is a little bit complicated in the back and forth - the debate about whether Community Court should still exist and the City Attorney's office should be participating in it or not - but my understanding is that the Seattle City Attorney's Office - there's been several iterations of Community Court, which is basically allowing people with certain misdemeanors to deal with their cases in a non-traditional way, whether it be through community service or other avenues. The Seattle City Attorney's Office said - We're frustrated with the way this has been going, we're pulling out. And once they pull out, then it ceases to be a viable option - they're a necessary player for that equation. And so that was a dramatic termination of that program that even came into the conversation then a few days later about the drug possession and drug use prosecution with, I think, Councilmember Andrew Lewis saying that the termination of Community Court influenced his decision to vote against allowing the City Attorney's Office to prosecute drug possession and public drug use because the Community Court, or something - things like it - would be a helpful tool to have in dealing with those cases and then the Community Court isn't there anymore. [00:32:24] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. This is really interesting - and again, helps to understand and remind people that cities typically handle misdemeanors, counties typically handle felonies. So this is just a conversation about city-level misdemeanor cases. And what evidence has largely found, what has guided some recent decision-making is that for the lowest level crimes, usually addressing the root causes of those does a much better job of eliminating recidivism - re-offense - than strictly punitive policies only focused on punishment and not the cessation of whatever behavior or criminality is occurring. So once again - here in Seattle - Community Court, which had broad support from the public, from the judges implementing this. We talked about this a bit last year during some of the Seattle, or year before last, Seattle Municipal Court battles here and this being an issue that was at play kind of bubbling underneath the surface, but certainly a desire at that time - knowing that the Seattle City Attorney's Office wanted to end the Community Court - they had a person running from within that office who appeared that they intended to wanna do that, that was talked about on the campaign trail. The voters voted for people who said that they would not do that - that seems to be where the voters continue to be at. But we see once again, a pandemic-impacted conversation - Hey, we implemented this, but during the pandemic, everything was turned upside down - from the way court was done, the way Community Court was done, and the way that a lot of the options that required human contact, face-to-face contact and working through these issues were dramatically impacted, cut down, not provided - for understandable health reasons, but this wasn't fully implemented. And some of the justification of this was - Well, it's not working. It's not working 'cause it's kind of not happening throughout the pandemic and not doing that - the things that were going to be helpful were not being provided. But it seems like the City Attorney is continuing to jump on these things and saying - Okay well, we didn't fully implement the thing, but it's not working, so let's just repeal it. It seems like that's the position that the City Attorney is starting from, returning to, didn't deviate from, and is using whatever justifications they can use to do this. Curious that now and previous - there was another mass kind of dropping of cases that they don't seem to think that that's gonna impact public safety or worrying about that, but we need to get harder to make sure that people who do come into the system are put into that traditional, more punitive system. I don't know how this is gonna turn out. I don't know how this is gonna proceed, but it looks like this Community Court is ending, that they're not putting more people into it. They did mention that there were a few new contracts signed with some service providers that maybe are going to be working with this new system. I would love to learn more about that - who those providers are and what they're going to be doing, how that differs from what was being done before. I do not know one way or the other, so genuinely interested in learning more about that - wasn't covered in the article that we read about it, but we'll see how this proceeds and we'll see what public safety and the criminal legal system continues to look like as it evolves in the City of Seattle. [00:36:06] Daniel Beekman: Yeah, there were a couple of details in my colleague Sara Jean Green's story about this Community Court issue that I thought were interesting. One of them being a reason cited, I think by the City Attorney's Office, for being frustrated with Community Court is people not showing up to engage in the Community Court. And folks on the other side, proponents of Community Court, I think, maybe saying - Well, it's true, they're not showing up, but they also don't and wouldn't show up for traditional court. So it's not like you solve that problem necessarily by getting rid of Community Court. And even smaller sort of little detail that I thought was - I'm glad it was included - was even something as small as the - I believe the program had access to a van to take Community Court participants to their community service obligations at some point. And that was a victim of a budget cut. I think it was the presiding judge of Municipal Court talking about this and bringing it up as - something as simple as a van taken away by a budget cut can affect some of the performance here of this program. And so again, there are the big sort of big picture policy, political, philosophical debates on the criminal legal system and things like this. And then there are things as simple as a van. So I thought that was an important note. [00:37:45] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and thank you for bringing that up - that was a really important note. And I hope people who are putting together policy understand how important details like that are, particularly with transportation - something that a lot of people are contending with, a lot of people who, especially a disproportionate amount of people involved in the criminal legal system, don't have access to reliable transportation. We see that in the healthcare setting too - access to transportation significantly impacting patients' adherence to their plans, access to medication. It's a big deal how to get to and from somewhere, so even providing a service like that is really important to this. And the other one - as you said, it's so interesting to hear the objections to one program from the City Attorney also being present elsewhere, which kind of makes it look like a cynical attempt to just end something that they never liked in the first place. But we'll see how this happens, and I do hope that they pay attention to those details. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, June 9th, 2023. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today was Seattle Times politics and communities reporter, Daniel Beekman - always appreciate his information and insight. You can find Daniel on Twitter @DBeekman. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks, and you can find me on Twitter @finchfrii. You can catch Hacks & Wonks wherever you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review show and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

