Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Upcoming closure of Lodi courthouse raises questions

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 12:00 am

Although San Joaquin County Superior Court officials decided to consolidate services to the main downtown Stockton courthouse, questions remain about a lease the court has with the city of Lodi for use of the Elm Street court building.

The lease became an issue when David Warner, presiding judge of San Joaquin County Superior Court, decided to close the Lodi branch court.

Beginning March 4, those who are arrested in the Lodi area will have to go to the main courthouse in downtown Stockton. So will attorneys, prosecutors, police officers, records employees, and friends and relatives of people with court dates.

Warner, who announced the closure on Jan. 3, said he decided to close the Lodi branch to trim the court system's budget. The greatest cost savings will come from terminating all court services at the Lodi complex on West Elm Street, he said.

But how can Superior Court save money by closing the court when it has a lease with the city of Lodi that doesn't expire until 2022?

Warner, who lives in Lodi, has a ready answer: The Superior Court isn't paying rent to the city. The Administrative Office of the Court, based in San Francisco, oversees the construction and rental of court buildings throughout the state, and is footing the bill, Warner said.

"They can negotiate out of lease," Warner said of the state administrative office. "I hope they don't. We'd like the city to keep that facility. I hope it will remain leased to the court."

The lease, signed in 2006, called for the state judicial agency to pay almost $200,000 plus another 77 cents per square foot for operational services for the first year. Then it went up 2.5 percent for the second through fifth years of the agreement. Future rental fees would be based on the Consumer Price Index.

Teresa Ruano, spokeswoman for the state judicial agency, said discussions with San Joaquin County Superior Court officials are just beginning. They will discuss current and future needs for court space.

Administrative Office of the Courts officials have yet to discuss its lease with the city.

Lodi City Manager Rad Bartlam and City Attorney Steve Schwabauer were not available for comment Monday.

Warner said he didn't have a dollar figure on how much the Superior Court would save by closing the Lodi branch, since some services will be transferred to the seven-story courthouse in Stockton at 222 E. Weber Ave. There won't be any cost savings by reducing personnel, either. The eight court employees in Lodi, not counting the judge, will be transferred to the downtown Stockton courthouse.

Until March, the Lodi court will continue to handle landlord-tenant issues, traffic cases, passport services and arraignments for criminal cases. Criminal trials are already held in Stockton.

"There are other things that we're doing to save money," Warner said. "It's part of our budget puzzle I'm not free to discuss right now."

Contact reporter Ross Farrow at rossf@lodinews.com.

More about

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don't pretend you're someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don't insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.

Welcome to the discussion.

4 comments:

  • Mary Ragusa posted at 8:44 pm on Wed, Jan 16, 2013.

    lilragu Posts: 17

    It does not make any sense...why does Warner say the Administrative Office in San Francisco should continue to pay? For nothing? What a blatant waste of money!!! As far as having to go to Stockton to court, they won't see me there. I just don't "do" downtown Stockton any more. The court building itself is not safe...they have old metal detectors and prisoners come from County Jail with shanks and stab the judges! I don't feel safe walking through an empty parking garage to get to the court house. When I last did jury duty in Lodi, there were two sheriffs at the metal detector every time someone went in or out the door. There was a heavy police presence through the entire trial. This was just for possession of marijuana (a large amount) and a pipe! In Stockton, there was one person in a guard uniform at the metal detector and one bailiff(sheriff) in the courtroom. It was a civil suit...but you just never know who is walking around that place! Keep the court open in Lodi. Our police officers can stay in town, our cases can remain here, we can get and renew passports here. How pathetic that Lodi cannot keep a court open!

     
  • Jerry Bransom posted at 6:43 pm on Tue, Jan 15, 2013.

    Jerry Bransom Posts: 363

    Police, Sheriff, Highway Patrol, Border Patrol, Bart Police, Port Police, School District Police, College Police, Airport Police, BATF, DEA, Game Wardens, Department of Corrections, Federal Prisons, Lottery Police, US Marshals, ICE, Coast Guard, Customs, FBI, CIA, NSA, Secret Service, National Guard, TSA, DHS, dozens of others in the Armed Services and more. You cannot say them all in one breath.

    We are mostly a Police State. A slowly receding nation of laws. Divert funds from Police to political infrastructure (retirements & graft), restrict peoples access to the court. Sound familiar? Get used to it. It is your legacy.

     
  • Jose Sanborn posted at 10:25 am on Tue, Jan 15, 2013.

    Jose Sanborn Posts: 34

    @Josh Morgan: You don't appear to be missing anything here. As far as I can tell, you are spot on with your observation.

     
  • Josh Morgan posted at 9:11 am on Tue, Jan 15, 2013.

    Josh Morgan Posts: 529

    What am I missing here? Rent will continue to be paid, there will be no savings for personnel and Judge Warner can't give the dollar amount that will be saved by closing the court. This just isn't making any sense to me. The move will cost everyone else more money....transferring of prisoners, the time for police officers to travel to and from Stockton let alone the costs for Lodi residents to travel to and from Stockton. I'm all for the downsizing of government but this is just transferring the burden from one location to another and creating all kinds of hardships on everyone else. Again, what am I missing?

     

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists