For the past five years, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Sheila Woods-Skipper has overseen much of the daily administration of the First Judicial District, serving as the court system's president judge.

Woods-Skipper, a Temple Law School graduate, who spent more than a decade as a prosecutor and is serving her 20th year on the bench, stepped down as president judge earlier this month. The move marks the end of a decade-long tenure serving in court leadership, since she spent five years as the supervising judge of the criminal division before being elected as president judge in 2013.

The Legal spoke with Woods-Skipper about her time leading the court.

The following has been edited for clarity and length.

Q: Walk me through the day-to-day of being a president judge?

A: So, a day in the life of a president judge [laughs]. Every day is a different day. You could come in with one plan and it could go completely haywire, depending on what's happening in the court. But generally, I was in court at least three days a week, either in mental health court, or I've been handling police misconduct PCRAs, which takes up quite a bit of time. I did a lot with reentry programs. When it's election season we do a lot of the election court, like the objections to nominating petitions and the emergency absentee ballots.

I would also do the appeals from our civil mental health program. It's when people are committed out in like Friends Hospital. There are hearing officers who hear them, but they can be appealed and as president judge you hear them as well.

But you know, tons of meetings on the various committees that come up, the Administrative Governing Board, we meet and there are agenda items we have to do, which reminds me of one of the things that I'm proud of, which is the fact that we developed a strategic plan for the first time.

Q: What do you think your biggest accomplishments were on the bench?

A: I think there are several. The opening of the Elder Justice Center. We wanted to ensure there was access to justice for elder individuals, and to help them navigate the court system. Also, being instrumental in increasing counsel fees for court-appointed lawyers. Sitting as chair of the Criminal Justice Advisory Board, I've been instrumental in encouraging the application for the MacArthur grant and participating in that. Starting our Judicial Ambassador program for our Board of Judges, which is a program chaired by Judge Karen Shreeves-Johns and Judge Gwendolyn Bright, which is a program where judges go out into the community to educate about civics and the court system and things of that nature.

One of the things I really wanted to make sure we accomplished was transparency, access to the courts and inclusion, and so in terms of the judges I increased the number of judges on the Board of Judges Committee, and encouraged the judges to participate and take ownership of some of the issues they were concerned with … because some of the committees are in the bylaws of our Board of Judges and some are ad hoc committees that I developed as we saw the needs around the court.

Q: Was there any particular focus for the committees you created?

A: Looking at judicial security. I convened the Elder Committee to move forward with the concerns of elder justice and navigation of the court.

The jury participation initiative, which, along with [Administrative] Judge [Jacqueline] Allen, we're looking at how to increase jury response to summons and participation in the jury system.

Also as chair of the Administrative Governing Board, one of the other issues we were trying to address was cellphone usage in the [Justice Juanita Kidd] Stout Center, so again along with Judge Allen, and the Administrative Governing Board, we're using the Yondr pouches, which generally have been very successful. People don't seem to complain about them. They have found ways to rip them apart [laughs], but other than that, they have generally served their purpose in terms of distractions in the courtroom and witness intimidation issues so they can't take pictures or record anything.

Q: What comes next for you?

A: I will remain in the trial division through the end of the year, where I'm handling, which I've done the entire time, our criminal mental health court. I'll handle some issues around the re-entry programs, and miscellaneous things that come up for whatever is needed in the criminal justice side.

In January, I hope to move on to Orphans' Court, which is dealing with elder issues, transfers of wills and estates, guardianship, incapacitation. It's something I've had an interest in for the past few years or so, which is why we did the Elder Center.

Q: What were the biggest hurdles you faced during your tenure?

A: Resources are always the biggest hurdle. We have grandiose plans and sometimes no ability to accomplish them because there's not money available to do it. We're funded by City Council and the mayor, and having to go there and sort of beg and plead for what you want, or having to figure out a way to do it in another way, can make life a little more difficult.

The saddest moment, I guess, was the whole situation with the elevator accident and the injury that resulted from that, and trying to make sure that people felt secure in the building and able to utilize the elevators as they are trying to repair that situation, and waiting for the city to complete the modernization project, but not necessarily being on the same timeline you would like it to be.

Even though we did increase counsel fees in Philadelphia, I guess the city's inability to fund it in a way it needs to be funded. We sort of came to a compromise for what the increase would be and trying to ensure that those who can't afford counsel do get competent counsel and they are adequately paid. While we did increase it, it probably still is not adequate compensation for what these lawyers need to do.

Q: Have vacancies on the bench been an issue?

A: It has been because when there are vacancies it usually means there are not enough judges to get the job done, and sometimes it closes courtrooms. I can say with the advent of the new DA and some changes in policies, our criminal court judges have managed because the caseload is going down somewhat, either because of fewer arrests, and this is all anecdotal, or the number of different diversionary programs that are occurring.

Q: Are there any projects in the works?

A: There are some initiatives I've been working on that probably won't come to fruition until after I'm done. One is trying to increase our law clerks' salary. They're the lowest-paid lawyers in the city, so I have been working on that. I'm not sure that's really going to happen, but I'm hoping it will happen considering the district attorney and the city solicitor have already gotten those raises and we're not asking for that same raise. Most of our law clerks are not career law clerks, but they play a very important role in the judicial chambers.

I've also been working with the bar association on what I'll call an ombudsman program, to be a place where lawyers and judges can identify issues—I'll put that in quotation marks—of something that didn't rise to the level of a disciplinary or ethics referral, but to sort of try to stop the concern before it rises to that level. So we're looking to develop this program with either retired judges, or judges and retired lawyers, or highly respected individuals. It would be anonymous and confidential with people who could work through the issues with the judge, so we could nip it in the bud before it goes to another place.

The other thing as a court system that we've been working on is the whole trauma-informed courts. We're developing some training programs for judges and staff because trauma hits them in so many different ways, and it goes unrecognized. We want to make sure that we're providing the appropriate supports for them, or referrals for where they can go to get assistance. It's really for our jurors as well. Sometimes you can listen to some of these cases, some of them are pretty obvious that they might cause some problems, sometimes there are other smaller other kinds of cases that have impacts we're not as aware about.

We're also working on our own diversity and inclusion issues, with training on that, as well. It could perhaps lead to an in-house position, like a diversity inclusion specialists, to assist with everything from the #MeToo to harassment. So it's another opportunity for folks to understand how seriously we take those issues.

Q: What are your thoughts about having served 10 years in court leadership?

A: It gives others the opportunity to put forth their vision for the court. While I have enjoyed every moment of it despite challenges, I think passing the torch and allowing the court to move forward in a new path, a different path, or a continuation of some of the same path, it's not a bad thing.

I just hope that I left the court in at least as good a position as it was, or hopefully better in terms of understanding, awareness, accessibility, transparency and inclusion. And I hope that as we, as a court, move forward we will continue to look to the strategic plan and we will build upon that and really begin to make strong moves in positioning the court for a more progressive future.