Girard judge takes stand

Additional funds are needed to meet payroll in the court.
By JOHN W. GOODWIN JR.
VINDICATOR TRUMBULL STAFF
GIRARD -- The financial battle between Girard Municipal Court Judge Michael Bernard and the city is now being argued in the 11th District Court of Appeals.
Judge Bernard ordered the city in November 2005 to increase its appropriation for court operations by $49,000. Council complied and has filed suit to get the money back, which is what brought the parties to the appellate court Monday.
The judge also ordered the city to increase appropriations to the court for 2006 to $905,454, an issue that has been included in the appellate court lawsuit. The court was originally appropriated about $600,000 for the year. Bernard said the court cannot make payroll this week unless additional funds are appropriated.
The city must show that the judge's request for additional funding is unnecessary and unreasonable or it must provide the judge with the money he says is needed to run the court.
Warren Attorney Frank Bodor, representing the city, said in opening statements that the court's caseload over the past several years has steadily fallen, but there have been no cutbacks in staffing or operations in the court. He said the court is too heavily staffed.
Bodor also said Judge Bernard passed up several opportunities to meet with city officials and discuss his budget and pay raises given to court employees in 2005.
Former city Councilman Joseph Christopher, who took the stand first, told the court that the judge had carryovers in discretionary funds totaling about $225,000 going into 2005. He said he asked the judge to use those funds to cover his court's financial shortfall and invited Bernard to a council meeting to discuss the matter. Bernard, he said, did not show up for the meeting.
Paul Marshall, chairman of the state oversight committee put in place to oversee city financial matters, told the court that he twice invited Bernard to meetings to discuss the court's budget with city and state oversight personnel. Both invitations, he said, went unanswered.
Judge testifies
Judge Bernard spent more than three hours on the stand Monday doing what city officials have wanted for months -- explaining his budget and staffing levels. He is represented by Attorney John Juhasz of Boardman.
Judge Bernard said increases in hospitalization, workers' compensation fees and funding a program the court is looking to start that would allow individuals to pay court fines via the Internet are the primary reasons for an increased demand in revenue for the court in 2005.
The judge has previously said that the city, in its initial appropriations, failed to appropriate enough funds for the court to operate in 2006.
Judge Bernard explained to the appellate court the importance of each of his five discretionary funds and what those funds cover.
Judge Bernard also offered the court a detailed explanation of each court employee's job, its relevance to daily court operations and the reason behind 6 percent pay increases given to court employees in 2005 while the city is fighting its way through fiscal emergency.
Court employees, Bernard said, accepted a pay freeze in 2002 and again in 2004, but he saw no decrease in city debt. Bernard said that after a statement by city officials suggesting that the city would be in fiscal emergency until 2012, he decided to calculate cost of living adjustments for court employees.
Jobs questioned
Bodor, on cross examination, questioned whether the court needed the four bailiffs and 11 deputy clerks -- some full time and some part time -- with which it currently operates. He asked Judge Bernard to explain overlap in court personnel duties.
Judge Bernard, under cross examination, acknowledged that the 2005 caseload was the lowest the court had seen. Bodor asked if the court, like the private sector, should scale back employees when there is a reduction in work.
Bodor also questioned the judge's policies of using such factors as age, health and family obligations to determine salary. Bernard defended the policy.
The judge's testimony will continue today. Judge Bernard said he "cannot speculate" as to what will happen with payroll in the court this week. Funds have not been appropriated to meet payroll.
Mayor James Melfi said the city cannot afford to lose the case.
"If the court is allowed to keep increasing its budget by $250,000 a year, it will eliminate our ability to reduce the debt and get out of fiscal emergency," he said.
jgoodwin@vindy.com