By Amy Yarbrough Daily Journal June 15, 2009 SAN FRANCISCO - As the threat of statewide monthly court closures looms, trial courts have been figuring out their own ways to trim badly stretched budgets, from dozens of layoffs to reduced office hours. Last week, Sacramento County Superior Court officials reached an agreement with their court's largest employees union to delay an upcoming pay increase and institute mandatory furlough days. The judicial branch as a whole is facing a $495 million shortfall for the coming fiscal year, which starts next month, stemming from budget cuts and unfunded cost increases. On top of that, the state's budget conference committee approved $168 million more in cuts to the judiciary late Wednesday.

Ron Overholt, chief deputy director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, said trial court funding - and any cuts to that funding - are distributed according to court size. The AOC has asked lawmakers to pass legislation closing courts statewide one day a month - a move expected to save the judicial branch $100 million over the next year. Beyond that, Overholt said, administrators will have to figure out for themselves where to trim their court's budget. Overholt said trial court administrators have been considering options including furloughs, layoffs, hiring freezes, rolling back raises, and holding off on purchases. Expenses now considered a luxury given the recession, such as travel and education, are also being cut.

While Sacramento County Superior Court is well on its way to slashing its budget through employee costs, officials are still in talks with two other employee unions, according to the court's Executive Officer, Dennis Jones. So far, only the United Public Employees, which represents 600 of the court's 800 employees, has agreed to a two-year delay on a 6 percent pay increase that employees would have started receiving July 1. The union's leaders have also consented to 13 mandatory furlough days a year, which will lower employees' pay by 5 percent a year. The plan, coupled with other cost-saving measures, could help avert layoffs, but it remains to be seen how the $168 million in proposed additional cuts statewide will affect the court, Jones said. "I think [the union's vote] says something terrific because they voted against their individual best interests for the corporate best interests," Jones said. Sacramento and other courts including those in Orange County, San Diego, Santa Clara, San Mateo and Ventura counties have had hiring freezes in place for months to help them ride out the economic downturn.

Starting July 1, Ventura County Superior Court will eliminate all overtime in addition to closing help windows earlier, said Robert Sherman, Ventura County's assistant court executive officer. Solano County Superior Court is in negotiations with the sheriff's office over a plan to assign sheriff's security officers, who normally provide security in county buildings, to civil proceedings. Security officers, who are less expensive than deputies, can carry a firearm but can't make arrests. Paula Toynbee, a spokeswoman for the Solano County Sheriff's Office, said discussions were still preliminary and that deputies would still be used for criminal cases. Other courts are taking more drastic measures. Alameda County Superior Court will lay off 73 employees effective June 26. And last month, Los Angeles County Superior Court announced it would shut its doors every third Wednesday of the month. The closures, to begin July 15, are expected to save the court $18 million annually. The AOC wanted to first get approval for a monthly court closure day that would apply to all courts before any individual courts closed on their own. Overholt was concerned that Los Angeles' announcement ahead of the AOC might prompt other courts to follow suit in deciding on their own days for closure. Still, he noted that: "It was a powerful statement, that the largest court in the nation says, 'We need to do this.'"