Critic judges say bill an attack on small courts

Presiding judges from a majority of the state’s superior courts, including Tuolumne County, oppose a bill passed Monday in the state Assembly they say would diminish the participation of smaller courts in funding decisions.

Supporters of AB 1208, generally comprised of judges from courts in medium to large counties, argue that the current ability for the state’s 28-member Judicial Council to divert money intended for trial court operations hurts the budget-strapped institutions.

“This is a problem that’s been boiling in the judiciary for many years,” said Tuolumne County Superior Court Presiding Judge Eric L. DuTemple.

The Judicial Council, established by a voter-approved proposition in 1998, can take money dedicated to covering the operating costs of trial courts and spend it on statewide projects intended to promote efficiency.

The new measure, passed 42-24, aims to take that authority away.
DuTemple, a member of the council’s Trial Court Presiding Judges Advisory Committee, joined 41 other presiding judges in a Jan. 12 letter urging lawmakers to vote against AB 1208.

The letter states the bill “threatens the uniformity and efficiencies of a statewide system that have improved the public’s access to justice.”

A number of provisions in the bill would also give smaller courts a diminished role in the governance of the judicial branch, DuTemple said.

He cited one provision that would require the Judicial Council get approval from two-thirds of all trial court judges before setting aside money for statewide technology and infrastructure projects within the court system.

“That could mean two or three courts would be able to make all the decisions,” DuTemple said. “If you took Los Angeles, Sacramento and Fresno that would pretty much be two-thirds of the judges.”

Another point of concern for DuTemple is giving the Legislature the power to appropriate money directly to trial courts, which he feared could have courts in counties with the greatest “political pull” securing funds over those with less clout.

“There’s a possibility where we’ll be out in the cold when it comes to funding,” he said.
Kern County Superior Court Judge David Lampe said the legislation isn’t perfect, but it will at least ensure all counties receive their allotted portion of money for day-to-day operations.
 

“I understand the concern, but the bill doesn’t change the funding formula for any court. It doesn’t give anything to bigger courts or take away anything from smaller courts,” said Lampe, a director for the Alliance of California Judges, the group that sponsored AB 1208 and is comprised of judges from counties including Los Angeles, Orange and Kern.

The requirement for two-thirds of all trial court judges to approve certain funding decisions made by the Judicial Council was a “compromise provision” to get the bill passed through the Assembly before the Jan. 31 deadline, Lampe said.

“It’s a part of the legislative process that will continue,” he said.

Assemblyman Charles Calderon, D-Whittier, who introduced the bill in February 2011, said the next step is to make a case for it on the Senate floor.

“We, in effect, start rolling the boulder up the hill all over again,” Calderon said.

He said it is important for the courts to have autonomy over the money dedicated to covering operating costs, especially after about $350 million in cuts were made to the state’s court system in the current budget year.

“Having a direct appropriation to the courts, and preventing money from being taken away for pet projects of the Judicial Council, will help the public by keeping courts open,” Calderon said.

One contentious project Calderon cited is a statewide case management system intended to unify the more than 70 different systems now in use throughout the state’s 58 superior courts.

The cost of designing and implementing the system was estimated at $33 million in 2003. That number has since ballooned to a projected $1.9 billion by 2015 with more than $400 million already spent, according to a 2011 California State Auditor report.