Courts Aren’t Just Buildings: Traffic ODR at 14A District Court

Well, hello, and welcome to the next edition of the Court ODR Podcast. I am Colin Rule, CEO of ODR.com, and I am delighted today because I'm joined by my friend Lisa, who is the court administrator in Washtenaw County, Michigan. So Lisa, thank you so much for being here.

I'm happy to be here.

Great. I thought we would talk a little bit today about our collaborations around traffic ODR in Washtenaw. But why don't we start off with this: you've been court administrator for 18 years in Washtenaw, right?

Well, technically I've been court administrator since 2019. I was a deputy from 2011 until 2019. But I've been in court administration for a little bit.

For a long time, yeah. And actually, we're looking forward to the MCMC conference, the Michigan Court Managers conference. Are you going to make it to that one this year?

I will be there, yes.

All right, sounds good. So tell me a little bit about Washtenaw County. I know we talk about you as 14A, and I think there's also a 14B, right? So what cities are under your umbrella?

Yeah. So there are actually three district courts in Washtenaw County. There's the 15th District Court, which is the city of Ann Arbor. 14B is the township of Ypsilanti. And 14A encompasses everything else. So we're Ypsilanti City, Chelsea, Saline, Scio Township, pretty much everything else in Washtenaw County with the exception of the city of Ann Arbor and the township of Ypsilanti.

I see. So that's a lot for you to manage. I know you have to keep a lot of balls in the air. I remember you have two courthouses that you need to go back and forth between. Actually, four?

We have four courthouses. Yep.

Wow. Okay, so that's a lot. Well, you actually were our first customer for our traffic ODR product in Michigan, and you helped us enormously in understanding how this product would work, and I want to get to that in a minute. But obviously we weren't involved at the inception of this project. I think you initially set it up with Matterhorn, right? And what year would that have been?

2014, I believe. We did a pilot program with Pittsfield Township.

Great. So that's a long time. Let's talk a little bit about the need that this ODR product is intended to address. Can you just describe how it operates?

Yeah. So essentially, ODR traffic takes the informal hearing process that would take place in a courtroom in front of a magistrate and takes it into an online environment. We used to have what we would call in-person mediation for a traffic ticket. So you get a traffic ticket on the side of the road. You admit that you are responsible for that ticket, but you really just don't want to see your insurance rates go up. So you come in, you talk to a magistrate, you talk to the officer representing the police agency, and you say, "Hey, I admit to the ticket, but can I get something else that doesn't give me points on my license?"

Right, because you have points in Michigan. So people are highly motivated to try and reduce the number of points, because it has ramifications for their insurance.

For sure. So the officer and the magistrate both take a look at the defendant's traffic history, whether they've had tickets in the past, and they decide whether or not they're eligible for this program to reduce their infraction to something that doesn't carry points. All of this used to happen in person. We used to schedule that. People still had to come to the courthouse and have that process take place. And when we got approached by Matterhorn to say, "Hey, is there something that we could do in an online environment?" this was something that we suggested and identified as something that might work. And so that's where traffic ODR was born.

Yeah. You know, I remember I used to live in Boston, and they give out tickets all the time. Boston's crazy with how many parking tickets they give out. But a lot of people would appeal the tickets, even if they knew they deserved it, because it was all in-person hearings. And if the law enforcement officer that issued the ticket didn't show up at the in-person hearing, the court would often just cancel the ticket. So you would have lots and lots of people filing these appeals, and then they would be in the courtroom, and when the law enforcement officer came in, they would immediately say, "Okay, I'll pay it." They just wanted to roll the dice, because obviously these law enforcement officers were busy, so if they didn't show up, you'd get out of your ticket. It created a huge churn, and eventually Boston said, "We can't keep doing this." But this was a very innovative project, right? To do it all online, I'm sure it was a challenge to explain it to law enforcement and to the judges when you first put it in place.

Yeah, and fortunately for us, we have really good relationships with our local police agencies. Pittsfield Township was one that was willing to pilot it with us. There was a nuanced conversation, because some police agencies rely on the overtime that they get from those hearings. Michigan State Police actually was one of the last agencies to partner with us due to that, where they had to come up with an agreement with their union. So there was a little bit of conversation, and making sure that the officer who wrote the ticket has a say in whether or not that ticket gets mediated, depending on what took place with the traffic stop. We have made some adjustments to how things happen based on agencies, to make sure that we are meeting what they wanted to see. And so we're fortunate in that pretty much every agency we deal with, I think with the exception of one, is now on board, and that means that everyone can take advantage of it. And really, for agencies it's a boon that they don't have to pay the overtime. And the default rate is so much better, because they're getting some money for these tickets where before, if their officer didn't show, like you pointed out, nothing would happen. That ticket would get dismissed and nobody would get anything out of it.

