Consolidation is a judgment call

Erin Neff

Tuesday, Oct. 5, 1999 | 10:27 a.m.

Customer service problems plaguing Las Vegas Municipal Court will force the City Council to consider a $237,000 increase in budgeted funds this week, even amid talk of consolidating city court services with the county's Justice Court to save money.

Consolidating Municipal and Justice courts was first raised in late 1996, but talks ceased when the Municipal Court judges and the City Council at the time approved a three-year Court Efficiency Plan.

The plan required a reduction in Municipal Court expenditures and an increase in fees and fines.

While the plan had its desired financial effect, customer service suffered in the process, court administrator Mike Havemann said.

"We probably would have been in good shape had our caseload not gone up," Havemann said.

During the first two year years of the plan, court costs decreased 20.5 percent, most of which is attributable to a 22 percent decrease in staff positions. At the same time 45 positions were cut, the court's revenue increased 32 percent.

But so, too, did the court's caseload. Criminal cases increased by 24 percent, and traffic cases went up 21 percent even as the court stopped its Saturday hours and cut back weekday hours to the same 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. period offered at other courts.

Havemann said workload pressures have increased, resulting in clerical errors, overtime expenses, absenteeism, staff turnover and resulting training demands.

In June an average of 751 defendants per day visited the court counter, overcrowding public areas and causing fire code and crowd control issues, according to a report sent by Chief Judge Seymore Brown to the City Council.

During May and June, 87,780 people visited the court counter, a 20 percent increase from the same period of time in 1998.

"I was kind of against cutting back, even when we did," Councilman Gary Reese said of the 1996 efficiency plan. "I've always been against that even when consolidation was raised."

Councilwoman Lynette Boggs McDonald said Monday she had not yet had time to study the issue, but she did say that the lines outside the court give her concern.

"Whenever you walk by, there are lines," she said. "That's not the type of service we should be proud of."

Callers to the court can expect to wait 45 minutes for a representative to answer. One of the first things callers request when they finally get through is where to send their complaint.

Court clerks say that waiting time coupled with a court responsibility many don't wish to take care of in the first place compounds the problem.

The court will ask the council to fund several different staff positions in an effort to improve services.

The request calls for four court clerks and upgrading two clerical positions to supervisory roles in the customer service division. The cost would be $113,957 in fiscal year 2000.

Three clerks positions and one upgrade to supervisor are requested for the courtroom support division. The cost would be $83,145.

The entire $237,851 request would cost $306,354 in the 2001 fiscal year.

"Having more people is always wonderful," Wien said. "If you don't have to work with the people at the counter where the stress is high 40 hours a week, it would be better for staff morale."