Churchill filed a lawsuit against the CU regents alleging his 2007 firing violated his First Amendment rights because it was done in retaliation to his remarks about 9/11. CU countered that Churchill was fired over plagiarism.

The touchy issue of whether concealed weapons can be carried on University of Colorado campuses will be decided by the state’s highest court.

The Colorado Supreme Court has accepted a CU appeal of a lower court ruling that allowed carrying of concealed weapons on campus.

At issue is CU’s contention that it has the constitutional and statutory authority to enact safety measures for its campuses. Its gun ban was enacted in 1994. (Unlike other state colleges, CU and its board of regents were created by the original state constitution.)

A three-judge panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled last April that CU’s campus gun ban violated state law (read the opinion). Three students, represented by a Texas-based national group named Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, had sued to overturn the ban. Their case was dismissed by an El Paso County district judge but revived by the appeals court.

The regents on June 25 voted 5-4 to appeal the case, after being urged to do so by President Bruce Benson.

Four Democratic regents along with Republican Tilman Bishop of Grand Junction voted for the appeal; the other four Republican regents voted against it. (See story about the regents’ vote.)

After the Court of Appeals ruling last spring, Colorado State University and the Community College System both repealed their campus gun bans.

DENVER — Know Your Judge public service announcements were created by a consortium of nonprofit groups to educate the public about the state’s judicial performance evaluations. The PSAs have been frequently played, according to Colorado Broadcasters’ Association figures.

The 30-second spots ran 2,211 times on radio in August and 746 times on television. Though the figures for September aren’t final, preliminary data shows the PSAs ran 681 times on television and 2,136 times on radio in that month. The PSAs will run through the end of October.

Radio and television stations run the spots for free. The Colorado Bar Association contributed $50,000 for production of the PSAs, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System contributed $25,000 and the Colorado Judicial Institute contributed $10,000.

The campaign doesn’t offer previously unavailable information about the judges. But it highlights performance evaluations released during the current election cycle and encourages voters to read those as well as the voter “blue book” distributed by the state.

The PSA features outdoor scenes of voters saying, among other things, “I vote for them,” “I don’t know who these people are,” “I skip them,” “I guess” and “I think who are these people?”

A narrator intones, “Be informed, get the facts at knowyourjudge.com.”

The upstart campaign to turn out three Colorado Supreme Court justices got a boost Sunday from The Pueblo Chieftain, its first endorsement from a major newspaper. Clear The Bench Colorado, the all-consuming cause of Denver activist Matt Arnold, has this year pushed to the forefront the issue of judicial retention, usually an afterthought for most voters.

Denver Post columnist Vincent Carroll has backed a “no” vote on two of the three targeted justices, though the the newspaper’s official editorial voice so far has been silent on the matter.

The Chieftain, in urging its readers deny retention to Justices Bender, Martinez and Rice, wrote, “These justices consistently have upheld tax increases without requiring voter approval, in direct defiance of the TABOR amendment to the Colorado Constitution.”

The paper points to three decisions in particular: The upholding of a school property tax “freeze,” the classification of certain taxes as “fees” exempt from TABOR, and the suspension of state tax credits “at the expense of Pueblo steelworkers’ paychecks.”

The endorsement provides a much-needed dose of positive press following a court decision that placed strict fundraising limits on the campaign, which until recently had been able to accept unlimited donations. That change comes late in the election season, however, and Clear The Bench has operated on a shoestring since its inception.

None of the three targeted justices has organized a formal campaign to be retained on the bench, though a coalition including the Colorado Bar Association and the League of Women Voters is mounting an effort to promote the positive reviews penned by the state’s Judicial Performance Commission. Clear The Bench is pushing its own evaluations, which are of course far less flattering.

No state Supreme Court justice has ever been denied retention under Colorado’s voter-approved “merit selection” system, in place since 1966.

STATE BILL COLORADO

Colorado Supreme Court Justice-To-Be Monica Marquez recently visited the Old Supreme Court chambers in Colorado’s capitol as a possible site for her swearing-in.

Marquez may be considering an alternate venue because the high court currently hears cases in temporary space on the first floor of The Denver Post building, 101 W. Colfax. That temporary courtroom, while nice and functional, isn’t nearly as majestic as the old chambers, which was home to the court in the 1970s.

Gov. Bill Ritter appointed Marquez to succeed Mary Mullarkey, the court’s chief justice, following her retirement Nov. 30.

A courts spokesman wasn’t immediately available for comment.

DENVER — Mary Mullarkey dreamed of getting a new Supreme Court building from the time she first became chief justice of Colorado’s high court a dozen years ago, she said. At first it was no more than “a gleam in my eye, or figment of my imagination.”

Now that dream is being brought to life. Mullarkey was joined on Monday by Gov. Bill Ritter, Attorney General John Suthers, Treasurer Cary Kennedy and a host of dignitaries at the event celebrating the start of construction of the Ralph L. Carr Colorado Judicial Center. They marked the occasion by scrawling their names in a slab of wet concrete that will be placed somewhere in the new Supreme Court building.

