Rising Security Costs Leave L.A. Courts Wanting for State Funding
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
- Organization: The Daily Journal
LOS ANGELES - Inmates flashing gang signs. Defendants charging at witnesses and attorneys in courtrooms. A man shooting a probate attorney in a peekaboo fashion around a tree outside a Van Nuys courthouse.
These are some of the images included in a seven-minute video on court security put together by Los Angeles County Superior Court executive officer Jack Clarke.
To raise awareness about security budget shortfalls, it will be shown at tonight's Los Angeles County Bar Association board meeting.
After receiving onetime supplemental funding of just over $7 million, the Los Angeles County Superior Court still must overcome a $12Â million gap in security funding for the current fiscal year.
Although the Los Angeles court is the largest court of its kind in the world, with approximately 100,000 people entering its 50 locations on a daily basis, officials say funding for court security statewide is an ongoing crisis.
Clarke calls the video the equivalent of a "garage-band" production, but it has made a lasting impression on the select few judges and attorneys who have seen sneak previews.
Clarke and Los Angeles County Bar President Gretchen M. Nelson hope to change the perception about security and mobilize efforts toward a more lasting security budget fix. Tonight's meeting is for the bar association's 40 board members. The association has about 23,000 members, not all of whom reside in Los Angeles County.
"People think 'wanding' is court security," Clarke said, referring to the screening process at court entrances. "We're actually policing a courthouse, not securing it."
For Nelson, the most striking image of the video was that of the daily transportation of thousands of inmates to court.
"I do civil law," she said. "I don't think you appreciate what goes into transporting that many people. That's a very tight rope [the court] is walking to make sure that gets accomplished - and accomplished safely."
But the tightest rope the Los Angeles County Superior Court walks is the one that leads to state funding for security, officials say.
"The last four years [of security financing] have been a roller coaster," Clarke said. "But we've never had a high point. It's just a bunch of low points."
Clarke and the Los Angeles court - which had to scramble to cover an $11 million cut by the Administrative Office of the Courts in the fiscal year that ended June 30 - recently averted yet another security budget crisis for this year.
According to Clarke, the AOC decided on Aug. 10 to match the Legislature's $7.3Â million distribution to Los Angeles, which was calculated based on a state formula.
"That's the pressure relief valve," Clarke said.
But the court is still short about $12 million in its $168 million security contract with the Sheriff's Department for the current fiscal year.
Most of the increasing gap can be attributed to rising security costs, which accommodate increases in deputy benefits and salaries and far outpace the state's formulaic increases.
The Los Angeles court will still have to make cuts, although officials said they could not specify what those might be.
"There will be some actions," said court spokesman Allan Parachini. "They will not be visible to the bar or most of our customers."
The latest budget crisis, he said, "represents yet another evolution of the ever-shrinking of our security capabilities."
Los Angeles County was not the only court affected by the budget shortfall. Statewide, court security was underfunded by $21 million, said Kate Howard, director of the office of governmental affairs at the Administrative Office of the Courts, which submits budget requests for state courts to the Legislature.
According to Bill Vickrey, administrative director of the AOC, about 30 jurisdictions statewide do not even meet state security standards. The Los Angeles court system is funded up to state security standards, but the rising cost of security exceeds that amount.
Howard said court security is an ongoing issue her office is trying to address with the Legislature.
She said court security would not be addressed in the current budget, which the Legislature approved Tuesday, but she said her office, the courts and the statewide sheriffs' association had submitted a proposal to the Legislature to help alleviate security budget problems.
"Public safety risks are obvious here," she said. "We're seeking to have this get immediate attention in the Legislature."
Fredericka McGee, general counsel to California State Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, said the Legislature was very aware of the need for a fix to court security budget gaps.
But she said lawmakers were left out of negotiations between the governor's office, the AOC and the sheriffs' association. When a proposal came in May, the Legislature advised the AOC that the court security issues needed to be addressed in the form of a policy bill - not in the budget - as the old policy of funding to a statewide standard is no longer adequate with the use of the State Appropriations Limit formula.
"Does the Legislature really want to get in the habit of funding beyond the standard as a requirement," she asked. "We all know the budget is the biggest piece of policy in the state, but in theory those should not be significant policy changes. [The court security proposal] is a significant policy change."
Howard said McGee had been involved in many discussions over a period of several months, but acknowledged that more work was needed with leadership from both the Assembly and the state Senate and in both parties. She said the AOC hoped to address the issue of court security in a policy bill before the legislative session ends Sept. 14.
McGee said a waiver of the policy deadline, which was July 13, would be needed to submit a policy bill this late.
Drawing attention to the problem was Clarke's goal when he made the security video with the Sheriff's Department.
"When I say court security, most people have no idea what I'm talking about," Clarke said. "We need to turn the image of security into the reality."
The video is filled with mind-boggling numbers about the Los Angeles County court system: 580,000 inmates transported to courts each year; 24 million people entering the courts last year - an average of 100,000 people per day; and 250,000 weapons seized last year.
"When [the Legislature or the AOC] turn around and say, 'Cut your budget,' we say, 'What part of it,'" Clarke said.
Nelson said it was "disgraceful" that the court had to worry about security and other forms of funding.
"I am constantly fascinated by the notion that somehow or another courts are the step-child of the Legislature in terms of funding," she said. "The problem needs to be dealt with in a manner that resolves the issue long term."
