• The SKREM Task Force last year was a rushed process and the resulting Final Report, where these suggested rule changes came from, are not in the public interest. The legislative language from the Final Report that was sent to the Legislature this year was dropped. The bill died because of many issues and recognition that this would be a huge disservice to the litigants and to our legal system as a whole. Please vote against any change to the current rules.

Karla M. Martin, RPR, CSR, CR
CART Captioning for the Deaf
and the Hard of Hearing
24 W. Camelback Road, Suite A-605
Phoenix, AZ 85013
602-266-1114
[email protected]

Dana Valles, CCR, RPR
Coalition of Arizona Court Reporters
PO Box 1936, Florence, Arizona 85132
520-866-5715
[email protected]


To Whom It May Concern:

• I OPPOSE the suggested rule changes. I have been a Certified Court Reporter for over 26 years. I know firsthand that the currently mandated proceedings are just too important to risk to the inherent inefficiencies of ER because property, freedom, and life all depend on a clear and accurate record of the proceedings. Certified Court Reporters have ethical responsibilities in taking down testimony and in the production of the transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberty are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error.
Please vote against any changes to the current rules.


Thank you very much for your time and consideration in this very important matter.

Dana Valles, CCR, RPR
Coalition of Arizona Court Reporters
520-866-5715
[email protected]

Jill Marnell
928-713-1036
[email protected]

I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. Certified Court Reporters have ethical responsibilities in taking down testimony and in the production of the transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberty are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.

Christine Bemiss
3748 Northstar Dr
Lake Havasu City, AZ 86406
928-715-4412
[email protected]

I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. The currently mandated proceedings are just too important to risk to the inherent inefficiencies of ER because property, freedom, and life all depend on a clear and accurate record. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. Certified Court Reporters have ethical responsibilities in taking down testimony and in the production of the transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberty are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
I am against any change to the current rules. The Keeping the Record Committee in 2005 did a thorough study with all stakeholders present regarding what court hearings needed a certified court reporter to preserve testimony and what the best practices were. Nothing has changed since 2005 that would warrant changing the policy determinations previously made by the Arizona Supreme Court. People’s lives and liberty are at stake, and relying on electronic recording to create the record would be a major injustice. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
The SKREM Task Force last year was a rushed process and the resulting Final Report, where these suggested rule changes came from, are not in the public interest. The legislative language from the Final Report that was sent to the Legislature this year was dropped. The bill died because of many issues and recognition that this would be a huge disservice to the litigants and to our legal system as a whole. Please vote against any change to the current rules.

Treva Colwell
602-506-1126
[email protected]

The SKREM Task Force last year was a rushed process and the resulting Final Report, where these suggested rule changes came from, are not in the public interest. The legislative language from the Final Report that was sent to the Legislature this year was dropped. The bill died because of many issues and recognition that this would be a huge disservice to the litigants and to our legal system as a whole. Please vote against any change to the current rules.

• I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. The currently mandated proceedings are just too important to risk to the inherent inefficiencies of ER because property, freedom, and life all depend on a clear and accurate record. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
• Certified Court Reporters have ethical responsibilities in taking down testimony and in the production of the transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberty are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
• The Keeping the Record Committee in 2005 did a thorough study with all stakeholders present regarding what court hearings needed a certified court reporter to preserve testimony and what the best practices were. Nothing has changed since 2005 that would warrant changing the policy determinations previously made by the Arizona Supreme Court. People’s lives and liberty are at stake, and relying on electronic recording to create the record would be a major injustice. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
• The SKREM Task Force last year was a rushed process and the resulting Final Report, where these suggested rule changes came from, are not in the public interest. The legislative language from the Final Report that was sent to the Legislature this year was dropped. The bill died because of many issues and recognition that this would be a huge disservice to the litigants and to our legal system as a whole. Please vote against any change to the current rules

Julie Ottmar
3370 N. 7th Street, Ste. 150
Phoenix, AZ 85012
602-485-1488
[email protected]

Kayla Hubanks
[email protected]

I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. The currently mandated proceedings are just too important to risk to the inherent inefficiencies of ER because property, freedom, and life all depend on a clear and accurate record. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.

I am against the suggested rule change. The proceedings currently mandated to use a certified court reporter are too important to risk having only electronic recording. A court reporter is professionally trained and certified to report judicial proceedings. Court reporters provide equipment and software at their own expense and have built-in backup systems. They are subject to monetary sanctions and discipline from a licensing board if they do not meet standards. What backup is there for electronic recording and who will be held accountable for failures of equipment and operator error? What recourse is there for litigants who are stuck with a transcript prepared by an untrained, uncertified typist from a recording containing inaudible, overlapping, and indecipherable dialogue? There is no shortage of certified court reporters to cover the currently mandated proceedings. Even in outlying areas, with appropriate planning and scheduling -- just as for attorneys, judges, and essential parties to a proceeding -- a court reporter can be available. Please vote against any changes to the existing rules. Thank you.

Jennifer Church
AZ Certified Court Reporter
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
[email protected]
480-534-6554

This effort has failed once and it should fail again. This hurts hard-working taxpayers (court reporters), judges, and people who have trial rights under our constitution. All so a big company that doesn't pay taxes in this state can benefit?

