Workload Assessment Advisory Committee

Provides guidance to the Judicial Council on performance measures and modifications to the Judicial Workload Assessment and the Resource Assessment Study Model.

Date Established: December 2013

May 20, 2015 Meeting (Teleconference)
4:30 p.m.
Public Call-In Number: (877) 820-7831, Passcode: 5197241

Previous Meetings

The 16-member advisory committee—comprised of superior court judges, court executives, and advisory staff â€”reports directly to the Judicial Council. Members are appointed by the Chief Justice for three year terms.

Superior Court Judges

  • Hon. Lorna A. Alksne (Chair), County of San Diego
  • Hon. Irma Poole Asberry, County of Riverside
  • Hon. Joyce Hinrichs, County of Humboldt
  • Hon. Suzanne N. Kingsbury, County of El Dorado
  • Hon. John D. Kirihara, County of Merced
  • Hon. Richard C. Martin, County of Lake
  • Hon. Annemarie G. Pace, County of San Bernardino
  • Hon. Garrett L. Wong, County of San Francisco

Superior Court Executive Officers:

  • Ms. Sheran Morton, County of Fresno
  • Ms. Sherri Carter, County of Los Angeles
  • Mr. Jake Chatters, County of Placer
  • Mr. Stephen Nash, County of Contra Costa
  • Mr. Darrel E. Parker, County of Santa Barbara
  • Mr. Brian Taylor, County of Solano
  • Ms. Mary Beth Todd, County of Sutter
  • Ms. Kim Turner, County of Marin

The Judicial Council established the Judicial Branch Resource Needs Assessment Advisory Committee (JBRNAAC) as a standing Judicial Council advisory committee on December 13, 2013.

The JBRNAAC succeeded the Senate Bill (SB) 56 Working Group, previously established by the Administrative Director of the Courts in 2009.

In April 2014, the JBRNAAC was renamed the Workload Assessment Advisory Committee (WAAC).

Charge of Workload Assessment Advisory Committee

(a) Area of focus
The committee makes recommendations to the council on judicial administration standards and measures that provide for the equitable allocation of resources across courts to promote the fair and efficient administration of justice.

(b) Additional duties
In addition to the duties specified in rule 10.34, the committee must recommend:

  1. Improvements to performance measures and implementation plans and any modifications to the Judicial Workload Assessment and the Resource Assessment Study Model;
  2. Processes, study design, and methodologies that should be used to measure and report on court administration; and
  3. Studies and analyses to update and amend case weights through time studies, focus groups, or other methods.

(c) Membership
  1. The advisory committee consists of an equal number of superior court judicial officers and court executive officers reflecting diverse aspects of state trial courts, including urban, suburban, and rural locales; size and adequacy of resources; number of authorized judgeships; and for judicial officers, diversity of case type experience.
  2. A judicial officer and court executive officer may be from the same court.

Rule 10.66 adopted effective January 1, 2015.

Contact Information

Court Operations Services
Operations & Programs

Site Map | Careers | Contact Us | Accessibility | Public Access to Records | Terms of Use | Privacy