Judge Pro Tem Peggy Kittel churns out justice from a new courtroom, plowing through a steady pile of juvenile offender cases each day.

But her days may be numbered.

Kittel’s job – and the growing slice of justice she handles for Douglas County District Court – could be on the financial chopping block in the coming weeks, as Douglas County commissioners struggle to fill an estimated $1.8 million hole in next year’s budget. The revenue loss is tied to the state’s decision to hold back $48 million in transfer funds that otherwise would go to local governments.

With the county picking up the annual $150,000 tab for Kittel’s salary and staff – expenses normally the responsibility of the Kansas Legislature – commissioners are talking about her department as a target for potential budget cuts.

“In hindsight, we wouldn’t do it,” said Commissioner Bob Johnson, of the county’s decision two years ago to finance the judge’s job because the state failed to do so. “We couldn’t do it. So what’s next?”

Commissioners say they don’t want to eliminate the job because Kittel takes care of 2,800 cases a year, lightening the load on the district court’s five other judges. Even with Kittel’s help, the county’s per-judge caseload remains the second-largest in Kansas.

No-win decision

Such an unenviable ranking would have risen to the top by now, had the county not agreed to bring Kittel on full time to handle cases. But commissioners had little idea the county’s temporary move effectively would become a permanent decision as legislators ran up a $312 million state budget deficit.

“This is no way to run a circus,” Johnson said. “It’s one governmental unit operating on the backs of another governmental unit.”

Judge Robert Fairchild, the court’s administrative judge, said losing Kittel would challenge the district’s ability to meet the constitutional requirement for providing defendants with speedy trials.

That’s why, if faced with the loss of $150,000 in county financing, Fairchild said he likely would do all he could to spare the judge’s job and look elsewhere for cuts – such as among part-time clerks, equipment allotments and other fixed fees.

Fairchild already uses a rotating group of area attorneys to hear small-claims cases, which otherwise would get lost in the judicial shuffle as judges struggle to clear their desks of the most important criminal cases.

“For us, it would be a disaster,” Fairchild said. “Cutting the pro-tem judge, at this time, is almost untenable. We’d stop hearing small-claims cases. Divorce cases would get pushed back to the back burner. Civil cases would get done when we could get to them.

“And that’s not the way we want to run our courts.”

Commission challenge

Commissioners agree but acknowledge that big cuts must be found if they are to balance the budget. And because their budgeted revenues already are set, they cannot raise taxes to make up the difference.

The quandary troubles Charles Jones, who resigned his commission seat last week for personal financial reasons and will be sworn back in as a commissioner Jan. 13. He said he would spend much of his month off thinking about ways to cut services without eroding the county’s overall operation.

Jones would rather cut heavily in five areas than dip piecemeal into all county services.

“Disabling services by making a thousand cuts doesn’t make sense,” Jones said. “We need to make deep, surgical cuts.”

Whether the district court ends up on the operating table remains to be seen. Commissioners are expected to consider recommendations for budget cuts by the middle of February.