County to Move Misdemeanor Cases Out of Santa Monica

By Blair Clarkson
Staff Writer

Feb. 24 -- In a stunning decision that could have significant economic impacts on the cash-strapped City, the Supervising Judge for Santa Monica informed City officials last week that all misdemeanor cases heard at the local courthouse would be transferred to the LAX Courthouse.

The decision will make the Santa Monica Courthouse an exclusively civil courthouse, virtually eliminating a community role it has played for half a century.

At a surprise meeting Thursday, Judge Linda Lefkowitz told the City attorneys, court officials and the sheriff's department that the high cost of courtroom security and an antiquated lockup facility forced County Supervisors to make the "difficult decision" of moving the court cases, possibly as soon a March 15.

"It's very difficult for all of us to face these budget cuts and make decisions that are contrary to what we might want to make personally," Lefkowitz told The Lookout. "But we have to make up $4 million in security costs, and this unfortunately goes a great way toward doing that."

The state-funded Superior Court system faces a $4 million budget shortfall this year because it is "inexorably tied to the State budget fund problem," she added.

Lefkowitz -- who also has administrative responsibility for the County's five other Westside courts, including LAX and Malibu -- estimated that the cost of bailiffs and security for the misdemeanor courtroom exceeds $500,000 a year, and was the "main impetus driving the need to move the courtroom."

City officials expressed concern that moving the misdemeanor cases to the airport courthouse will burden the City with additional transportation and personnel costs, including vehicles to shuttle the prisoners and officers working overtime to accompany them to and from the new court.

"I expect that all of that will be rather costly," said City Attorney Marsha Moutrie.

Currently all of the City's felony cases are transported to the LAX court, while only misdemeanors are heard in the Santa Monica courthouse. However, the number of misdemeanor cases the City hears is substantially higher, according to Moutrie.

"We're talking about a very significant number of trips," she added.

In addition to the financial repercussions of the move, Moutrie cautions that a "very significant downside" of the decision, which is more difficult to quantify, is the loss to Santa Monica of a "community" court.

While The Los Angeles County Municipal and Superior courts unified in 2000, virtually doing away with community courts, Santa Monica has retained a small-town feeling by having misdemeanor cases still tried in the city.

"It's particularly significant here in Santa Monica, because of the fact that we have so many different kinds of activities in such a small area,” Moutrie said. “There's an awful lot going on in an awfully small space.

"To do all that, and maintain a quality of life, the Council has adopted a number of municipal code provisions" that are unique to the City, Moutrie said.

"I believe that there are advantages to having a community court, which is much more likely to understand the community's needs and value system."

The Police Department -- which estimates that officers escort an average of 14 misdemeanor prisoners to court every day -- is also worried about the financial consequences of the move.

"Right now we're just trying to get a (short-term) solution," said Lt. Frank Fabrega, the police department spokesman. "The immediate solution is using police officers on overtime."

Because the officers would be making numerous time-consuming trips to the courthouse throughout the day, the police department could not use on-duty personnel to transport defendants, Fabrega said.

”We do not want to disrupt the law enforcement services we provide the community," he said. "That's the only option we have."

The Police Department would also have to purchase special vehicles to transfer the prisoners, extra handcuffs, leg irons and jail attire, according to Fabrega.

Separate trips or segregated vehicles would be needed to move felony and misdemeanor defendants who cannot be transported together, he said. Male and female prisoners must also be kept apart.

While these changes would address the department’s immediate needs, longer-term options must be explored, said Fabrega.

Among the alternatives being considered are contracts with an agency that already provides the required transportation services and the possible use of a transportation officer, instead of a police officer, to move the prisoners, according to Fabrega. A transportation officer would save the department money due to the relatively lower salary.

However, Fagrega added that "money is very tight," and the department must determine if such options are "economically sound."

Lefkowitz said the court is "certainly aware that (the decision) impacts the City financially" and is exploring alternatives that could eliminate the cost of transporting prisoners to the airport courthouse.

In an effort to save the City personnel and transportation expenses, the court supervisors are considering using video arraignment as a future option, she said.

Prisoners would remain at the City police station and enter their pleas without having to be moved to the judicial facility. Public defenders could either be with them in the station or in front of the judge at the airport courthouse.

The process has successfully saved money for Glendale and Burbank, both of which lost their custody facilities due to budget constraints, according to Lefkowitz.

In addition to security costs in the courtroom, Lefkowitz said the decision was driven by the courthouse's aging lockup facility and the upcoming construction of new buildings to replace three outdated courtroom trailers behind the courthouse.

"We have a combination of factors that force us to make the decision now rather than later this year," Lefkowitz said.

When construction begins on the new courtrooms, the walled-off walkway used to march prisoners between the lockup and court will be removed, and the defendants cannot be taken through public areas of the courthouse, Lefkowitz said.

"We can't provide secure facilities out there any longer to walk them outside to the criminal courtroom," she added. "It's a danger to prisoners and to the public."

Although Moutrie appreciated how "reasonable" the presiding judge had been in listening to the City's worries during Thursday's meeting, she also expressed concern over the "speed with which they are intending to do this."

"We think the (March 15) schedule is problematic," she added, "because it doesn't allow time for a transition, which will considerably impact this office's work on the criminal cases."

Lefkowitz allowed that the initial deadline discussed at the meeting "appears a little early" to expect the City to be ready, and that it is "unlikely that we could get it done by March 15."

"We have made a firm decision that it has to happen," she said. "What we have not made a decision on is when it will happen.

"We're going to be meeting this week to work out a rational schedule for the move," she added. "We're not rushing it any more than we need to."

By moving all the City's misdemeanor cases to the airport facility, the Santa Monica courthouse will only handle family law, divorce, custody and contract cases.

Last year the City moved all of its felony cases to the LAX courthouse, which is the major criminal courthouse for the entire area and hears the vast majority of criminal cases.

Lefkowitz said she understands the concerns of city officials and the sheriff's department about the decision to transfer cases, but added that "these are really difficult times" for municipal courts.

Until the State financial situation improves "we must serve the citizens by making rational budget moves," Lefkowitz said.

"It is not, I assure you, something that any of us wanted to do," she said.