Lawmakers examine eliminating judgeships in Clark County

Senate Democrats are wondering whether Clark County really needs nine new judges and are taking a look at whether they might save some dollars by eliminating those positions — even though the jobs were approved in the last session.

Sen. John Lee, D-North Las Vegas, said his research shows the judgeships aren't really needed and he's concerned about the county's cost to find chambers and courtrooms for the new judges.

Chief Judge Art Ritchie insists the need was "absolutely established and there's no benefit of savings in eliminating the judges."

Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-North Las Vegas, confirmed that eliminating the judgeships "is something on our radar." The capital and personnel costs are a concern, he said. "For the state and the county, it's something worth looking into."

Ritchie said when Assembly Bills 64 and 65 passed the Legislature late in the 2009 session, the costs of the new judges were covered by increasing filing fees by roughly $100 per case filed.

Under the law, the increased fees are to be used for court staffing, capital costs, debt service, renovation, furniture, fixtures, equipment and technology. The bill specified the fees would be used to pay the salaries of the judges added as of next year, either by election or appointment. In Clark County, that's nine new judges. The number of family court judges increases from 18 to 20, and district court judges jump from 25 to 32.

The twist in that filing for those judgeships has already closed and people have filed for those new seats. Some are already campaigning. In Washoe County, one judge was unopposed and has been elected, Ritchie said.

The hundreds of endoscopy cases have added to the case loads of the civil judges, and each civil judge now carries a case load of more than 2,000 cases, Ritchie said.

He seemed shocked that Lee and Horsford were even considering trying to undo what was done in the last session. A $1.4 million contract has already been awarded for the design phase of adding new courtrooms and chambers, he said.

The unanswered question is: What happens if the increased court filings don't cover the costs of the judicial salaries, the additional staff and the big construction costs? Isn't the county then on the hook for those costs?

For other judges, the salaries are paid by the state and the support staff is paid by the county, which estimates it costs about $1 million to fund a new judgeship.

Lee believes the downturn in the economy will change the estimates of how much the increased filing fees will raise. Ritchie believes they will meet the estimates. Only one of these two men is going to be right.

But this is one example of why the hallways of the Legislature are crowded with lobbyists, because nobody knows what idea might pop up and be considered as part of the effort to reduce the state's budget deficit this year and next.

If everything is a moving target, and it definitely is, lobbyists don't want that target on their backs.