Plan for municipal court hits snag
Trending
A proposal to move Minot's municipal court into the Ward County Courthouse is running into the same district court concerns over space that stalled efforts in the past.
The City of Minot has been looking at alternatives for municipal court since at least 2022. The city and municipal court staff believe the court isn't functioning optimally in its current location in the Minot Municipal Auditorium, listing security and safety as significant concerns. In considering options, co-locating in the Ward County Courthouse rose to the top, and the city decided last spring to reopen talks with the county.
Ward County Commissioner Jim Rostad, who engaged with the city on behalf of the county, supported a co-location plan presented at a joint meeting of the city and county boards on Monday, Oct. 5. A draft lease offered office space for the municipal court clerk, access to the Administration Building break room, shared use of the Administration Building chapel for ceremonies and shared use with North Central District Court of Courtroom 100, a small courtroom inside the county courthouse's main entrance.
After discussing with the county how technology services would be handled and where municipal court records might be stored, city council members were ready to take the next step toward a lease.
"I can't imagine a better outcome for the people of our city and county," council member Rob Fuller said of the co-location plan. Council member Mike Blessum called it a "home-run win" to bring municipal court into a building designed for court purposes.
Rostad also indicated he was happy with the plan, with the understanding some negotiation remains before a lease can be finalized. However, Commissioner Miranda Schuler recalled the consternation over use of the building in the past, which led to the city council to open the joint meeting for public comment.
District court representatives rose to speak about why the plan won't work.
Municipal court proposed to use the courtroom four mornings a week, but Judge Stacy Louser said the district's equipment isn't mobile to the extent it can be moved to accommodate municipal court's equipment.
"The ability for this to be a jointly used courtroom is likely not possible from the district court perspective,” she said.
Judge Steven Lautt said judges have participated in discussion about co-location and have opposed it for a couple of reasons.
"One is just the logistics of scheduling. The second one is about the IT component," he said. "If there is co-location in a courtroom, the fact that our equipment is built in makes it a challenge."
He noted the state court administrator has agreed co-location is not feasible.
"It's a hard no," he said.
"There are portions of the Courthouse that aren't being used for courtrooms at all right now, that were explored whether they might be an option for the city court to locate there. It is true though, that we did not know the proposal as to Courtroom 100 until today," Lautt added. "Our concern is that we haven't really had the opportunity to study what the impact would be."
Ryan Kamrowski, Minot city assessor and member of an internal committee looking at site selection for municipal court, said the plan has been to leave the district's technology in Courtroom 100 alone and install city court's equipment separately.
"We are surfacing some things that need to be addressed, and I think this is a good beginning step," Commission Chairman John Fjeldahl said. "I think the committee should continue more formally than it has been in the past."
Schuler suggested continuing the conversation before bringing matters to the county commission on Oct. 20 for a public airing.
"I think there's a way forward," she said. "I just think we need to work through some of this."
Carolyn Probst, court administrator, welcomed the chance for the district court to be heard.
"We do have great concerns about this. We really appreciate the fact there will be a public hearing. We will do more homework on this and get more answers for you," she said.
Rostad said the benefit of having municipal court in the Courthouse is too great a benefit to not continue considering it.
The council debated whether to wait on the county's continued conversations with the district court or move forward to have staff finalize the details in the draft contract. The council voted 6-1, with Stephan Podrygula dissenting, to approve the draft, which could be amended based on future decisions made at the county level. Any final contract would require another council vote.