|
|
|
|
State takes control of courtrooms |
|
|
Friday, 28 September 2007 |
 The Inyo County Superior Court, which includes the courtroom and related office space in the historic Inyo County Courthouse in Independence, will become the sole responsiblity of the state sometime soon, even though the county will still pay a share of current court costs. Photo by Jon Klusmire By Jon Klusmire
Register Staff 9-27-2007
The State of California has a funny way of “relieving” Inyo County of the responsibility to operate state courtrooms and associated office space.
The state will be assuming the responsibility of providing the courts with adequate space.
That’s good.
The state will also be charging Inyo County about $40,000 a year for the county’s share of maintaining and operating the space consumed by the state courts and its employees in the Inyo County Courthouse.
That’s annoying.
But the county will not have to give up its ownership of any part of its courthouse, which was being considered at one point.
That’s good.
The move also throws into question the long-standing goal of having a new, separate courthouse constructed on Edwards Street in Independence, and puts in limbo hundreds of thousands of dollars set aside for such a building.
That’s annoying.
While the state’s options for future courthouse construction are now up in the air, the county had no choice but to go along with the “transfer” of the current court space.
State law mandates an end to the dual-funding of state courts and transfers the court operations, and the space they occupy, to the state. Prior to the Trial Court Facility Act of 2002, the state and counties jointly funded state court operations.
Inyo County recently approved the official documents that will formally transfer the responsibility for the Independence Superior Court facility from county to the state, in the form of the Administrative Offices of the Courts.
Well, sort of.
The deadline for such transfers has lapsed, so the county and the state court system are waiting for new legislation to open the window once again for such transfers. Inyo County was not alone in missing the deadline, noted Public Works Director Ron Chegwidden.
The transfer was complicated for several reasons, he noted.
First, the court space is split up in the big, historic courthouse. The courtroom and some offices are located on the third floor, with additional office space located on the ground floor of the building. Overall, the courts and associated office space take up about one-third of the space in the courthouse, he noted. In many cases across the state, the courts occupied a separate building, thus making any transfer or cost calculations much simpler.
Dealing with a courthouse building that is on the National Register of Historic Places also complicated the calculations and negotiations between the county and the sate, he added. In fact, the Inyo County Courthouse is only one of two designated historic buildings in the state involved in the court-system transfer, Chegwidden said.
Under terms of the deal, the county will continue to pay for such expenses as maintenance, utilities, insurance, etc., on the state’s court space. That cost was calculated at about $40,000 a year, based on actual costs from 1995 to 2000.
The state, in return, gets “exclusive use of the areas now used by the courts,” Chegwidden said.
The Board of Supervisors pointed out that, typical of a state program, it appeared the county would still be paying to support the courts even though several state laws maintain rather pompously that the state will now be responsible for funding state court operations.
There is a positive, long-term financial trade-off for the yearly payment, which is part of the laws governing the “transfer.”
Under the previous laws, the county, not the state, was responsible for “providing the courts with adequate facilities,” said County Counsel Paul Bruce. That meant the state could simple dictate it needed a new courtroom, for example, and the county would have to pay for the new room or whatever else was deemed necessary.
The new law and the “transfer” of the courts means that now, the state and the courts, not the county, are responsible for providing the aforementioned, “adequate facilities.”
That means, if the state thinks it needs more room for its courts in Inyo County, the state will have to pay for building new courthouses, expanding current facilities and otherwise footing the bill for any expansion of court facilities.
That means the longstanding plans to fill the vacant lot on Edwards Street in Independence with a new, state courthouse are on hold, apparently. The idea was to move the court operation out of the county courthouse, which would free up space for county offices.
Also unclear is the status of the Courthouse Construction Trust Fund, which holds money collected from the county and the courts for construction of a new court facility. The state controls how that money will be spent.
Actually, the whole transfer and payment plan is still a bit fuzzy right now, since the legislation that created the transfer mechanism lapsed this summer.
The legislature will eventually have to pass a new court-transfer bill.
The county will submit its paperwork (five agreements/contracts) for the “transfer,” and hope the state either accepts those terms and conditions or, at worst, the agreements can form the basis for future negotiations if a new bill changes the terms and conditions of the courts’ “transfer.”
The county will watch the progress of the court-transfer legislation. Bruce added that he felt any new bill won’t provide better terms, so the county was probably safe to submit the current agreement and hope it doesn’t get worse.
|
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 14 November 2007 )
|
|
|
|
