13 comments:

• Elise Middlecamp posted at 12:05 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2013.

  Posts: 15

  Interesting perspective. I'm not sure what budget cuts have to do with the justice system though. If the justice system is not supporting itself by the legal and permitting fees along with the fines and other sources of revenue then those pricing schedules need to be adjusted to support the court. It makes zero sense to need to subsidize the court with a majority of outside tax dollars.

  Based on your comment it makes me think that everyone of my parents generation and older just don't know how to run a government.

  You do know what you're talking about, but you're only incriminating your generation (if you are indeed older than mid forties) for being unable to operate the government of the people in a way that honors future generations.

  • Link

   

• Teresa Johnson posted at 10:38 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2013.

  Posts: 5

  Although sad this should have happened last year. Every court in California is feeling the cuts and some have already made the sacrifice of shutting courts to save money. Although an inconvenience for some there are more services offered at the main courthouse that was not offered here. And yes with trials not just LPD, but CHP, stockton and Sheriff officers/deputies have to attend th and wait to be called not to mentioned. The investigating officer who sit in on the entire trial. That comes with gthe job and they know it. Since we like to find people to blame blame the aoc for mismanaging money for the courts and blame the courts who didn't realize being efficient means running your court I'm the black not the red and them go to the state for a bail.out. so sorry but the rose colored glasses should have come off two years ago. Oh and before you say I do not know what I am talking about guess again.
  

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 10:38 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2013.

  Posts: 2031

  This isn't about "smaller government," it's about having a necessary part of our city's services located in OUR city. Now since we've already got the court-rooms in place, the savings would be for heating/cooling them and the support staff to keep them operating. But rest assured Stockton will be expecting a rather tidy sum for sponsoring our court-related operations in their not-so-fair city.

  With the cost of gasoline still high and the wear and tear on police vehicles just to go back and forth (as Ms. Middleton outlines below), how much would the City actually save? Or is this just a knee-j-e-r-k reaction by one judge? After all, until this article I hadn't heard one word about closing down the court-house in favor of moving to Stockton. Is this a unilateral decision by Judge Warner? And why doesn't he have the figures to support this (his) decision? On what basis was it made then?

  • Link

   

• Josh Morgan posted at 9:54 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2013.

  Posts: 518

  Acquiring property through eminent domain does not mean the City would get the property free. Many times the property owner prefers eminent domain because they actually get a higher price for their property plus add tax breaks. Be careful what you wish for.

  • Link

   

• Doug Chaney posted at 9:33 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2013.

  Posts: 388

  Does the city of Lodi really need a law enforcement officer just to patrol the few parks in Lodi that are all no further that two or so miles apart? Isn't this just overkill to protect the affluent neighborhoods that contain nearly all of the parks? There are three members of this city council who have no vision or care whatsover what happens to Eastside, CA 95240, now only a dream and plan on buying the decrepit, abandoned car lot properties from Geweke for their new and much needed fire station. I certainly hope if that deal in the works happens that the price is in line with what that blighted property is worth and not some exaggerated amount way out of line not appropriate to today's still struggling economy. I'd suggest the city attorney consider eminent domain and just get the property free.

  • Link

   

• Jerry Bransom posted at 9:26 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2013.

  Posts: 361

  And all of you hypocrites tell me just what is wrong with smaller government? You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Or maybe you really are no different than the liberals you demonize. Stay out of trouble if you don't like it!

  • Link

   

• Doug Chaney posted at 9:22 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2013.

  Posts: 388

  Those empty courthouses and buildings could be used for city departments and some of those spaces the city is leasing at ridiculous rents/leases to house city employees from various departments would amount to tremendous savings to the city. This would consolidate city employees nearer to city hall. It would be an ideal place for the DLBP, Wine & Visitors center, or any entity that is funded by the city of Lodi.

  • Link

   

• Doug Chaney posted at 9:15 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2013.

  Posts: 388

  Perhaps the city of Lodi and LPD, along with the parks and recreation department could reconsider hiring that police officer just to patrol the parks and assign him/her to the task of transporting prisoners from Lodi to Stockton. With one supervisory position for every four police officers, maybe one of those "desk sergeants" could also be assigned to that duty.

  • Link

   

• Elise Middlecamp posted at 9:45 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2013.

  Posts: 15

  I don't know the numbers. I was thinking that we all go there maybe once every 3 years for something. Which is something like 19,000 trips per year, or about 70-75 per working day. I could be way off, maybe double I don't know.

  That's approximately 600,000 miles of extra driving Lodi residents will need to do annually. That is about $100,000 in fuel. $6000 in oil changes. $4000 in tires. The associated waste. This isn't counting police costs, which we pay for as well.

  I wonder how much this move is saving annually. In either case, Stockton or Lodi, billable hours for the service should be about the same. The thing that comes to my mind is that Stockton is just larger so they can do it for less money per case from sheer volume efficiency.

  This all doesn't sit well really, especially with respect to decisions that will be made in the coming 20 years, Lodi has had a court for decades. Downtown is looking really good. These aren't that hard of times for a functioning city.

  • Link

   

• Ed Walters posted at 7:10 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2013.

  Posts: 143

  Makes one wonder what will happen to the empty court houses. Mr. Kinderman expressed good points as to why the city of Lodi should have its own justice system. If, for any reason a Lodi police officer doesn`t appear in Stockton, the person that must appear in court, walks. If a trial is needed, that officer might spend a week or more waiting to testify. [sad]

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 5:46 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2013.

  Posts: 2031

  And yet we still have a library when the Internet is fast becoming a one-stop resource center for all books, periodicals and other items that are easily found with the click of a mouse or on a "smart" phone. I think it's time we thought seriously about closing that waste of money.

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 5:43 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2013.

  Posts: 2031

  A 60,000-person population city without its own court house? Somehow this just doesn't seem right. I do hope the numbers will be released soon regarding the savings over such a move. Clearly Stockton's courthouse will charge rent and other service-related charges to the City of Lodi for this move.

  And what about removing Lodi's police from the streets while they travel to/from and spend all that time waiting to be called to testify? I would suspect that many of them might opt to not making a showing at all for traffic-related appearances or even non-violent misdemeanors. So much for justice being served.

  • Link

   

• Josh Morgan posted at 4:27 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2013.

  Posts: 518

  This is extremely unfortunate. [sad]

  • Link