t address long-term needs

? For some time, Judge Tracy Klinginsmith has worried whether there will be enough money to keep the 2nd Judicial District operating at full steam after July 1.

He worries a little less now, thanks to the Kansas Supreme Court, but still isn’t happy about its short-term solution.

The high court decided to impose emergency fee increases to raise extra money to meet the judicial system’s fiscal 2003 expenses. The increases take effect April 1 and expire June 30, 2003.

“It is unfortunate, because this additional cost will fall upon the users of the courts as opposed to the taxpayers,” said Klinginsmith, chief district judge for Jackson, Jefferson, Pottawatomie and Wabaunsee counties.

“But I think it was needed in order to continue operation after July 1 in a manner necessary for us to perform,” he added.

Gov. Bill Graves has proposed that the state spend $81.2 million in fiscal 2003 on the judicial branch  $3.5 million less than court officials believe is needed.

Salaries consume 97 percent of the court system’s budget. And because the Kansas Constitution prohibits cutting judges’ salaries, reducing costs to make ends meet would likely mean layoffs or furloughs of staff.

Graves also proposed $228 million in tax increases that would have covered the judicial shortfall and lessened the likely cuts in other areas of government, but lawmakers so far have shot down every tax measure put to them this year.

Chief Justice Kay McFarland said the expected shortfall left her little choice but to impose what she called an “emergency stopgap measure” to keep the courts operating full-time during the next budget year.

Short-term solution

Klinginsmith said the chief justice did what she had to do, but he added, “I think it is contrary to the rights of the people to have equal access to the courts.”

He said the fee increases probably won’t keep anybody from filing a lawsuit or other legal claim, but nevertheless it bothers him.

“It is just the principle of the thing that the Legislature has an obligation to adequately fund us,” he said.

And the higher fees don’t address the judicial system’s long-term needs.

“The Legislature needs to address it in a more permanent manner. If they fail to do that, I remain concerned about our employees of the court,” Klinginsmith said.

While judges preside over hearings and trials, it’s the court staff that keeps things running on a day-to-day basis, Klinginsmith said.

“Everything that requires court time requires staff time,” he said. “As a judge, you can’t function without your staff.”

Case load increase

The 2nd District, in northeast Kansas, has 15 full-time clerical workers who handle all legal paperwork, plus four court services officers who perform such functions as pre-sentencing reports and probation supervision.

He rates the current budget the tightest he has seen in his 27 years as a judge.

“We’ve had budget problems before, but it’s at the most difficult stage since I have been on the bench,” he said.

Klinginsmith said the size of his court staff has remained about the same while the caseload has increased sharply.

The number of civil and criminal cases filed in the 2nd district nearly doubled in a decade, from 1,910 in fiscal 1991 to 3,757 in fiscal 2001.

Unless the Legislature comes up with a permanent solution, the future could be bleak.

“We would simply have to prioritize responsibilities,” Klinginsmith said. “We would have to decide what needs immediate attention, and some of the work would get shoved back and not done in a timely fashion.”

One likely change would be shorter hours or work weeks in the clerk’s offices, or fewer workers on any given day. That would mean less staff time to stream of paperwork  motions, counter motions, pleadings, cross-pleadings  generated by any most cases, whether civil or criminal.

Another possibility could be not paying a part-time secretary for such things as home study reports in domestic cases.

“Our choice would be no secretary and not be able to generate the reports in a timely fashion, or require litigants to have private studies at their expense,” he said.

But no matter how costs are cut, the results would be the same  delays in the administration of justice.

In the worst case, the judge said, citizens needing court services in such areas as domestic abuse or child custody might find nobody available to help.

And if that were to happen, Klinginsmith said, “Justice is denied. That is the bottom line.”