DWI JUDGES SURVEYED
APPENDIX A

Listed below are specific individual comments, answers and responses to various questions included in the 2008 DWI Judicial Survey.

Question:  List your three most troublesome or frustrating problems (in order of priority) encountered when dealing with DWI defendants: 

Responses:

First

• Ineffective or unprepared law enforcement testimony
• Weak prosecutorial efforts
• Jury Skepticism of scientific testimony
• Long wait times for blood test results
• Recidivism
• Subsequent rearrest
• Bond and probation problems
• Defendant indigency
• Drivers license suspensions, surcharges, and added expenses
• Lack of treatment facilities and/or providers
• Lack of substance abuse education
• Interlock issues – cost, monitoring, installation  
• Lack of individualized punishment options

 

Second

• Language problems 
• Understanding it is a crime with a victim
• Achieving sobriety
• They don't consider it a crime -  most of the time they were not caught
• Understanding it may be a disease -  they are younger and younger (<21) 
• Commitment to change
• Denial of an alcohol problem
• Defendants not acknowledging their addiction 
• Do not have money to pay for programs. 
• Resources to treat
• There is no alcohol treatment plans for misdemeanor offenders
• Poor officer execution of HGN 
• Continuances
• Length of time it takes to get blood test results
• No scene or poor quality video's at the scene;
• Unavailability of technical supervisor to testify 
• Lack of proper DWI training for Probation Officers, and Judges
• Interlock requirements
• Interlock
• Expense of monitoring and service of devices 
• Lack of local interlock provider 
• Telling the court that they do not own a car in an attempt to avoid the interlock requirement.
• No funds for car interlock devices on indigent defendants
• Repeat offenders/positive tests or admissions of usage
• Recidivism—felony
• Recidivism
• Getting a 2nd DWI while on probation for DWI 
• They have to get to work
• Continue to drive while license is suspended
• Get caught drinking alcohol 
• Concern about their drinking and driving while on bail
• Having to try jury trials solely because of the surcharge 
• Surcharges also influences the prosecution to consider a different charge than DWI.
• Too many DWI (repetitions) reduced to 1st offense 
• State surcharges on financially strapped defendants 
• Lack of incentive to take probation 
• Unadjudicated probation not available
• They don't take probation seriously
• Monitoring
• Monitoring interlock requirements under the new law.

Third

• Concern about their drinking and driving while on probation
• Do not do their classes (AOP and VIP)
• Failure to comply with terms of probation 
• Basic probation does not work
• No deferred probation for 1st offenses
• Fairly short probation periods for 1st offense class B defendants
• Not having early release available
• Compliance with terms of probation
• Lack of seriousness about obligations related to probation
• Defendant's pleading to straight probation and then getting a Restricted Drivers License vs. probation;
• No stringent probation guidelines for DWI offenders
• Completing the terms and conditions of probation successfully
• Test dirty for other substances while on probation
• They won't complete DWI classes
• Repeat offenders (x2) 
• Lack of treatment and supervision resources 
• Lack of treatment facilities/programs
• Lack of affordable in patient facilities 
• Failure to follow up with alcohol treatment
• Lack of programs to treat abuse of drugs/alcohol by  the defendants
• Ineffective treatment
• Lack of meaningful programs to assist problem drinkers at the misdemeanor level
• Unavailability of sufficient programs to deal with the addiction
• No dollars for treatment
• Lack of treatment resources 
• Not enough SAFPF beds or aftercare
• Failure to grasp addiction
• Lack of desire to change
• Troublesome to imprison people who are honest and nonviolent young offenders are a problem because I believe we do a poor job of educating them of zero tolerance 
• Separating serious abusers from one time offenders
• Complicated conditions
• Keep the defendant working to support family
• No wiggle room - guilty or not guilty
• Assessing appropriate jail term when needed
• Effects on family members
• Family culture that supports continued drinking
• Overburdening a probationer with too much in too little time
• Jury trials
• Ineffectiveness of prosecutors
• Poor job by law enforcement in testifying 
• Lack of scientific evidence (breath or blood test) because driver refuses
• Uncertainty of accurate monitoring 
• Having to make written findings in every Motion to Suppress 
• Delays (acknowledged by defendant or not) due to wanting to obtain discovery in ALR re license - especially due to DA closed file policy
• Poor visual quality of videos
• Offense is not taken serious enough
• Jury empathy with defendant
• Too much public sympathy for DWI defendants
• Do not pay the surcharge
• DPS surcharges
• Financial burden overwhelming to many defendants
• Interlock
• Avoidance of in-car breath interlock devices
• Bypassing guardian interlock
• Occupational drivers licenses

Other Responses:

• I really do not have that much difficulty with the DWI cases
• N/a  (x2) 
• No opinion 
• No reportable troublesome or frustrating problems

 

Question:  If a probationer is caught driving with a suspended license, what course of action, if any, is taken?

