Quick Links:
Judges
Calif. judges aren't sharing state's economic pain

  
 
 

  Judges

  
 
 

  On 10-10-2008 An appeals court has found this practice to be in violation of
the constitution, lets see if anything happens now. COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA Decision # D050832 Section 19, article VI of the California Constitution requires that the Legislature "prescribe compensation for judges of courts of record." The duty to prescribe judicial compensation is not delegable. Thus the practice of the County of Los Angeles (the county) of providing Los Angeles County superior court judges with employment benefits, in addition to the compensation prescribed by the Legislature, is not permissible. Accordingly, we must reverse an order granting summary judgment in favor of the county in an action brought by a taxpayer who challenged the validity of the benefits the county provides to
its superior court judges.

  This report is from the San Bernardino County 2006-2007 Final report. I dug a
little more and found the County response on the Grand Jury recomendations. It's
at the bottom of this page.This goes back to 1997, when the judges became State
employees, yet the County keeps paying out $19,371.56 per year per judge in
benefits. The Grand Jury asked in 2002-2003 why the County kept paying the
benefits and again in 2006-2007. This for the County employees trying to get a
fair contract with the Board of Supervisors, ask about the Judges benefits paid
by the County even though the Judges are State employees. "The County sees no
reason at this time to amend the agreement."

JUDICIAL BENEFITS BACKGROUND
 In 1992 Municipal and Justice Courts in the County were merged. In recognition
of the merger, the Board of Supervisors equalized the benefits paid to those
County Judges. In 1997, a second consolidation took place when the State of
California enacted the Trial Court Funding Act of 1997 (SB 223) which abolished the
Municipal Courts and declared the Municipal Court Judges were, henceforth, Superior
Court Judges. This act also provided that all Judges are employees of the State of
California and no longer County employees.

 In 2000, The San Bernardino Board of Supervisors enacted Resolution 2000-190
that allocated $1.3 million to the Court for costs associated with locally
authorized judicial benefits for “eligible” judges, and there were 63 “eligible”
judges at that time.

 The 2002-2003 Grand Jury questioned why the Board of Supervisors continued to
authorize the payment of $19,371.56 per year to every San Bernardino County
Judge since they were now employees of the State of California.

FINDINGS
 Superior Court Judges are State employees and their salary is set by the State
legislature and paid by the State of California (AB 223, Chapter 850, Statutes
of 1997). Superior Court Judges are appointed by the Governor of California or
elected by the residents of the County. The Governor can appoint persons to the
San Bernardino Superior Court who are not residents of the County. County
“judicial benefits” are not a major factor in the acceptance of an appointment
to a judgeship. Many counties offer no judicial benefits.

  County Counsel in two separate legal opinions, one on September 22, 2000,
and one on April 21, 2003, questioned whether judges can legally participate in
County sponsonefit programs.

  In 2000, 63 “eligible” judges were collecting County benefits. Today, 83
“eligible” judges receive County benefits of $19,700 per year.There are
presently five judicial vacancies on the San Bernardino County judicial bench
and the State of California has authorized 16 additional judicial positions for
the County of San Bernardino.

 In 1997, the salary of a Superior Court Judge was $108,000. Today, the salary of
a Superior Court Judge is $171,000. This is a 63% increase.

 The 2003-2004 Grand Jury reported on what other Southern California counties
paid judges as judicial benefits. Their findings were as follows:

• Alameda Paid $1,350 per judge annually for a cafeteria plan. A total cost of
   $150,000 for 69 judges.
• Fresno Paid $1,121.42 per judge for health insurance and $92.56 for a life
   insurance policy
• Riverside Paid a car allowance, deferred compensation and life insurance policy.
• San Diego Paid no county benefits for 128 judges.
• Santa Barbara Paid no county benefits for 19 judges.
• Santa Clara Paid for a $25,000 life insurance policy for 79 judges.
• San Bernardino Paid county benefits of $19,371.56 per judge. A total of
   $1,607,839 for 83 judges.

 The current San Bernardino County benefit is $19,700 per judge. A total of
$1,635,100 for 83 judges. An expected total of $1,950,300 for 99 judges. (San
Bernardino is authorized 16 additional judges).

