Topeka ? As legislators cut state spending, the usual targets come to mind — the poor, the downtrodden and the disabled.

With lawmakers looking at the prospect of a billion-dollar deficit by the end of the next budget year unless some major cuts are made, everyone is subject to scrutiny, even the state court system.

Just how much the court system will suffer is an open question.

When Gov. Kathleen Sebelius proposed her budget-cutting ideas last month, she called for cutting $562,000 from the judiciary’s current state revenue budget of about $112 million

Senate leaders first called for cutting another 3.4 percent cut for everyone, amounting to about $3.8 million for the court, but that ended up being 1.5 percent. The House Appropriations Committee on Friday whittled it to 1 percent, or about $1.1 million.

At this point, it’s anybody’s guess what the final numbers might be by the time House and Senate negotiators come up with the version going to the governor.

Nationwide problem

Kansas courts aren’t unique in a nation beset by economic woes. Daniel Hall, the National Center for State Courts’ vice president, said at least 25 state court systems face deficits and he expects that will increase. He said Florida has cut court employees, Vermont is delaying jury trials and Minnesota is considering closing courts one day a week.

“As the economy slackens, it could be even worse. That is what courts are bracing for,” Hall said. “If the revenue streams are down, the states could be facing even deeper cuts.”

In Kansas, 97 percent of the judicial budget is for personnel, including some 300 judges and 1,500 nonjudicial employees such as court clerks and court service officers throughout the state.

“We’re not necessarily unique in the pain we’re going to have to suffer in this economic crisis. There is enough pain to go around and we’re not going to be immune from that and we’re not asking to be immune,” said Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert E. Davis.

Davis said the court already has imposed a hiring freeze, reduced the number of retired judges handling cases and decided not to use the $200,000 authorized by the Legislature for a new Court of Appeals position.

That leaves few options short of cutting services, which is the last thing Davis wants to see happen.

Instead, the Supreme Court wants the Legislature to allow it to raise docket fees temporarily until the economy turns around.

“All we’re asking is an opportunity to continue the services of the courts to the citizens of this state and I think there is a lot of sentiment in the Legislature and understanding that this needs to be done,” the chief justice said.

Change in law sought

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday plans to review a bill repealing a 2006 law that says only the Legislature can increase docket fees. The bill also authorizes the Supreme Court to raise fees.

Davis said how much the surcharge on fees might be can’t be determined until the court knows just how much less it will have to spend.

In 2002, the court on its own temporarily raised fees to overcome a budget crunch, which upset some lawmakers who felt the Legislature should control the purse strings.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Tim Owens said changing the law is a good idea. “They want to avoid the furlough of court employees,” the Overland Park Republican said. “They don’t have as many options as other places. If you start shutting down the courts, I think that would be a huge mistake.”

House Speaker Mike O’Neal said a key difference this time is the court is asking the Legislature to allow it to raise fees rather than doing it on its own. “They have asked for that accommodation and I think under the circumstances, we would be willing to give them that authority,” said the Hutchinson Republican.