| |
Use Surplus to Change Court System Funding
Posted 03-12-1998
I am sure you have read many times about the huge surplus in the coffers of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Since it is an election year you have seen the Governor and
the Legislature talking about how they are going to give the surplus back to the
taxpayers. Well, if they were living up to their constitutional responsibilities to fund
Pennsylvania's court system, they would not be talking about a surplus.
We in County government are stuck with that
growing burden even though the Commonwealth's Constitution states that it is the
responsibility of State government to provide for a unified judiciary. That means the
court system should be the same in every one of the State's sixty-seven counties. With
County government being responsible for court funding, there is no way the system can be
equal. There are big differences between the financial resources of counties like Berks
and Bucks and counties like Fayette and Greene.
In 1986, Allegheny County sued the
Commonwealth over court funding, the case progressed the whole way to the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court, the ruling was that the responsibility lies with State government. Yet,
Harrisburg ignores their constitutional responsibility. They threaten lawsuits in federal
court, tell the Supreme Court they do not have jurisdiction, and blatantly ignore the
growing burden on counties. Last year the Supreme Court hired retired Justice Montemurro
to conduct a study and provide recommendations about how the Commonwealth can gradually
assume the burden of court funding.
Westmoreland County is spending roughly ten
percent of our budget on the courts. That comes to $18 million. We do not pay the Judges'
or District Justices' salaries, as they are employees of the Commonwealth. We receive
$70,000 per Judge for staff salaries. However, salaries and benefits for each Judge's
staff are twice that amount. We receive nothing for any other expenses such as utilities
or equipment. For the District Justices we receive nothing for their staff salaries or
rent for offices. Years ago counties received $60,000 per District Justice. That amount
was reduced to $30,000 and then to nothing. While we receive some money for offender
supervision fees and fines from offenders, the amount that goes to Harrisburg dwarfs the
amount we keep.
So the burden grows. We have as part of the
court system, Adult and Juvenile Probation, the Court Administrator's Office, and a
Judicial Information Systems Department. The county funds the District Attorney's Office
even though they prosecute on behalf of the Commonwealth. The county funds the Public
Defender's Office because the state mandates that all defendants are entitled to
representation, and if the defendant is indigent, they are represented by the Public
Defender's Office, at the county's expense. Additionally, the court-related row offices
are our responsibility although their burden is not too great because of the fees they
collect. We pay for court security and the transportation of prisoners through the
Sheriff's Department.
Currently Justice Montemurro is continuing
his study. His initial recommendation is for a takeover that will take a decade. It is not
going to provide immediate relief, as his proposal has the Commonwealth only taking over
the Court Administrator's Office this year. That's five employees here. But I am a
realist, and five employees is better than none. Frankly, I understand the reality of
politics and if it is going to take ten years to complete the process, I can live with it
with one critical caveat. DO NOT REDUCE COUNTY FUNDING IN OTHER AREAS. Counties cannot
raise revenue like the Commonwealth can and if they fund the courts, it will allow
counties to provide the mandated services more efficiently. Most importantly it is the
constitutional responsibility of the Commonwealth to provide for a unified judiciary, and
we all want them to respect our Constitution. |