Responses:      

• Motion to revoke filed or bond is raised.
• Most often their probation is revoked. On rare occasions, I might extend with some days in jail added as a condition of probation.
• A motion to revoke is usually filed with probation being revoked or modified.
• That is a misdemeanor offense out of my jurisdiction
• The State will file a motion to revoke community supervision for a violation of condition of probation.
• The District Attorney usually files an application to revoke probation, a hearing is conducted, and usually the offender’s probation is revoked or modified to require immediate jail time as a further condition of probation.
• If felony probation:  Review hearing or revocation hearing.
• Revocation
• Sanction; jail time
• I put them in jail.  How long depends on the defendant and the crime he or she is on probation for committing.
• Ranges from admonishment to weekend in jail to revocation depending on other factorts
• Progressive sanctions will determine the course of action.
• Additional consequence
• Revocation of probation
• Revocation 50%, Extension 25%, Interim Jail 25%
• Probation is usually revoked.
• Probation is usually amended and extended and probationer does 3 days in jail on the DWLI charge.
• A warrant is issued and a motion to revoke is filed.
• Little jail time, add more time on probation
• Depends on the facts
• Maximum sentence is imposed
• DWLI filed
• A motion to revoke is prepared, a warrant issued and a hearing is held.
• Usually jail time therapy but sometimes revocation
• Probation and a fine
• Technical violation
• Motion to Revoke filed
• Usually not known.
• Revoke probation or order jail as a condition
• Motion to Revoke
• Jail for 10 days
• If probationer is arrested, the fact of arrest is usually grounds for the CSCD field officer's action in pursuit of revocation or adjudication proceedings.
• Revocation of bond - increase in bond amount
• Motion to revoke may be filed
• Possible motion to revoke
• A motion to revoke probation is filed and the defendant is arrested
• I use progressive sanctions
• Usually a fine -  possible 3 day - 6 day confinement modification
• Motion to Revoke filed
• Court review with probable sanctions or motion to revoke
• Sanction in DWI/Drug court - weekend in jail or CSR - regular probation - 1st no big deal - Subsequent revoke or other amendment
• Jail time
• Motion to Revoke isfiled and court schedules hearing
• Follow prosecutor's suggestions
• If a second offense - treat as a Class "B" misdemeanor (complaint/information)
• Sanctions
• Working on an immediate arrest and modification of conditions
• Typically he's charged with a new offense and gets another probation
• Possible Revocation or Modification; DWLI is prosecuted 
• Motion to revoke, arrest on MTR warrant--Court action depends on many factors.
• DA files case but caves in on sentence recommendation.  It's just a slap and should be a major punishment.  I re-suspend for same period of time if I can find out what suspension was for and if it had a definite period.  I won't re-suspend if the period was indefinite, despite DPS's belief it can.
• Motion to revoke and a few days in jail
• varies, depending upon history of defendant and reason for suspension
• Motions to revoke/amend/extend probation.  Judicial admonishment.
• The adult supervision department has a graduated step program in place
• Change in terms and conditions of probation, maybe jail time as terms and conditions of probation
• Revocation hearing and go from there
• Revoke their probation.
• Depends on the totality of the circumstance
• Unknown if I do not receive a motion from the DA. If I am aware, I revoke or assign additional jail as a condition of probation.
• Usually a pat on the hand or a few days in jail
• Nothing
• Depends
• It's up to D.A. or probation to act on it
• Have not had to address situation
• I have not encountered that situation
• Have not had one
• It depends
• It depends on the case.

