| Youth Court Enabling Legislation |
One Perspective on Utah's ExperienceBy Michelle E. Heward Michelle E. Heward is the present chair of the Utah Youth Court Board and is also an associate professor of Criminal Justice at Weber State University in Utah. Introduction Does your state need legislation to govern youth court activities? We recently faced that question in Utah. I certainly do not claim to be an expert in the legislative process, but most of those involved with youth courts probably do not have the luxury of that experience either. This article is written to assist those facing legislative concerns with the benefit of our experience and provide a potential framework for proceeding. Background In the fall of 1997 the State of Utah was experiencing a huge growth in youth courts. Along with the growth came questions about regulating youth courts. A statewide youth court committee was organized and the following summer technical assistance was provided from the American Probation and Parole Association, with support from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. One of the suggestions was to develop legislation. This was an intimidating proposition, but through good advice and a lot of hard work, we were able to successfully tackle the problem. Legislative committee The formation of a legislative committee was essential to our success. The committee was composed of leaders in the state from the fields of law enforcement, prosecution, juvenile court, state education, a local university, Utah Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the legislature, as well as of coordinators running successful youth courts. The purpose of the committee was to draft legislation that would help the youth court movement grow appropriately. It is imperative to have representatives from a state level that can assist in that process. It is also important to consider representatives from entities that have been, or may be, critical of youth courts. For example, in Utah we received information that a few juvenile court judges were skeptical about youth courts. We sought out representatives from both juvenile court administration and a juvenile court judge for the committee. That representative gave us the opportunity to benefit from their vast experience, to address their concerns, and make the youth courts stronger. Do not be afraid of healthy criticism. We were also able to allay many of their concerns about youth courts. Utah has several youth court models and we represented the different models on the committee. If we were to do it again, I would also recommend including a youth member on the committee. In essence, if you form a committee to draft legislation, you should consider the following:
Once your committee is formed, the first question to tackle is whether legislation is necessary. We were concerned that if we did not act, that legislation would be addressed by someone who did not know much about youth courts. That was enough incentive for us to proceed. Another major concern was the impact legislation would have on existing youth courts that, up to that point, were running totally unregulated. Any legislation we passed would have to be narrow enough to be effective, yet broad enough to allow all courts to continue to run effectively. Our goal was to enhance the youth court movement in Utah, not diminish it. The legislation needed to assist youth courts from rural Utah to those along the Wasatch front where most of our population is located. The issues in those areas are often diverse. While Utah decided to draft legislation, there may be states that do not need legislation because the youth courts are running efficiently without it. Legislation is usually restrictive. It is appropriate to consider whether legislation is needed and the impact it will have for youth courts in your state. Content of the legislation We started by making a list of different areas we wanted to consider for legislation. We then gave ourselves several weeks to consider the issues and divided them up over the course of several meetings. I would suggest that the committee agree that once an item has been discussed and decisions made, the committee not readdress that issue without a very good reason to do so. This will keep committee business moving forward and assure that someone with strong feelings on a particular topic is present when the committee discusses it. After we addressed a number of issues, we researched legislation from other states. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel. You will find legislation that provides fairly detailed and comprehensive guidelines for youth courts and other legislation that is very broad and general. A couple of committee members reviewed the legislation, pulled out what they liked, and drafted additional statutes consistent with our committee discussions. A very rough draft of proposed legislation emerged and was used as a starting point for future discussions. After several more months of discussion and consensus building we developed proposed legislation that we proudly presented to our sponsoring state senator. He critiqued our bill and made further changes with the assistance of the Office of Legislative Council. I cannot stress enough the importance of the consensus building process. The debate that we had was sometimes frustrating, but always productive. The membership of the committee provided enough diverse interests and backgrounds that we were able to flesh out potential problems with the legislation. Once we agreed on a position, we knew that it generally had gone through a refining process that gave it credibility. We did not all agree on every issue, but through the consensus building process we were able to reach decisions at the end of each meeting that represented the collective best of the group. This early opportunity for debate, particularly with the leadership represented on the committee, was invaluable later on when the bill was considered by the legislature and various subcommittees. We knew most of the areas that were likely to span debate and had already worked through the concerns. Legislators recognized the committees expertise and appreciated the fact that we had worked through many of the issues they brought up. Things to consider Personally, at this point in time I was out of my league in terms of knowing what to expect from the legislature and what was needed to successfully shepherd the bill through. I strongly suggest finding someone well respected in the legislature who is willing to mentor your committee. In our case we were fortunate to have several members with a wealth of legislative experience. You need to discuss which legislative committees would have interest in the bill and should play a part in sponsoring or otherwise supporting it. You also need to know which legislators should be approached up front for support or comment. We identified one person from the committee who was primarily responsible, along with the sponsoring legislator, to be the mouthpiece for the legislation. This person sat with the sponsoring legislator and fielded questions from committees. In our situation the biggest opposition to the bill came in the form of technical questions from lawyers who were concerned about jurisdictional and turf issues. It was helpful that the committee representative and our legislator had legal backgrounds. Do not forget the political and other ramifications of the fiscal note attached to your bill. At one point a legislative analyst attached a large fiscal note to our legislation. Luckily this was caught by a committee member familiar with the process who worked through the problem and reduced it to a more realistic figure. As with most of the concerns raised in this process, the analyst simply needed education on how youth courts operate and the problem was solved. Gathering support for the legislation Our greatest ally once the bill was before the legislature, was our youth. Take advantage of this opportunity to educate youth regarding the legislative process. Some of the things youth can learn from the process include:
Youth and their parents also contacted their legislators and educated them on the value of youth court. They extended invitations to watch youth court and answer questions. Personal e-mails were also sent to every legislator. In the end, the bill passed unanimously through both the house and senate with only minor changes. More important, the youth received a wonderful education on the legislative process. Ongoing revisions As a result of our legislation a state Youth Court Board was formed with many of the same members from our initial committee. We are now focusing our efforts in many areas to benefits youth courts in Utah. A subcommittee will continue to be involved with legislative concerns. |