Dallas municipal court building closed as ransomware recovery continues; Add election workers to the list of people Dallas County didn't pay on time; Allen Premium Outlets remains closed with no reopening date; Texas House passes bill to end diversity, equity and inclusion offices in higher education; Dallas artist Niki Dionne uses wool, whimsy to spotlight Black women

Residents of Rowlett are asked to go to the polls on Saturday, May 6 to consider authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $76.3 million for three facility bond propositions. Each of these projects was carefully considered and proposed by the Council-appointed Community Investment Program Task Force, and the City Council voted unanimously to place these propositions on the ballot for citizens' consideration. Election day is Saturday, May 6 Early Voting is April 24 - May 2 Learn more at www.RowlettBond.com Email with questions: buildingthefuture@rowlett.com PROP A: Public Safety Facilities - $63,928,980 72,806 square feet to house Police, Fire Administration, Detention Center (jail), and Municipal Court. PROP B: Animal Shelter - $8,400,000 9,296 square feet. The proposed facility will be planned to manage phased growth and plan for build out. PROP C: Herfurth Park - $4,000,000 Design and construct Phase 2 and 3 of the Herfurth Park renovations.  

Here's your top news and highlights for the week of January 13:    Monday, January 16 is Martin Luther King Jr, Day! City of Rowlett facilities, including City Hall, Municipal Court, Rowlett Community Centre, Library and the Animal Shelter will be closed. FCC trash services will also be postponed by one day. Our Rowlett Diversity Equity and Inclusion Commission is hosting a community event and food drive on January 16 from 10am-1pm! You're invited to come out to the lawn on Main street for food trucks, readings from local children and a whole bunch more.  More info can be found here: https://www.facebook.com/RowlettDEIC  We finally released another episode of the My Rowlett Podcast featuring Daniel Cabuya, who is the Winter 2022/2023 Spirit of Rowlett Award Winner! You can listen to the My Rowlett Podcast on your favorite podcast platform or you can watch it on our YouTube channel! I can't wait for you to listen!  More info here: rowlett.com/podcast   The Rowlett Citizen Corps Council (RCCC) recently announced that they are  sponsoring another two-day Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training on Februaury 4th & 11th. This is a great opportunity if you're interested in serving your community during a natural or man-made disaster. Visit rowlettcert.com to register and for more info.  Applications are open for the Gary Alexander Arts in Education Grant! The Rowlett Arts and Humanities Commission sponsors mini "Arts in Education" grants which are available to public and private schools in the City of Rowlett. More info here: https://bit.ly/3kdXTeZ During this year's Winter Reading Program, 336 people read more than 113,250 minutes. That's over 1,887 hours! Way to go, readers! We'll see you all again for another reading challenge, starting June 2023!    And finally, don't forget we have our Town Hall upcoming up on January 26th! We hope to see you there.  More info here:https://bit.ly/3iz5S5D    If you wish to suggest a topic, guest, or have a question- Please email Hannah Rabalais at podcast@rowlett.com or reach out online:    rowlett.com/podcast    https://www.facebook.com/CityofRowlettTexas    https://www.youtube.com/user/RowlettTexasVideo    https://www.instagram.com/cityofrowletttexas    https://twitter.com/RowlettTexas    https://www.linkedin.com/company/city-of-rowlett/ 

