The class visited the housing courts located in the Edward
Brooke Courthouse on Thursday, which is the day that the housing court holds
hearings for evictions. The building is home to multiple courts and office
spaces, but the housing court is one of the major occupants of the building.
While navigating the busy halls, we got a glimpse into some of the challenges
the court faces. Below are some of the major take-aways split into three rough
categories:
Architectural
challenges
- · The security check point created a physical pinch point due to the strict security requirements of the building and limited staffing
- · The building needed extensive roof repairs and other deferred maintenance challenges. As shown in the image above, parts of the roof are leaking enough to cause extensive water damage and cause stairway closures below.
- · Circulation through the building is guided by security clearances and requirements. Many of the spaces have clear separations and interaction points. Some entrances and elevators are strictly off-limits because individuals under custody are transported through them for other courts that handles criminal charges in the building.
Technological challenges
- · Due to the lack of funding, many of the technological interfaces around the building were not thoroughly troubleshooted. In the main lobby, screens listing the cases and the location they will be held were very complex to understand. Screens with interactive maps were located in the elevator lobbies which were not functioning properly and displayed FAQ placeholders such as “Question 1” and a respective answer of “Answer 1”.
- · Much of the systems used by the court were not completely compatible which makes the process of analyzing it and displaying it much harder.
Interactional
challenges
- · Due to the lack of signage and “greeters” (they did not have enough staff or resources to maintain staff at information desks), many depended on the security personnel for directions. The security personnel neither had the training or the time to properly guide visitors but did help to the best of their ability. Most of the cases had self-represented members that were not all well-versed on the intricacies of navigating a courtroom/courthouse.
- · The employees of the court, the administration offices, and the volunteer lawyers were all very personable and were highly patient with the visitors.
- · The vast majority of cases are solved through mediation which highly reduces the pressure on the courts, which proves that interactional investments in the court can be successful.
Final note:
The housing court is funded through a complex process run by
the state which greatly limits its freedom in how to allocate money for
maintenance or renovations. Grants are granted with strict budgets, and needs
are not fully prioritized by the court itself but by DCAMM. This can sometimes
limit freedom of innovation and funds for testing new technologies thoroughly.