Right. In dispute resolution we often talk about win-win outcomes. I can see why it's really in the interest of the person that's received the ticket to be able to go to this platform and do it all online. But I imagine it's much more convenient for law enforcement as well, to get a notification: "Hey, look, there's a ticket. Can you log in and take a look at it?" They can see the details and register their preference, and it doesn't have to be at a particular time. They can do it whenever it's convenient for them to log in and respond.

And that's the bonus, not only for officers but for people utilizing the system. If an officer works midnights, and that's the officer that you've selected to be in charge of the program, they can do it at 2:00 in the morning. If somebody works an afternoon shift and they got a ticket during the day, and they're not able to get to it until 3:00 in the morning, they can do it when it's convenient for them. I think my favorite analogy, and I use it all the time, is somebody watching TV at 11:00 at night, able to eat their popcorn and take care of their traffic ticket at the same time. The convenience factor is huge.

I love the image of somebody eating popcorn while they appeal their parking ticket. It does make sense. So how many separate law enforcement agencies are you interacting with? You said everybody's bought in except for one, and I can understand how the Michigan State Police is trickier, because they're working statewide, and you're just one area where they have jurisdiction. You must have a big highway that goes through Washtenaw County, and that's why you get a lot of tickets from Michigan State Police. But how many different law enforcement agencies participate?

I believe there are eight different agencies within Washtenaw County that participate, including the Washtenaw County Sheriff, which is one of the larger ones. We do have two interstates that run through Washtenaw County, so we do get a fair amount of Michigan State Police tickets.

And I do want to also point out that the one driving factor on our end, too, is understanding that courts need to be innovative, and understanding that courts aren't just buildings. We need to meet people where they're at. This is one of those opportunities that I think every court needs to take a look at, because courts have to grow and change. We've got to be seen as a leader in this and take up technology in those areas that we can. For me, this was a no-brainer.

Oh, I so appreciate you saying that, because one of the things we talk about a lot in the access to justice field is this: is the court a place, or is the court a service? And the answer increasingly is that it is a service. You can't staff your court 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It's just not the way it works. Courts are usually open 9:00 to 5:00, Monday through Friday, which of course is when everybody's working. And it's unreasonable to say, "Well, we have to expand our hours so somebody's sitting there at 9:00 PM just in case somebody wants to come in and appeal a parking ticket." So I think that you really have been an innovator. As I say, you were the first one to work with us to help us flesh out how this tool should operate, and you taught us an enormous amount. And I think you're modeling exactly what you're describing, which is courts being innovative and customer-focused. It's not just about litigants and citizens. You are providing a service to people, and how can you make that easier for them? I think this is a perfect example of how to do that, a win-win use of technology.

Well, and access means a lot of different things too. Part of that is making sure that accessibility also means we're open to people that may have concerns about the court process, or may have some anxiety around court processes and the court building. Showing up at the court. So having the ability to message back and forth through this system takes some of that anxiety out. I think this is such an easy way for the courts to allow people access to a court process without amping that anxiety up. Traffic tickets shouldn't bring anxiety to people.

Especially appealing. There's an argument you want a little anxiety when somebody's driving down the road, but if you're appealing a ticket, there's no point in making it an anxious process. I agree with you. So can we talk a little bit about the results? Because obviously we've been doing this for a long time. How many appeals do you do a year?

That varies from year to year. Throughout COVID there was a huge decline in traffic tickets, and we've seen a little bit of an uptick over the last few years, so that obviously affected the number of people that utilize our system. We had some issues with our last vendor, so this is our first year with ODR.com. You probably have those numbers better than I do at your fingertips, but I want to say that we had somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 to 500 last year. And I will say that my biggest feather in the cap is a less than 1% default rate.

Amazing.

The way that we structure our ODR is that everybody knows going into the process what offer they're going to get. And everybody knows the expectation is that once they receive their offer, they have 48 hours to pay. So it's very, very quick.

Or it reverts to the original charge, right? If they don't follow through. So that's a pretty narrow window, that 48 hours.

Yes. And the nice thing is, you can get a ticket on the side of the road and log into the system right away. The system notifies you when that ticket is available for you to come back and start the process. That process goes to the clerk's office for them to update the ticket and say, "Hey, somebody's filing for mediation on that." Then the clerk's office notifies the agency, who takes a look at it. The agency makes a recommendation to the magistrate. The magistrate makes a decision and sends that back to the clerk's office to update the case. The clerk's office lets the litigant know that a decision's been made. And then the litigant takes care of their ticket. All of that can happen in a matter of days instead of weeks or months, which is how far out an informal hearing can be scheduled.

