HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1995.12.07 - 24384. . -.December 7, 1995
REPORT (Misc. #95276)
BY:
IN RE:
GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE - KAY SCHMID, CHAIRPERSON
M.R. #95276, OPPOSITION OF THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS TO CERTAIN ASPECTS OF PROPOSED COURT
REFORMATION BY SUPREME COURT
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS:
Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
The General Government Committee, having reviewed the above-referenced
resolution on November 27, 1995, reports with the recommendation that the
resolution be amended as fellows:
After the NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED paragraph, insert the following
new paragraph:
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board
of Commissioners does hereby establish an Ad Hoc
Study Committee to review the Supreme Court's proposed
reforms; said committee to include ropmesactrertvem of
Corporation Counsel's Office, Circuit Court, Probate
Court, 52nd District Court, Friend of the Court,
County Clerk, County Treasurer, Bob Daddow, rPprPqPh -lng
the County Executive, a Rppreqpnrar -ive of the Michigan
ARRnciatinn of Counties, and four County Commissioners,
appointed by the rhairpprnn of the Board."
rhairpprgon, on behalf of the General Government Committee, T move
acceptance of the foregoing Report.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE
•nn
Miscellaneous Resolution #95276
BY: David L. Moffitt, Commissioner-District #18
ennis N. Powers, Commissioner-District 10
Dan Devine, Jr., Commissioner-District #14
John P. McCulloch, Commissioner-District #22
RE:OPPOSITIO 41.2SEEPailLAUL; TS OF PROPOSED COURT REFORMATION
THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF commissETED134 SQPRericewriT
Ladies and Gentlemen:
WHEREAS, the Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court James
Brickley addressed a joint session of the Legislature to outline
the Supreme Court's plan to improve the justice system; and
WHEREAS, various administrative features of the Court's
program involve significant changes in County government operation
as it relates to Court services support and operation; and
WHEREAS, certain LuuummeaddLiull& of the Supreme Court and
their potentially negative impacts upon Oakland County include the
development of a Statewide Computerized Information System which
our Board of Commissioners in consultation with the County Clerk,
opposes; and
WHEREAS, Oakland County has a highly developed system of
information delivery, and is developing a comprehensive system of
access to county information involving the Internet; conversely,
the State's Computer Support Enforcement System, developed by
Supreme Court Administration Office (SCAO) has been an uncTalified
disaster; and
WHEREAS, the proposal to bring essential Court Services wholly
within the judicial branch of government, as currently understood,
is opposed by the Oakland County Board of Commissioners, in
consultation with its County Clerk, as the function of record
keeping is effectively managed by County Clerk's office, a
constitutionally created public office (Michigan ronstirnrinn Art
VI, Section 14) and is professionally staffed, has the advantages
of the County's Information Technology Systems, and is locally
accessible to continued rapid developments in the fast moving info-
sharing field; and
WHEREAS, Oakland County wishes to maintain its level of
technical and service excellence, not to be reduced to the lowest
common denominator often inherent in attempted centralizAtlnn and
ronsnlidnfinn effort a statewide basis can involve; and
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court, despite having sole authority over
rule-making for court organization, changed without extensive prior
pllhlinn or known requests for comments from the bar the Chief
Judge rule, wherein the Chief Judge of a local circuit court is now
selected by the Supreme Court, instead of having approval power
over chief judge selection; and
-7-440WIS ,
110.4
WHEREAS, continued diminished ability of the local circuit
courts to select their own chief judge does not facilitate improved
communication between the legislative and judicial aspects of
county government; and
WHEREAS, criticism from the legal community and bench of the
Supreme Court's proposed reforms is undelstandaLly muted, and, in
the case of the Chief Judge Rule, same not having been offered for
comment or criticism at all, making constructive comment by
directly elected rpprpspntAtives of the people of enhanced value in
further court reform policy development.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of
Commissioners does hereby express its grave concern and qualified
opposition to the Michigan Supreme Court's proposal to alter the
management and organization of court support services without
thorough rnnsidnratinn of its impact upon county government and its
operations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this
resolution be sent to all of Oakland County's legislators, the
Senate Judiciary Committee, the House Judiciary and Civil Rights
Committee, the State Court Administrator, Oakland County Court
Administrator, County Clerk and the County's Legislative Agent.
Mr. Chairpprcnn, I move the adoption of the foregoing
resolution.
rni •
Resolution 495276 December 7, 1995
Moved by Schmid supported by Devine the General Government Committee Report
be accepted.
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the report was accepted.
Moved by Schmid supported by Moffitt the resolution be adopted.
Moved by Schmid supported by Devine the resolution be amended to coincide
with the recommendation of the General Government Committee Report.
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the amendment carried.
Vote on resolution, as amended:
AYES: Pernick, Powers, Quarles, Schmid, Taub, Wolf, Amos, Crake, Devine,
Dingeldey, Douglas, Garfield, Holbert, Huntoon, Jacobs, Jensen, Johnson, Kaczmar,
Kingzett, Law, McCulloch, McPherson, Moffitt, Obrecht, Palmer. (25)
NAYS: None. (0)
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution, as amended,
was adopted.
DOES tiOa Kith'11(i ILI Uhl bitiuilvE
STATE OF MICHIGAN)
COUNTY OF OAKLAND)
I, Lynn D. Allen, Clerk of the County of Oakland, do hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution is a true and accurate copy of a resolution adopted by the
Oakland County Board of Commissioners on December 7, 1995 with the original
record thereof now remaining in my office.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the
County of Oakland at Pontiac, Michigan this 7th day of,Decembek-I993.
Lynn/D.-Allen, County Clerk