Audiences all over North America have been bowled over by Butler's personal and professional perspectives, his whirlwind delivery, gentle humor, and remarkable insights into the human condition. Dan Butler draws on his experiences as a father, a syndicated weekly columnist, a securities salesman, a college professor, a retail store manager and a regional director for the National Conference of Synagogue Youth (NCSY).He has been a judicial law clerk, a prosecutor, a family court hearing officer and a family court meditator, successfully settling over 1,100 custody cases. Dan Butler is a District Judge in the Municipal Court of Pittsburgh. He has served as a judge of the Municipal Court of Pittsburgh, as well as on Pittsburgh's specialized, Domestic Violence Court.00:00 - Intro13:32 - Interview1:07:52 - OutroRabbi Efrem Goldberg: Rabbi, Boca Raton Synagogue (BRS).Rabbi Philip Moskowitz: Associate Rabbi, BRS.Rabbi Josh Broide: Outreach Rabbi, BRS.

The quality of dignity is not strained. Judge Victoria Pratt presided for years over Municipal Court in Newark, New Jersey. Her experiences form the foundation of her book, The Power of Dignity: How Transforming Justice Can Heal Our Communities. In the third of Amicus' summer season of big-picture conversations, Dahlia Lithwick and Judge Pratt explore what everyone, up to and including Supreme Court Justices, can learn from procedural justice, also known as procedural fairness. You can watch Judge Pratt's viral Ted Talk here. Sign up for Slate Plus now to support our show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The quality of dignity is not strained. Judge Victoria Pratt presided for years over Municipal Court in Newark, New Jersey. Her experiences form the foundation of her book, The Power of Dignity: How Transforming Justice Can Heal Our Communities. In the third of Amicus' summer season of big-picture conversations, Dahlia Lithwick and Judge Pratt explore what everyone, up to and including Supreme Court Justices, can learn from procedural justice, also known as procedural fairness. You can watch Judge Pratt's viral Ted Talk here. Sign up for Slate Plus now to support our show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The quality of dignity is not strained. Judge Victoria Pratt presided for years over Municipal Court in Newark, New Jersey. Her experiences form the foundation of her book, The Power of Dignity: How Transforming Justice Can Heal Our Communities. In the third of Amicus' summer season of big-picture conversations, Dahlia Lithwick and Judge Pratt explore what everyone, up to and including Supreme Court Justices, can learn from procedural justice, also known as procedural fairness. You can watch Judge Pratt's viral Ted Talk here. Sign up for Slate Plus now to support our show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dan Butler is a District Judge in the Municipal Court of Pittsburgh, as well as on Pittsburgh's specialized, Domestic Violence Court. He is also a judicial law clerk, a prosecutor, a family court hearing officer, and a family court meditator. Dan is an active Board Member of many charitable organizations and is Past Chairman of the Holocaust Commission of Greater Pittsburgh, and is an Executive Board member of the Orthodox Union. He has lectured thousands of times around the country from Radio City Music Hall to the Vermont legislature. He draws on his experiences as a father, grappling with the tragic loss of his son, a syndicated weekly columnist, a securities salesman, a college professor, a retail store manager, and a regional director for the NCSY. Subscribe to our Podcast Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/2WALuE2 Spotify: https://spoti.fi/39bNGnO Google Podcasts: https://bit.ly/MPPGooglePodcasts   Or wherever Podcasts are available!   Follow us on Instagram: https://instagram.com/meaningfulpeoplepodcast Like us on Facebook: https://bit.ly/MPPonFB Follow us on Twitter:https://twitter.com/MeaningfuPplPod   Editor: Sruly S. Podcast created by: Meaningful Minute   For more info and upcoming news check out: https://MeaningfulPeoplePodcast.com   #jew #jewish #podcast #frum #rabbi #frumpodcast #meaningfulpeople #torah #mitzvah #hashem #jewishmusic #jewishpodcast #israel #kumzitz #nachigordon #yaakovlanger #jewishpod