 The cost of living in San Bernardino County is less than many other Southern
California counties. For example, the median home prices are substantially less.
In March 2007, the median home prices in Southern California counties were as
follows:

• Los Angeles $540,000
• Orange $629,000
• Riverside $420,000
• San Diego $490,000
• Ventura $566,750
• San Bernardino $369,000
• So. California $505,000*

 The median home prices in San Bernardino County are the lowest in Southern
California, yet San Bernardino County pays substantially more in judicial
benefits than other Southern California counties.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
07-45 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DISCONTINUE OR REDUCE THE JUDICIAL BENEFITS PAID TO PRESENTLY APPOINTED OR ELECTED SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES.

07-46 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS NOT PAY ANY JUDICIAL BENEFITS TO ANY NEW JUDGE APPOINTED OR NEWLY ELECTED AFTER JULY 1, 2007.*

  

  Return To Top || Home  
 
     
 

  Calif. judges aren't sharing state's economic pain

  
 
  Original Article
Mar 31, 2:36 PM (ET)
By PAUL ELIAS

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - California has furloughed workers and slashed programs to close a $41 billion budget gap, but it still has more than 400 judges in Los Angeles County who each make more than the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Judges in Tulare County still get free health club memberships. Those in Kern County can count on a $600-a-month car allowance. And colleagues in other counties get perks such as funds for "professional development" and money to buy extra health insurance.

Eighteen of California's 58 counties give more than 800 superior court judges about $25 million a year in extra benefits on top of their $179,000 state salaries, even as they lay off employees and reduce services amid the recession. The state picks up the tab for extras in 19 counties.

An appellate court found that some of the perks were unconstitutional, but a lobbying effort by judges in the Legislature has helped keep the benefits in place.

Defenders of the system say the supplemental benefits are necessary to attract and retain good lawyers, who often take a pay cut to serve in the judiciary.

The heftiest perks go to Los Angeles County judges, who get $46,000 a year from the county on top of their state salaries, giving them a total of $225,000. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts makes $217,400 per year, and associate justices bring in $208,100.

An appellate court last year ruled that the Los Angeles County perks, which cost $21 million annually, were unconstitutional. But the judges fiercely resisted attempts to do away with the extra funds, hiring a law firm and Sacramento lobbyist to resist challenges to the benefits.

The California Judges Association also hired a Sacramento lobbyist and joined forces with the judiciary's administrative office to get legislation passed earlier this year protecting the county-provided benefits.

During budget wrangling in the wee hours of Feb. 19, the Legislature reinstated the perks through a bill that allows counties to phase out the benefits if they choose.

"Los Angeles judges are quietly one the most powerful lobbying groups in the state," said Robert Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles.

Curt Child, who is the Administrative Office of the Courts' top Sacramento lobbyist, said the legislation was necessary to stave off legal chaos and defections from the bench while judicial officials figure out an equitable salary scheme for all superior court judges.

"Quite frankly, many of these judges went on the bench understanding and relying that these benefits were there," said Child, who also said the state Constitution bars reducing an active judge's salary.

State-funded perks include gym memberships for 14 Tulare County judges at a combined cost of $10,428 annually.

"We have a health and wellness program," said LaRayne Cleek, the county court executive officer. "We felt, if we had healthy families and judges, we would have fewer sick days."

In the 1990s, the courts eliminated the state's municipal court and promoted those judges to the superior court. Then in 1997 the court system was brought under exclusive state control.

The reorganization was supposed to eliminate the often Byzantine funding process where the state and counties were both paying judges.

But in many counties what critics call "double-dipping" has continued.

"Somebody forgot to turn off the financial spigot in Los Angeles County," said Sterling "Ernie" Norris, a lawyer for the conservative political group Judicial Watch, which sued Los Angeles County in 2006 over its perks.

Some perks have been reduced over the years, and others could go soon. San Bernardino County Supervisor Neil Derry has proposed phasing out the $1.4 million spent locally to boost the pay of 67 judges by $19,300 each for things such as "personal security."

"It's a moral issue," Derry said. "It doesn't make a whole lot of sense."

 

  
  Return To Top :: Home