Vickrey agreed.
"Costs exceed the available budget," he said. "If we don't get that hole fixed, next year we are going to have to make drastic reductions."
These are some of the images included in a seven-minute video on court security put together by Los Angeles County Superior Court executive officer Jack Clarke.
To raise awareness about security budget shortfalls, it will be shown at tonight's Los Angeles County Bar Association board meeting.
After receiving onetime supplemental funding of just over $7 million, the Los Angeles County Superior Court still must overcome a $12Â million gap in security funding for the current fiscal year.
Although the Los Angeles court is the largest court of its kind in the world, with approximately 100,000 people entering its 50 locations on a daily basis, officials say funding for court security statewide is an ongoing crisis.
Clarke calls the video the equivalent of a "garage-band" production, but it has made a lasting impression on the select few judges and attorneys who have seen sneak previews.
Clarke and Los Angeles County Bar President Gretchen M. Nelson hope to change the perception about security and mobilize efforts toward a more lasting security budget fix. Tonight's meeting is for the bar association's 40 board members. The association has about 23,000 members, not all of whom reside in Los Angeles County.
"People think 'wanding' is court security," Clarke said, referring to the screening process at court entrances. "We're actually policing a courthouse, not securing it."
For Nelson, the most striking image of the video was that of the daily transportation of thousands of inmates to court.
"I do civil law," she said. "I don't think you appreciate what goes into transporting that many people. That's a very tight rope [the court] is walking to make sure that gets accomplished - and accomplished safely."
But the tightest rope the Los Angeles County Superior Court walks is the one that leads to state funding for security, officials say.
"The last four years [of security financing] have been a roller coaster," Clarke said. "But we've never had a high point. It's just a bunch of low points."
Clarke and the Los Angeles court - which had to scramble to cover an $11 million cut by the Administrative Office of the Courts in the fiscal year that ended June 30 - recently averted yet another security budget crisis for this year.
According to Clarke, the AOC decided on Aug. 10 to match the Legislature's $7.3Â million distribution to Los Angeles, which was calculated based on a state formula.
"That's the pressure relief valve," Clarke said.
But the court is still short about $12 million in its $168 million security contract with the Sheriff's Department for the current fiscal year.
Most of the increasing gap can be attributed to rising security costs, which accommodate increases in deputy benefits and salaries and far outpace the state's formulaic increases.
The Los Angeles court will still have to make cuts, although officials said they could not specify what those might be.
"There will be some actions," said court spokesman Allan Parachini. "They will not be visible to the bar or most of our customers."
The latest budget crisis, he said, "represents yet another evolution of the ever-shrinking of our security capabilities."
Los Angeles County was not the only court affected by the budget shortfall. Statewide, court security was underfunded by $21 million, said Kate Howard, director of the office of governmental affairs at the Administrative Office of the Courts, which submits budget requests for state courts to the Legislature.
According to Bill Vickrey, administrative director of the AOC, about 30 jurisdictions statewide do not even meet state security standards. The Los Angeles court system is funded up to state security standards, but the rising cost of security exceeds that amount.
Howard said court security is an ongoing issue her office is trying to address with the Legislature.
She said court security would not be addressed in the current budget, which the Legislature approved Tuesday, but she said her office, the courts and the statewide sheriffs' association had submitted a proposal to the Legislature to help alleviate security budget problems.
"Public safety risks are obvious here," she said. "We're seeking to have this get immediate attention in the Legislature."
Fredericka McGee, general counsel to California State Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, said the Legislature was very aware of the need for a fix to court security budget gaps.
But she said lawmakers were left out of negotiations between the governor's office, the AOC and the sheriffs' association. When a proposal came in May, the Legislature advised the AOC that the court security issues needed to be addressed in the form of a policy bill - not in the budget - as the old policy of funding to a statewide standard is no longer adequate with the use of the State Appropriations Limit formula.
"Does the Legislature really want to get in the habit of funding beyond the standard as a requirement," she asked. "We all know the budget is the biggest piece of policy in the state, but in theory those should not be significant policy changes. [The court security proposal] is a significant policy change."
Howard said McGee had been involved in many discussions over a period of several months, but acknowledged that more work was needed with leadership from both the Assembly and the state Senate and in both parties. She said the AOC hoped to address the issue of court security in a policy bill before the legislative session ends Sept. 14.
McGee said a waiver of the policy deadline, which was July 13, would be needed to submit a policy bill this late.
Drawing attention to the problem was Clarke's goal when he made the security video with the Sheriff's Department.
"When I say court security, most people have no idea what I'm talking about," Clarke said. "We need to turn the image of security into the reality."
The video is filled with mind-boggling numbers about the Los Angeles County court system: 580,000 inmates transported to courts each year; 24 million people entering the courts last year - an average of 100,000 people per day; and 250,000 weapons seized last year.
"When [the Legislature or the AOC] turn around and say, 'Cut your budget,' we say, 'What part of it,'" Clarke said.
Nelson said it was "disgraceful" that the court had to worry about security and other forms of funding.
"I am constantly fascinated by the notion that somehow or another courts are the step-child of the Legislature in terms of funding," she said. "The problem needs to be dealt with in a manner that resolves the issue long term."
Vickrey agreed.
"Costs exceed the available budget," he said. "If we don't get that hole fixed, next year we are going to have to make drastic reductions."
Topics:
