Glenn A. Grant, J.A.D., acting administrative director of the New Jersey courts, testifying in a 2018 budget hearing. Photo by Carmen Natale

The acting administrator of the New Jersey courts went before the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee on Tuesday and touted the benefits of criminal justice reform two years into the program.

But more importantly, Judge Glenn A. Grant appeared before the panel to ask for more money to keep it going as pretrial service costs balloon with new staffing and salaries, among other expenses. He said criminal justice reform was easily staring at a $1.2 million budget deficit for the new fiscal year that starts July 1, and $15 million for the next fiscal year.

“Funding, of course, remains a concern,” he testified. “Right now, the Pretrial Services Program's funding stream relies entirely on an increase in filing fees authorized by the Legislature and adopted by the Supreme Court. The program has been operating with a structural deficit in funding since its first year of operation.

“However, we will experience an actual deficit by the end of this fiscal year,” Grant added. “Our projections indicate we will be more than $15 million in the red for next year's Pretrial Services budget.”

Grant said the cost of administering the state's new nonmonetary bail system has steadily swelled each year—from $24.1 million in its first year in 2017, to $35.7 million in 2018, to $37 million this year.

“We urge the governor's office and the Legislature to replace the current fee-based funding structure with a permanent funding source that makes the Pretrial Services Program a regular part of the state's budget,” Grant said.

Translation: Grant said filing fees totaling about $22.1 million should be transferred into the general fund, which would fund criminal justice reform and create a sustainable source of funding year after year.

Grant after the hearing said: “I think working with the two branches, we will come up with a solution [for] stable funding. We need to take the money we collect from filing fees, deposit [it] into the general fund, and then have the cost of running the program paid for like any other operation of the Judiciary. Year after year.  A permanent solution.”

Budget Committee Chairman Paul Sarlo, D-Bergen, was receptive to the idea.

”I think it's very reasonable,” Sarlo said after Grant's testimony. “What they're doing with criminal justice reform with the savings, I tell you what, to look at that 2018 report with the fairness and societal benefits it's had, that's a huge success for this Legislature. I agree we need to get them more money and to make sure these people [defendants] are getting speedy trials.”

The revamped bail system debuted on Jan. 1, 2017. The specific reforms were the result of recommendations by the Joint Committee on Criminal Justice chaired by Supreme Court Chief Justice Stuart Rabner and implemented through a constitutional amendment approved by voter referendum, as well as legislation and court rules.

The judiciary is required each year to provide the governor and the Legislature with a report on criminal justice reform.

The annual report released earlier this month said CJR was having a positive impact on the state, including reducing county jail population by detaining only the most serious offenders.

Among the report's highlights using statistical comparisons between pre- and current-CJR numbers:

• On any given day, 6,000 fewer people are in custody in county jails, including 3,000 fewer black defendants, 1,500 fewer white defendants, and 1,300 fewer Hispanic defendants.
• The composition of the jail population has also changed; nearly 75 percent of the 2018 jail population included detainees charged with serious offenses.
• The vast majority of defendants, 81.3 percent, were released within 24 hours; when no detention motion was filed, 99.5 percent of all defendants were released within 48 hours.

Additionally, the report said that concerns about a possible spike in crime and failures to appear did not materialize.

“Two years into its existence, CJR has balanced the protection of the constitutional rights of New Jersey residents with the responsibility to assure community safety,” Grant told Senate committee members. “That is not to say that our work is done in this area.”

Grant testified to the panel, flanked by members of the judiciary's Budget and Planning Committee, as well as the director of the Office of Management and Administrative Services.

Grant gave similar testimony on April 3 to the Assembly Budget and Appropriations Committee.

The judiciary includes the Superior Court, Appellate Division, Tax Court, and Municipal Courts.

Grant earlier in his testimony went into how collaboration among the three branches of government led to other sound policy. They included: municipal court reform; creating a more equitable manner for both homeowners and lenders to resolve their disputes, thus reducing the state's foreclosure rate; and resolving complex business litigation with a separate court program dedicated to such cases.

On municipal court reform, Grant said more was needed, such as decoupling the court's sentencing practices from a municipality's need for revenue, consolidating or regionalizing municipal courts, and modifying the appointment process for municipal court judges. He noted that earlier this year, the Supreme Court dismissed approximately 800,000 municipal court bench warrants and complaints involving minor matters that had gone unresolved for 15 years or more.

Grant said New Jersey is among the first jurisdictions to allow law enforcement and family members to file for a protective order to allow for the seizure of weapons from those who pose a significant danger to themselves or others, or to prevent the sale of weapons to such individuals.

“Our judges are being trained on the new law and the judiciary is designing and building an electronic database of such protective orders to be ready when the new law becomes effective in September of this year,” he said.