More economic setbacks could be ahead for Lawrence County – as well as many of the state’s other 87 counties – if a commission’s recommendations to consolidate judicial services becomes reality.

Saturday, January 15, 2000

More economic setbacks could be ahead for Lawrence County – as well as many of the state’s other 87 counties – if a commission’s recommendations to consolidate judicial services becomes reality.

Those possible changes, which could see local courts consolidated with others several counties away and could send many services to centralized agencies in Columbus, will be outlined during a special community meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at Ohio University Southern Campus.

Common Pleas Judge Robert Nichols of Madison County will be the guest speaker. Nichols is among the state’s leading activists in the fight against implementation of reforms planned by the state’s Futures Commission, said W. Richard Walton and Frank McCown, both Common Pleas Court judges in Lawrence County.

Residents are encouraged to attend and ask questions, Walton said.

"The Futures Commission is getting ready to issue its final report, probably by March," Nichols said this week.

That report is expected to echo previous preliminary reports that mandate centralization and consolidation of services. For example, all case filings could have to be done through a central office in Columbus instead of the local courthouse.

The commission seeks to divide the state into large districts, with all court proceedings heard at the convenience of a single judge in another city, perhaps several hundred miles away from Lawrence County.

The elimination of elected judges also has been recommended by the commission.

"Merit selection of judges has been defeated eight times by Ohio voters," Nichols said. "The Futures Commission is considering using a selection commission to pick judges."

The Futures Commission was formed several years ago by Ohio Chief Justice Bob Moyer. Many of the changes expected to be recommended in the final report could be implemented without approval by voters or the legislature.

"If judges are selected by the commission, then the process is open to all kinds of political pork," Nichols said, adding that the driving force behind the commission is the American Bar Association and the American Association of State Courts.

"The Futures Commission is going to use state funding to urge counties into joint (judicial) ventures," he stressed. "The problem is making sure there is an equitable distribution of funds."

In addition to the funding question, the Futures Commission is seeking centralized management of virtually all court-related processes, Nichols said.

"There is a view in Washington, D.C., and the ABA that state judiciaries have lost public confidence," he said. "However, national reports show that more than 80 percent of Americans are satisfied that the judiciary (on the state level) is doing a good job."

The problem centers on what Nichols called "an invisible commission" legislating sweeping changes without grassroots input.

"All of the questions the Futures Commission is addressing already have been addressed," Nichols stressed. "Ohio’s Modern Courts Amendment still is a national model."

He added that, if implemented, the Futures Commission recommendations will cast a "dark cloud on the horizon, casting a long shadow on county-based government and the local judiciary."