Right. It's a really streamlined process, tracking each stage of the workflow so that everybody knows, "Hey, look, it's your turn." Come in, you can see the case, take the action, and it moves on. How do the defendants, the actual people that receive the tickets, know where to go to initiate the process?

It's printed on the bottom of each ticket. We work with our agencies to make sure that on the bottom of each ticket it says, "For information about mediation, please go to the website," and then our website directs people to ODR to help walk them through the process. So it lets them know right away how to do that.

And I know you were very helpful in helping us connect to JIS, which is the statewide court case management system, so that we can pull all the data about the tickets dynamically. They just come to the website, they put in their driver's license number, and I know it's a little bit different for parking and for speeding tickets, but they put in their information and immediately it pulls up and says, "Okay, is this your ticket?" And they go, "Yep, that's it," and it's pre-populated. I just want to reiterate this, because so many of the courts that we work with wring their hands around defaults, even when it's in the interest of the defendant to accept something. A lot of people just don't follow through. But it's amazing to me that 99% of the time, the person that appealed follows through. Maybe that has to do with how quickly the process runs, because they don't forget about it. When they get a notification that says, "Hey, you have an offer," they think, "Great, I remember this," and they click it and take the action. That's probably the best default rate I've ever heard of in a court. I think that's evidence that the process is working the way the defendants want it to work.

Well, when you consider that the average default rate on a traffic ticket is somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 to 60%, a ticket that's run through ODR at less than 1% is phenomenal. But I also think the education around it matters, and people understanding that this process does help them, in that they're not receiving those points. It's going to benefit them with their insurance rates and all of those types of things.

Right. Defaulting on a debt case makes more sense, because I don't want to pay the debt. But this is a good thing for them. It's a reduction in points. It's a reduction in charge. So based on everything, first of all, kudos to you for being open to doing this. And again, we learned everything from you, because you were the first one that we deployed in Michigan. Now we've launched with 10 other courts, and we've benefited very much from the lessons we learned from that first deployment with you. There was a lot of stuff we had to learn. But what advice would you have for a court administrator that was contemplating putting a program like this in place?

It's a win-win. I have no reservations. You guys were so great to work with. Any concerns that we had, we talked it through. We made sure that we were in communication with you, and we were getting immediate responses. There was no concern about lack of communication, or concern that things weren't going to be adjusted. Honestly, as a vendor, ODR.com has been tremendous to work with. And unfortunately, I can say that because I've had experience with vendors that weren't. To me, it's such a benefit, not only to the court because it saves time. It's a benefit to your magistrate, because you don't have to schedule these hearings. It's a benefit to your clerks, because they're not having to be on the phone to schedule, reschedule, and prep those dockets. And it's a huge benefit to our litigants, because they don't have to come into your court building. It's a security issue. You're not bringing more people into your building. And it helps the court look good. You're seen as somebody that is moving with the times, and not somebody that's stuck doing the same old things and requiring people to come in person. This is where we should be. We need to be in this space, and we need to start looking for more ways to innovate, and this is an easy one.

Well, you're very kind, Lisa. This is why I'm glad you were our first, because you're so wonderful to work with. I remember we had some bumps in the road along the way, and your team was very understanding and supportive in working through all the kinks. Now we've got it humming. I do agree with what you're saying. I talk with some judges in particular who are worried that society is increasingly moving online, accelerated by AI and all of this, and the courts are having a hard time making that transition. They're worried about what they call the spiral of irrelevance, where people just won't use the courts. They'll find other mechanisms, because everything they do is online. That's how they sign their kids up for T-ball. That's how they make their health insurance elections. But the courts don't offer a lot of these online services. I think this is an example of deploying one that does make the court much more modern, much more online, much more accessible. So I agree with you. I think it is a win-win. I can't tell you how much I appreciate you taking the time to chat with us, Lisa. It's such a pleasure to work with your team, and I really appreciate the kind words. Thank you for all the great work that you're doing. I wish a lot of the other courts that I work with were as well organized and managed as your court, because it's just been a pleasure to work with you.

I appreciate that. Absolutely. It's been a pleasure, and I'm happy to talk with anyone that wants to hear a real live experience.

The Court ODR Podcast is brought to you by ODR.com. To learn more about ODR.com products and services, please visit us at ODR.com.