 

Question:  “What is your biggest worry or concern when imposing a breath interlock order?“ 

Responses:

• That the defendant will simply use another vehicle than the one with the device
• The defendant will drive another vehicle
• That they will use another car with no interlock monitoring
• That one is actually put on the vehicle the defendant drives
• That the offender will drive a different car
• Knowing the person can just drive another vehicle
• That a defendant who says he is not driving, and thus does not acquire the device, will drive anyway
• The person simply driving another vehicle
• In the case of some offenders, a breath interlock doesn't keep them out of another car
• claim by defendant they don't own or operate an auto
• Defendant driving another vehicle without interlock
• A second auto is actually used by the defendant
• Circumvention - other vehicles - their DL should have a notation on it
• Using another car
• Attempts to manipulate/circumvent operation of the unit, but I don't consider this a big concern
• Defendant driving another vehicle
• Defendant will operate another vehicle
• That defendant will use another vehicle without one
• Having the device on one car they own but driving another car – it is too easy to circumvent this order
• The availability of another vehicle with no device 
• The ease of the offender using a vehicle without the interlock
• That the defendant has 2 or more autos available to him/her
• The defendant will say he does not have a vehicle
• That defendant circumvents the order by driving a vehicle not equipped with the interlock
• Circumvention of the system and/or unit (x5)
• They circumvent the operation of the unit (i.e., they start the car while sober, and let it run when they know they're  going to drink
• There are ways to bypass the device 
• Tampering
• Hardship to the family.  If there is just one vehicle being used by the family
• as long as they are in compliance, they are helpful to help them keep employment that requires transportation
• Inconvenient to spouse or parent, etc.
• Unintended harm to family
• That the expense is creating an undue hardship on the Defendant's dependants/children
• How will they pay for the interlock, $60 per month probation fees, plus fine, court costs, attorney all on a minimum wage salary
• Expense
• Costs  (x4)
• Effectiveness vs. cost
• Compliance and cost
• Defendant’s ability to afford it (especially since the state dreamed up all these “surcharges” 
• Making sure that compliance occurs when the person is not on probation
• Monitoring probationers on breath interlock orders
• Monitoring issues
• Insufficient follow-up
• No local vendors
• Failure of defendant to obtain device
• Avoidance
• Non-compliance
• Accuracy of breath-test results and proper useage of instrument
• Accuracy of the reports.  Too many failures
• That it gets done ASAP
• Defendant causing an accident when granted an occupational drivers license
• All these felony DWI defendants have been sentenced to the penitentiary

Other:

• None (x5)
• No worries or concerns about imposing a breath interlock order (x2)

 

Question:  In general, how can we improve our educational courses in the area of impaired driving and related subjects?  Are there any additional subjects we need to make sure we include?  Do we need to give you more detail about any specific subjects, or do we need to change the way we present the material (i.e., more discussion, less lecture, length of courses, online courses, etc.)?  Please describe briefly.

Responses:

• I would call it "tricks of the Trade": ie:   Sneaky things done to bust panels or sticky the wheels in an unethical way under the guise of zealous representation
• Interlock device training
• More detail on the specific subjects
• Effects of DWI
• The importance of probation programs that are available
• Not sure
• More discussions and less lectures would be helpful
• Train the DA's. They have never won a DRE case in my court. The jury just won't buy into it.
• Statutory requirements for interlock as condition of bond, condition of probation, or condition of ODL
• More subjects regarding expert testimony, i.e., conducting a Daubert/Kelly hearing
• More on suppression issues
• Combine the materials from TCDLA and TDCAA on trying DWI cases, expert testimony
• More discussion.  I believe that it is very valuable to fine out what other judges are doing.
• Maybe if there was an actual drinking component with volunteers on a closed course to show the impairment.  Another thing would be to have an actual intoxilyzer to monitor the subjects.
• Video of how little it takes to become intoxicated
• Quit wasting the time of felony judges with trite sentences - felony DWI offenders universally have a serious problem with alcohol/drugs and should be treated accordingly
• Information on occupational licenses
• DWI-specific courses
• More lectures from skilled practitioners and trial judges with large DWI dockets
• Put courses online like the state bar does after presentation
• Programs always seem practical and well presented
• Less talking heads
• State funded rehabs for offenders and require rehabilitation for first felony offenders
• Provide more information about alternative sanctions and treatment
• Clarification/clear guidelines re SFST testimony/motions to suppress/deviations from NHTSA standardized instruction and testing/gatekeeper of testimony for SFST
• How to get cell phone contact with police to get them to scene of observed possible DWI
• More knowledge on cognitive education class and other courses - tell us how to get more Grants for specialty courts (DWI/Drug)
• Use of demonstrations
• Very well done now
• More templates online for DWI sanctions and resources
• More discussion - experiences- how others handle and new ideas
• Better audio/video equipment for officers
• More information on courses/classes available to probationers - what has been effective in changing behavior
• Try to simply explain driver's license laws
• Give judges in rural/poor areas some meaningful alternatives
• Interactive judicial admonishments/short term immediate punishments would be more helpful, but write some guidelines so we don't step over the line
• Include DPS training courses in our programs. I would like to see what they are trained in
• Expert testimony on interlock, SCRAM and other breath testing devices.  SFST's expert or opinion testimony?
• Troopers testify strong.  All others are weak.
• Courses are adequate
• More material, less discussion more lecture

 

Question:  In general, what in your experience is working and/or not working with our current system of impaired driving statues?  Please include any comments about the range of punishment, probation and sanctioning alternatives, driver's license suspension statutes, alcohol monitoring devices, treatment alternatives, sentencing alternatives, etc.

Responses:

• Taking away deferred adjudication has hurt in the long run. Treatment programs are only as good as the defendant's efforts put into them.
• I am considering making a 3 day jail sentence (probably over a weekend) a condition of probation
• Since most of the defendants I see are first offenders, it seems as if the current system is fairly effective at preventing repeat DWIs
• The emphasis should be the first offender, in trying to prevent them from recommitting, with stringent conditions of probation and counseling. then I believe if there is second offense that it should automatic residential treatment, then if that fails then incarceration.  It should a very strict probation monitored closely to insure compliance. 
• Courts should have a more active role in insuring probationers are complying with conditions of probation such as DWI Court.
• The sentencing alternatives need to be expanded
• Bring back deferred as an incentive
• Give us the ability to supervise an occupational license
• Give us the ability to restore a license suspension for good behavior
• Hard DL suspensions don't seem to work.  Offenders still drive, but without an interlock
• DL suspension and surcharges only prevent a person from working and are completely ineffective. Driver's license sanctions/surcharges are making it more difficult for offenders to plead to a DWI.  They are, therefore, pleading to some other offense which could make a difference down the line.
• Have a sliding fee for indigents paying surcharges
• I firmly do not agree with the civil sanctions ($$$) charged to individuals for DWI and DWLS convictions.  That is money the defendants need to pay for their fines, interlocks, probation fees, alcohol rehab classes, etc.
• Surcharges do not work to deter anyone
• Not working are surcharge laws and drivers license suspensions
• The surcharges are keeping defendants from paying for therapy, getting drivers licenses, and getting jobs
• The ever increasing catch 22 of dl suspensions and surcharges does not work in a rural area with no public transportation.  I just have a lot of people operating autos without DL and insurance
• Civil sanctions through DPS are not working, and serve to only place more uninsured, unlicensed drivers on the road
• Too many suspensions
• Too many add-on fees and costs to defendants
• Additional license suspension statutes are not needed or welcome!! 
• Suspensions aren't working.  Need to take the car.  Make it harder to get an Occupational  DL 
• DL suspension and surcharges just create  hardship - don't affect recidivism   
• AA
• Treatment Center, AA and jail works best
• Need more treatment alternatives combined with ability to require medications to supplement counseling
• Residential treatment works some of the time;
• We need more substance abuse treatment centers
• There's too little funding available for treatment
• Inpatient rehab for DWI (alcohol only) should be available
• Need more short term treatment facilities
• I think probation works in general except for the hard core drinker. For that we need a more intensive effort but that may involve getting into the person's life problems and coping skills
• We need more effective rehab alternatives
• Second plus offenders do not receive enough treatment for a disease
• SAFP is wonderful, but is only limited to felons.  Maybe there should be something comparable for misc.  Probation is pretty much a joke
• Need more SAFPF beds and alcohol counseling funds
• The threat of prison works better than prison;
• Prison term should be last resort, but when imposed should be lengthy for public protection and abstinence of Defendant
• I only deal with felony level cases;  most don't go to trial and are worked out by plea negotiations; 
• The legislature just keeps making punishment (and release on bail for that matter) more oppressive.  There are thousands of impaired drivers on the street each week all over the state. Some way to make enforcement more likely and punishment less oppressive might reduce the number of impaired drivers.
• As a district judge I let them know that a 4th DWI gets you prison. I then tell them that we (the probation dept) will give them all the help they ask for, but if they "pick up the keys" while drinking there will no excuses. Very rarely do I have my offenders come back in my Counties. I always follow through.
• I feel that our laws are more than sufficient.  Our problem is lack of highway patrolman to enforce the laws
• Alcohol monitoring devices are good, but the state needs to provide them and have them overseen by CSCD.  The expense is prohibitive to probations in poor areas of the state
• Intense supervision works but is a strain on manpower. Interlock devices work fairly well too.
• The law should be changed to:  1) make a breath test refusal a rebuttable presumption of intoxication;  2) make it a legal presumption that a breath test result within 2 hours of the stop is presumed to be the alcohol level at the time of the stop. 
• Allowing drivers to refuse a blood or breath test makes our system harder to work with
• Length of time between stop and collection of blood/breath sample
• Availability of intoxilyzer operators for testing and field supervisors for testimony (frequently unavailable for trial)
• Refusal to provide a specimen should be criminalized 
• The alcohol concentration constituting intoxication should be lowered
• Increase civil consequences for refusal.  The subjectivity of field testing (e.g., tests seem unfair because of variances in human physical abilities.  Now with the DL surcharge in place it is potentially cheaper to refuse a breath test and hire a lawyer to go to jury trial - might get lucky in light in current jury leanings
• Everything needs to be codified in one statute
• Driver's license statutes require a specialization to understand
• Horrible law  - DWI is the hardest case to win unless big intox #
• People are not convinced that .08 is DWI
• No confidence in SCRAM
• SCRAMS are really effective;
• Vicap and IG interlock are moderately effective
• Jail doesn't work very well -   
• Regular probation isn't especially effective
• Should be "no probation" for felony DWI - 3 convictions for DWI is too many opportunities to injure others
• First time offenders are taken care of most of the time
• Require mandatory jail time on 1st offenders that cannot be probated or back-time credit given
• Most do very little jail time (if any) because they get "credit" for time served  Minimum time should be 72 hours actually served
• Range of punishment - OK; DL suspensions - OK; probation/sanctioning - OK;
• I don't know why deferred adjudication is not available 
• There could also be a little more flexibility in the range of punishment options available to the court
• Further, I wish that I had the alternative of deferred adjudication for young first time offenders and a longer period of time on which to probate the offenses
• Although this is not within our arena, better training of law enforcement to make their arrests "stick" would also help
• Better training for officers on their appearance on video and how their conduct can engender sympathy for the accused

