Judicial Watch Announces: California Court of Appeals Rules That Extra Compensation for Los Angeles County Judges Violates California Constitution
Decision Would Cut Compensation and Save Taxpayers $21 Million a Year
WASHINGTON, DC--(Marketwire - October 14, 2008) - Judicial Watch, the public interest group
that fights government corruption and judicial abuse, announced today that
a California Court of Appeals ruled on October 10th that a scheme by Los
Angeles County to pay superior court judges in the county approximately $21
million annually in perks and supplemental benefits on top of what they
already receive from the state violates the California State Constitution
[Harold P. Sturgeon v. The County of Los Angeles, Super. Ct. No. BC351286].
The appellate court decision was rendered in a Judicial Watch taxpayer
lawsuit challenging the legality of the extra compensation. With its
decision the appellate court reversed a lower court ruling in favor of Los
Angeles County.
"Section 19, article VI of the California Constitution requires that the
Legislature 'prescribe compensation for judges of courts of record,'"
Associate Justice Patricia Benke wrote in her 37-page opinion. "The duty
to prescribe judicial compensation is not delegable. Thus the practice of
the County of Los Angeles (the county) providing Los Angeles County
superior court judges with employment benefits, in addition to the
compensation prescribed by the Legislature, is not permissible.
Accordingly, we must reverse an order granting summary judgment in favor of
the county in an action brought by a taxpayer who challenged the validity
of the benefits the county provides to its superior court judges."
In 1997, the California State Legislature enacted a law providing that
"[o]n and after July 1, 1997, the state shall assume sole responsibility
for the funding of court operations," including salaries and benefits
packages. Since 1998, however, Los Angeles County has continued to provide
at least $120 million in taxpayer funded perks and supplemental benefits to
judges in the county despite the California Constitution's clear mandate
that only the legislature can set the level of compensation received by
judges.
For example, in 2007 Los Angeles County provided the judges with cash
allowances equal to 19% of the salary they received from the state. Judges
were allowed to either purchase additional health, life, disability and
other benefits from the county's MegaFlex benefits plan on a pre-tax basis
or keep the cash as taxable income. Overall, each superior court judge was
eligible to receive $46,436 in supplemental compensation from Los Angeles
County, an additional 27% of the salary received from the state, for a
total cost of $21 million in fiscal year 2007 alone. Judicial Watch's
Sturgeon litigation was handled by Judicial Watch Litigation Director Paul
J. Orfanedes and Judicial Watch's senior California attorney Sterling
"Ernie" Norris.
"This appellate court ruling represents a tremendous victory the taxpayers
and citizens of California," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
"This extra pay for LA County judges was an affront to the rule of law and
now, thanks to our lawsuit, taxpayers in LA could save up to $22 million a
year."
The decision and other documents related to Judicial Watch's lawsuit
against Los Angeles County over its judicial "double dipping" scheme will
be available at www.judicialwatch.org.