Construction began a month ago, and the ceremony took place in a pit carved two stories below street level, so the event was called “All Rise” rather than a “groundbreaking.” Addressing the crowd, Mullarkey rattled off some big numbers: 2,000 jobs created directly and and 1,300 jobs created indirectly in the construction of the new courts complex and state museum; $60 million in rent that state agencies will save over the next 30 years by being housed in the Carr center, which is the first new state office building to be built in 25 years. Mullarkey said she hopes it lasts a 100 years or more.

Ritter spoke about the new center’s namesake, who was Colorado governor when World War Two broke out. Carr opposed the internment of Japanese citizens and Japanese-Americans. “No other political figure of Ralph Carr’s stature stood up to say that’s wrong,” Ritter said. Carr’s stance went against popular sentiment at the time, eventually costing him reelection.

It wasn’t a sure thing that the Supreme Court building would get Carr’s name. Ritter said he had to negotiate for it with Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, who wanted to name Denver’s new justice center after Carr. The Denver courthouse was eventually named after judges Benjamin Barr Lindsey and James C. Flanigan.

The Carr center will show that the judicial branch is coequal to the legislative and executive branches, Suthers said. He added that the 400 employees of his Colorado Department of Law are excited about moving into the new building, which is slated to open in 2013, if for no other reason than to have elevators that work.

The two-building Carr center will consolidate seven state agencies that had been housed in 10 separate buildings, Kennedy said. The construction of the $258 million center was financed with certificates of participation issued through the Build America program, saving the state $77 million, she said. The certificates will be paid back with court fees, which were increased for this purpose two years ago, and through the rent state agencies will pay to stay in the Carr center.

DENVER — The Colorado Judicial Building, the former home of the Colorado Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, was demolished this summer, just 33 years after it opened. Its successor, the under-construction Ralph L. Carr Justice Center, should be around much longer.

A host of dignitaries will be on hand for a construction kickoff ceremony on Monday at the future site of the Carr center, which is scheduled to open in early 2013 and, if all goes to plan, could still be in service a century from now.

“There’s been a concerted effort to sit down, to study the courts and their needs, and to think about that in terms of the next big block of time,” said Curt Fentress, the architect designing the Carr center. “We’re designing the building as a 100-year building. We’re looking at how we put it together for the long term, whereas the previous building had a lot of shortcuts, which led to a lot of issues with the building.”

Too cold, too small

The old Colorado courts building, which opened in 1977, was notoriously less-than-waterproof and was reportedly cold no matter the season. Not only was it uncomfortable, it was too small. The Court of Appeals more than doubled in size during its tenure in the building, with some staff having to work elsewhere. There was no room at all for the State Court Administrator’s office.

The Carr center will have room for more tenants while giving them plenty of room to grow, said Bill Mosher of Trammel Crow Co., project manager for the construction.

“The last building was strictly for the Supreme Court and appeals court,” Mosher said. The Carr center will also house the offices of the State Court Administrator, Attorney General, Public Defender and other state legal agencies.

The appearance of the new buildings is intended to convey the strength of the judicial branch as the equal of the legislative and executive branches, as represented by the Capitol, while also appearing open and accessible, Fentress said.

The four-story stone columns at the entrance show the time-tested strength of our legal system, while the glass atrium and dome show the transparency toward which the system strives.

Fentress Architects has designed a number of iconic structures around town, including Denver International Airport, Invesco Field at Mile High, and the Jefferson County Government Center (colloquially known as “the Taj Mahal”).

‘Celebrated entry’

The Carr center is divided into two. A four-story building for the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, law library and clerks’ office will be built facing 14^th Ave. on the site of the former Supreme Court building. An interactive learning center designed to teach visitors about the U.S. legal system will be on the first floor of the building.

The Supreme Court courtroom will be on the fourth floor, with one Court of Appeals courtroom on each floor below. All courtrooms open onto a large atrium, with a glass wall facing the state Capitol Building.

The old courts building had such a nondescript entrance that left first-time visitors were often unsure where the entrance was. Once inside, visitors were faced with a bank of elevators. That won’t be the case with the new building, Fentress said.

“It has a celebrated entry, so you know where the entrance to the building is,” he said. “It’s also very transparent, it’s very clear. You go into the atrium space and you can see the entire building. It feels open and accessible.”

A 12-story office tower will stand next door, on the site of the recently demolished state museum, with its entrance on the corner of 13^th Ave. and Broadway, across the street from the entrance of the Denver Public Library. The top two floors of the office building will be almost entirely occupied by the State Court Administrator’s office, with some room left for the Presiding Disciplinary Judge and extra space for a future tenant.  Taking up of the sixth through 10^th stories will be the Attorney General’s office, with some extra room on the sixth floor.

The AG’s office was originally going to be at the top of the office tower, but an extra floor was added to the top to make room for the courts administrator’s office, which was originally going to be in the same building as the Supreme Court.