Other:

• N/a
• No comment
• Not sure

  

Question:  What options would you like to see available to help you dispose of impaired driving cases more efficiently?

Responses:

• Second offenders do 10 days in jail (with no credit for good time) as a condition of probation  
• Bring back deferred adjudication for first offenders but still use it as enhancement.  Make all deferred adjudication with the option to still use it as an enhancement
• Deferred adjudication should be an option (x3)
• Build substance abuse treatment centers
• More options
• Deferred adjudication/ diversionary options for young offenders with intensive education and true non-enhancement if successful
• Deferred adjudication with a very high fine.  This would sell to the defendant and would be the best deterrent, if any
• Give back the right to consider unadjudicated probation
• Go back to possibility of deferred adjudication probation possibility for 1st offenses - but still counts for enhancement
• More incentives for successful treatment - early term, deferred
• More incentives to get participants in DWI/Drug courts - either deferred for DWI "Bs" and or orders of non-disclosure - Waive surcharge under specific conditions being met
• treatment programs, more close supervision of high risk individuals
• More rehab options
• More dollars for resources for treatment and if treatment does not work, stiffer jail time
• More treatment programs and facilities, with all the monitoring devices available and affordable and more probation officers
• More available treatment centers
• More short term treatment facilities
• Quicker response by alcohol testing labs
• Quicker blood testing results 
• Blood warrants on a large scale should help
• Issue warrants for blood on all refusals
• Budget for new technology such as SCRAM, ETI from state
• Less expensive SCRAM
• More funding for SCRAM's
• More intensive supervision officers
• Intensive supervision perhaps community supervision - more help for alcohol offender
• Less surcharge
• Get rid of the surcharge. 1/3-1/2 (maybe more) of my JT's are set because the D can't afford the surcharges.
• More than anything I need a prosecutor who is not afraid to try a case
• Quicker prosecution 
• Increased judicial resources (ie magistrates for DWIs)
• Quicker retribution for violations
• More information on what is available

Other:

• None come to mind
• No comment
• Not sure
• It is ok now
• None
• I believe I have all options for accomplishing the dispositions most efficiently
• N/a
• No opinion
• Don’t really have any
• I don't do criminal cases

 

Question:  In your opinion, what needs to change with regard to how the system deals with the repeat offender/high risk offender? 