Sneaking this in again while COVID-19 is in full swing is an affront to our democratic processes.

Shame on on each of the bill sponsors for re-hashing this highly-flawed procedural change - you are making our democracy weaker with chicanery like this.

Thomas W Mayo
Republican
17490 N 97th Street
Scottsdale, AZ 85255

Shelley Pearce, RPR
[email protected]

I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. Certified Court Reporters have ethical responsibilities in taking down testimony and in the production of the transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberty are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.

I am strongly in opposition of the suggested rule changes. Certified Court Reporters are highly skilled and have ethical responsibilities in taking down testimony and in the production of the transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberty are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error. Think of having to retry a case, summoning witnesses again, jurors, ect. To rely on a machine to capture the record minimizes the importance of the judiciary in its entirety. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.

Jenny Ogaard, RPR, CRR
[email protected]
11263 South Hopi Drive
Goodyear, AZ 85338

I am against any change to the current rules. The Keeping the Record Committee in 2005 did a thorough study with all stakeholders present regarding what court hearings needed a certified court reporter to preserve testimony and what the best practices were. Nothing has changed since 2005 that would warrant changing the policy determinations previously made by the Arizona Supreme Court. People’s lives and liberty are at stake, and relying on electronic recording to create the record would be a major injustice. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.

Linda S. Christensen, RMR, CRR, CRC
Scribe Enterprises, Inc.
6817 N 4th Place
Phoenix, AZ 85012
[email protected]
480.226.7766

Catherine L. Turner
618-444-2045
[email protected]
I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. The currently mandated proceedings are just too important to risk to the inherent inefficiencies of ER because property, freedom, and life all depend on a clear and accurate record. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.

I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. Certified Court Reporters have ethical responsibilities in taking down testimony and in the production of the transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberty are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
Lisa Bradley, CSR, RPR, [email protected]; 623-398-8892

I too strongly OPPOSE this suggested rule change in anyway. I have been a Certified Court Reporter for almost 32 years in Superior Court in the State of Arizona and this is a gross injustice not only to us as court reporters, but everyone involved in the judicial process. When you try to change things as vital as this, you are changing something that is not broke and you should not in anyway hinder the process that we all strive to uphold and keep.

thank you for considering my comments and please do not go forward with the suggested changes, thank you.

Denice Ripple, RPR
928-402-6864
[email protected]

I am in opposition of the suggested rules changes. Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
L. Thielmann, CR, RPR
[email protected]

I am opposed to this rule change. I am an official reporter and have been called on many times to cover mental health hearings where there is electronic recording. Yesterday, April 21, 2020, the electricity went out at one of the hospitals and they needed to call a court reporter to cover the hearings. The electronic recording was completely offline from February 25, 2020, through March 11, 2020. Again, a court reporter had to be called in to cover these hearings. There is no backup if the electronic recording fails. I have transcribed many For the Record recordings where a court reporter is not present only to have complete silence on the recording. This rule change was initiated because of a perceived shortage of court reporters. That is no longer the case. There are many court reporters attending schools all across the country. Also, other states have tried to replace court reporters with audio/video recording and it has failed and ended up costing more than any money "saved" by replacing a court reporter. First degree murder trials have had to be redone because of audio/video recording failures. For all of these reasons and many more, please vote no on this rule change.
Thank you,
Karen Kahle, RPR
(520) 724-3015
[email protected]

I have been a court reporter for 33 years, 17 of which have been in Arizona and 16 in California. I strongly oppose the suggested rule changes. Certified Court Reporters have an ethical responsibility to take down testimony and produce transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberties are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error.
Additionally, the Keeping the Record Committee in 2005 did a thorough study with all stakeholders present regarding what court hearings needed a certified court reporter to preserve testimony and what the best practices were. Nothing has changed since 2005 that would warrant changing the policy determinations previously made by the Arizona Supreme Court.
Please vote against any changes to the current rules.
Robin L. B. Osterode, CSR (CA), RPR, CR (AZ)
[email protected]
New River, Arizona

I am in opposition of the suggested rule changes. The currently mandated proceedings are just too important to risk to the inherent inefficiencies of ER because property, freedom, and life all depend on a clear and accurate record. Certified Court Reporters have ethical responsibilities in taking down testimony and in the production of the transcripts. These areas are instances where people's lives and liberty are at stake. To rely on electronic recording leaves too many opportunities for error. The Keeping the Record Committee in 2005 did a thorough study with all stakeholders present regarding what court hearings needed a certified court reporter to preserve testimony and what the best practices were. Nothing has changed since 2005 that would warrant changing the policy determinations previously made by the Arizona Supreme Court. People’s lives and liberty are at stake, and relying on electronic recording to create the record would be a major injustice. The SKREM Task Force last year was a rushed process and the resulting Final Report, where these suggested rule changes came from, are not in the public interest. The legislative language from the Final Report that was sent to the Legislature this year was dropped. The bill died because of many issues and recognition that this would be a huge disservice to the litigants and to our legal system as a whole.

Please vote against any change to the current rules.

Wanda J. Curry
P.O. Box 2863
Peoria, AZ 85380
602.525.2345
[email protected]