Judge: Commission targeting courts

Published 12:00 am Wednesday, January 19, 2000

Court workers, members of the county bar and elected officials joined with Lawrence County residents Tuesday night to voice concerns about judicial changes recommended by the Ohio Courts Futures Commission.

Wednesday, January 19, 2000

Court workers, members of the county bar and elected officials joined with Lawrence County residents Tuesday night to voice concerns about judicial changes recommended by the Ohio Courts Futures Commission.

Email newsletter signup

"I’m definitely against the ability to govern ourselves being taken away from counties and us," said Jim Shope of Hanging Rock.

Shope listened as Common Pleas Judge Robert Nichols of Madison County analyzed the Futures Commission’s plans before a near-capacity crowd at Ohio University Southern Campus’s Bowman Auditorium.

The Futures Commission, a 52-member panel formed by Ohio Chief Justice Thomas Moyer several years ago, has discussed reforms that mandate court centralization and consolidation of services.

Such reform ideas have included handling case files, personnel or funding through a central office in Columbus instead of a local courthouse; putting counties into large court districts; or modified merit selection of local judges, Nichols said.

"The local judiciary is the backbone of local government and the Futures Commission has no case for change," he said, adding that no fact-finding or data analysis has been done by its members.

The recommendations would establish a bureaucratic authority over courts, instead of what works now – the electoral authority of the voting public, he said.

Nichols said he would be the first to admit that final drafts of recommendations do not include what a March 1998 draft report suggested – that trial courts be changed to district and circuit courts of several counties each.

Other language has been changed, too, because the commission is trying to save its public image, Nichols said.

"But in my view, the final report will recommend judicial reorganization," he said.

That reorganization will embrace centralized courts and an attempt to control court funding and personnel in Columbus, he said.

Futures Commission project director Steve Stover denied such claims and said Nichols was "misinformed" about the intent of commission recommendations.

Ideas Nichols opposes were never formally considered, or they were considered and dismissed, Stover said.

"It’s water over the dam and he knows it," he said.

There has been no discussion of circuit courts for well over a year, Stover said, adding that centralizing court systems is not part of proposals now.

Joint court ventures are optional, to give the counties the flexibility to work together, like establishing multi-county drug courts, he said.

Stover said he is not aware that central filing of cases is under consideration, but there are ideas to set statewide standards with technology or formats of cases or processes.

"I think the commission is talking about efficiency, but not central control," he said.

Nichols still claims that final draft language will set up central control of funds.

For example, if a central office said this is the only funds available to these four counties, and it will only fund a few judges, it would force those counties to form a district judicial system, he said.

"It will establish a forced optional regional partnership of courts," Nichols said.

A final draft of Futures Commission proposals is due in three to four weeks, he said.

Under law that grants the chief justice superintendency over courts, Moyer has the authority to enact some changes by rule, but each July 1, the General Assembly has a trump card – to either affirm or deny that rulemaking authority, Nichols said.

Nichols suggested local residents contact legislators and voice their opinion.

Even if recommendations to consolidate local courts into multi-county "circuits" are not in the Futures Commission’s final report, Shope said he opposes the plan.

"Like the judge said, if they already have an implementation committee, something’s up and is going to happen," he said. "I will definitely write my legislator and let him know I’m against it."