Responses:

• Judges have the tools.  I think that we need to give sterner punishments for repeaters.
• High risk offender needs to be out of society and incarcerated.  If all other treatment programs failed and all other tools were ineffective, then the only solution for the protection of society is to jail the individual
• A higher range of punishment should be instituted for repeat DWI offenders with the second offense being a state-jail felony.
• We need more prison beds for these people
• Longer mandatory jail time for all offenders
• Longer jail or prison terms (x3)
• Mandatory jail time -- that can not be good-timed 3 for 1
• Prison 
• Prison followed by an  intensive court supervised DWI Court
• Longer jail time - denial of essential need license availability
• No probation - mandatory minimum sentences
• Mandatory 30 days in jail as a condition of probation - we need more DWI courts to help rehab where possible 
• Minimum jail sentence increased Longer mandatory jail time for all offenders
• Mandatory jail time -- that can not be good-timed 3 for 1
• Increase in the minimum time in jail for a 2nd offense
• We need more prison beds for these people
• Require mandatory jail time, at least 30 days, with no ability to probate it & no ability to give back-time credit.  Allow weekends or work-release with DLD, however.
• The DWI court approach is a huge step in the right direction
• Need DWI specialty sanction courts
• Required in-patient or DWI/Drug Court - more accountability and monitoring
• More participation by defendant
• More intensive supervision with mandatory in-patient alcohol rehabilitation
• More intensive supervision officers
• More intensive education/community service to victims groups
• Treatment alternatives to Incarceration Programs
• Ideally, treatment programs should be more effective and prison terms longer when imposed
• Rehabilitation services and the understanding of addiction
• Build substance abuse treatment centers and address the underlying problem of addiction
• Intense monitoring and effective deterrents
• Increase monitored medicinal prevention (Antabuse and the like)
• We need to change by providing probation officers with all the tools to assist them in providing the best programs;  better trained officers, in treatment,  monitoring these offenders 
• More funding for treatment options
• More funding for inpatient and outpatient treatment
• There needs to be mandatory blood draws
• Mandatory blood tests
• Abstinence with enforcement
• Serious in-patient treatment with intensive after care - even in smaller jurisdictions
• Perhaps have a consequence for a person who provides a vehicle to another when the provider knows, or should have known, the person has a suspended DL
• DL suspension only hurts the family.  The defendant either refuses to work or the family is in charge of transport.  This results in the defendant not working, which creates more problems.
• I think that all courts need to understand alcohol is a drug and it should be treated as a disease just like the other drugs are treated
• More attention should be paid to the FIRST TIME offender
• High risk cannot be tolerated and we must focus on this to bring down risk and sanction improper pretrial conduct
• Give misdemeanor court jurisdiction over felony DWI's.  Down here they will be treated like a capital murder rather than a minor case in the shadows of a real capital murder case.  Too many are getting reduced in felony court
• Forms should be developed that can be accessed and completed immediately relevant to information - all the way through including interlock order/SCRAM/Antabuse to modification of probation immediately when necessary
• I think that present law is adequate; since legally the habitual offender is  so dangerous to the driving public can be incarcerated for a lengthy period, there is incentive for offenders to comply with probation orders
• I think we're going in the right direction with intensive monitoring, treatment, interlock, and SCRAM
• Maybe a program similar to SAFEP at the felony level would help us at the misdemeanor level
• Civil remedies do not work, they are just creating more work for the courts and do not address the underlying problem.  We need rationale, intelligent individuals who are dealing with these cases on a daily basis to educate the Legislators on what is or is not working in the courts and stop listening to individuals who are in it for the money
• Fear of interest groups and media not understanding that incarceration is not the only answer

Other:

• I have no opinion (x2)
• No comment
• Not sure
• N/a
• No idea
• I have no suggestions for change in this area