|
|
Supreme Court of Wisconsin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the matter of the petition to repeal and recreate Supreme Court Rules 70.38 – 70.39, relating to court security and facilities. |
FILED NOV 23, 2011 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Supreme Court Madison, WI |
|
|
|
On June 30, 2011, A. John Voelker, Director of State Courts, on the recommendation of the Planning and Policy Advisory Committee (PPAC), petitioned the court to repeal Supreme Court Rules 70.38 and SCR 70.39, regarding court security and facilities, and recreate them as a separate chapter of the Supreme Court Rules. The petition states a "separate chapter will recognize the importance of security policy and procedure development, implementation and monitoring as a function of the judiciary while also recognizing the cooperative relationship between the state and counties in the construction and maintenance of Wisconsin's courthouses." The petition notes the rules would continue to be advisory.
IT IS ORDERED that a public hearing on the petition shall be held in the Supreme Court Room in the State Capitol, Madison, Wisconsin, on Wednesday, January 11, 2012, at 9:30 a.m.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the court's conference in the matter shall be held promptly following the public hearing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that notice of the hearing be given by a single publication of a copy of this order and of the petition in the official state newspaper not more than 60 days nor less than 30 days before the date of the hearing.[1]
Dated at Madison, Wisconsin, this 23rd day of November, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
A. John Voelker
Acting Clerk of Supreme Court
[1] Notice of the hearing will not appear in the Wisconsin Lawyer, the official publication of the State Bar of Wisconsin, due to the State Bar's publication schedule. Notice of the hearing will appear on the State Bar's official web site at www.wisbar.org, and well as on the Wisconsin Supreme Court's web site at http://wicourts.gov/scrules/notices.htm. Pursuant to its rule-making authority under Wis. Stat. § 751.12 and its Internal Operating Procedures, the court exercises its discretion to allow this unavoidable deviation from the notice requirements.