The two primary buildings of the Carr center will be connected by a smaller, three-story linking building, which will have some offices.

Several tenants

Other confirmed tenants on the office side are: The Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel, Attorney Registration, Commissioner of Judicial Discipline, Board of Law Examiners/CLE, Judicial Performance Evaluation, the administrative and appellate divisions of the Office of the State Public Defender, Office of the Child’s Representative and Alternate Defense Counsel.

As of estimates in May, there were also 55,000 square feet of additional space that could be leased to other state offices when the building first opens, but available if one of the legal agencies needs to expand.

The appellate courts and administrator’s office are now renting temporary quarters in the Denver Post building.

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers won’t immediately name a successor for Deputy Attorney General Monica Marquez, who will join the Colorado Supreme Court on Nov. 30.

Suthers spokesman Mike Saccone said Marquez continues to work in the AG’s State Services Section. “Once we firm up when she will be leaving the office, we then will consider the issue of who will replace her,” he said.

Suthers also is sorting out what changes, if any, will be made to Marquez’s job description in preparation of her move to the high court, Saccone said.

Marquez is one of seven section chiefs working for Suthers, a veteran prosecutor who faces a re-election challenge this fall from Boulder’s new district attorney, Stan Garnett.

By Allie Winter, STATE BILL COLORADO
DENVER — A Colorado House panel had many questions last week for Colorado’s Judicial Department about its plan to bring the state’s courts e-filing system in house.
After fighting to get its outsourced services in house, the department already has won a victory. When its contract with Lexis Nexis, the vendor currently handling the state’s public access and e-filing systems, ends this summer, the department has been approved to bring the public access system in house. Now, it wants the same approval for e-filing when Lexis’ contract for operating that system expires at the end of 2012. At last week’s hearing, officials plead their case and their abilities.
“I understand many people think this will work, but what if it doesn’t?” asked Rep. Joe Rice, D-Littleton, chair of the House Business Affairs and Labor Committee.
A big concern at the hearing was that judicial employees won’t be able to operate the system successfully, as some government systems have failed in the past. But Rep. Mike Ferrandino, D-Denver, assured the panel that the department could handle the task.
“When you look at judicial, every time they have implemented a system, the system has worked,” he said.
Another testifier, State Court Administrator Jerry Marroney, listed many programs and systems that the department has successfully launched.
“I know there’s been talk about failure,” he said. “We run probation, 90,000 people, all through an in-house system that we developed. It has 10,000 transactions a day.”
After listing a few more examples, Marroney said that not only is the department able to do this, it needs to; the system as currently constructed doesn’t do everything the department needs. Currently, the system includes only civil probate, domestic, water and county court collection filings, Marroney said.The department needs it to include criminal, mental health, juvenile and other filings and that would be possible if the department took over.
“We need it to do a lot more,” Marroney continued. “We need it because it’s our business to run the courts.”
But bringing it in house means hiring more people to help. Judicial has proposed hiring 19 information-technology employees to operate the e-filing system. This becomes a hot button for legislators, especially in light of the department’s previous request to cut 266 full-time equivalent positions in the next year. And more recently, the department has also requested permission to cut positions from its probation department.
“When people think of the judicial system, we think of judges and so forth; and the IT section is not the primary role of judicial,” said Rep. Larry Liston, R-Colorado Springs. “So, on one hand, you’re cutting 266 legitimate judicial employees and on the other hand, you’re bringing in 19 IT positions. I think we’re all a little bit weary, [especially with the] glowing report of what the outside vendors have done, and now we’re cutting them loose.”
Ferrandino answered saying that just because something has been outsourced doesn’t mean it needs to continue that way. Ferrandino, a member of the Joint Budget Committee, said the JBC prioritized the judicial budget request and felt it was essential to get these 19 FTEs.
“[Judicial] needs judges, but if they don’t have the system they need to function then they’re not going to be able to do their jobs and so by bringing on a system that allows them to do their jobs in a better way saves the state money,” Ferrandino said.
Marroney said the department has estimated a need for $2.6 million to fund the 19 FTE it wants to bring on. But, he also said the department will produce that money from the public access system by the end of 2012 — when it’s time to bring e-filing on board. The judicial department was given permission to run the public access system in house during the session, and it has been busy preparing it, testing it and bringing 12,000 government users onto the system before it is even turned on.
“If it doesn’t work, we’ll go back,” Marroney said. “There’s nothing preventing us from reissuing an RFP.” But should it face problems, Marroney said if it’s in house, at least he can deal with problems directly.
“I’m being held responsible, and I don’t have any authority. When you chew me out about something not working I can do something about it; right now I can’t. I have a vendor to go through, and I have to fit in their mold. I want to be able to walk in and chew [an employee’s] back side if they’re not producing.”
Should the department receive its wish and win approval to operate the e-filing, Marroney said Lexis Nexis will still be a vendor and buy the information, as secondary vendors BIS and Acxiom do now. He said those contracts are being negotiated.