Which then poses this question for California ’s judiciary: How much more will be cut from the judiciary’s budget next year? Notice how I said will be instead of may be. That’s because I believe the $300 million in budget cuts suffered by the judiciary is just the beginning. Maybe I’m just being too much of a pessimist, but if recent reports about the nation’s economy and jobs outlook hold true, it will be almost inevitable that the governor and the legislature will come knocking on the judiciary’s door with further cuts.

And when those cuts do come, all eyes will be on the Judicial Council and the AOC once again to see what their response will be. More importantly, people will want to know whether both entities will develop a new plan of action or whether they will continue to shift the shouldering of cuts onto local trial courts.

That may be a solution in the best of times when local courts have reserves to cover whatever cuts the JC and AOC dish out, but as we all know, these are not the best of times and next year isn’t looking so hot either. Those counties that may be able to avoid layoffs and diminished court hours this year may find themselves in a whole different position come next year. Today it’s San Francisco , Stanislaus, and Alameda . Tomorrow it may be Los Angeles , Ventura , Orange or who knows.

One thing is certain and that is the uncertainty of the economy for both our state and nation. And when things are so uncertain, is it wise for the JS and the AOC to continue as usual? Or is it time, for newer perspectives and priorities? The latter question is one many would answer with a resounding yes.

The article does cover how California’s legislature slashed funding for the judiciary which has affected state budgets with San Francisco bearing the brunt, for now. But what the article doesn’t cover is the years of wasted monies and mismanagement by the AOC that has led us here.

Facing a $1.3million reduction in an already diminished budget, Monterey County Superior Court officials will begin talks next week with union leaders representing 165 employees.

Court spokeswoman Nona Medina said the court hopes to identify ways to make the necessary cuts without eliminating jobs. Among the options are work furloughs, pay cuts and a reduction in court-service hours.

According to Court Executive Officer Brian Taylor, Solano County Superior Court’s baseline budget of about $25.5 million is set to take a $2.5 million hit. While that equates to about a 10 percent cut, Taylor said the disparity is attributed to an ongoing $1 million reduction carried over from fiscal year 2010-11 in addition to deficit spending for retirements clocking in at about $220,000.

How the funding loss will affect the landscape of Solano County’s courts is yet to be determined, according to Presiding Judge D. Scott Daniels.

“We’re going to have to tighten our belts. But we’re OK for right now,” Daniels said. “There are no present plans to furlough employees, close our doors or lay off employees. But we do have to plan for our future.”

San Mateo County Superior Court will receive a $2.72 million cut instead of the anticipated $5 million in the current fiscal year, said Court Executive Officer John Fitton.

The court has been braced for $9 million in cuts over the next two years, starting with $5 million and followed by another $4 million. The latest news eases the initial hit to $2.72 million in fiscal year 2011-12, followed by an anticipated $5.4 million in 2012-13.

“It’s quite a bit better than the $5 million we feared but the problem really exists in the next fiscal year,” he said.

More news and details to come as they develop. Of course, if you know more about this, leave a comment.

“We did not even know exactly what our budget would be until nearly a month after the beginning of the fiscal year,” Scheuler said. “Now that we know that figure, we are certain that we will experience a massive deficit without even further spending cuts.”

Employees will be asked to make further concessions, and layoffs have not been ruled out, he said. Labor negotiations will open in August, and after they are completed the court will have a better idea of the necessary changes that need to be made to meet the budget crisis.

Bill Girdner of Courthouse News Service totally understands the possible consequences of the Judicial Council’s choice to stay the course while ignoring the cries for help from county courts up and down California.

San Francisco’s court could be compared to Greece, the first of the dominos to tumble.

“San Francisco may have been the first trial court to fall,” San Francisco’s presiding judge, Katherine Feinstein, told the Judicial Council last week. “But I know that others are soon to follow, and you know that too.”

So which one is next.

Which court will be California’s Portugal, the next one that has to take radical measures such as closing courtrooms and laying off hundreds of staff.

Maybe Ventura fits that bill.

And although Mr. Girdner names Ventura as a possible candidate to become Portugal or Spain, I can think of many other counties that would be up for the running.

Judge Feinstein was spot on to say that San Francisco would only be the first to fall with others “soon to follow.” Now it’s going to be a favorite pastime for court employees to take bets on which court will follow San Francisco down the rabbit hole to the AOC and Judicial Council’s mad Wonderland.

In a press release issued by the AOC, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye had this to say about Ron’s appointment:

“With this appointment, the Judicial Council is ensuring an integrated transition of leadership at the Administrative Office of the Courts and the continuity of excellence in the administration of statewide courts.”

Hmm..I think there are a lot of people out there who would beg to differ, Chief. Instead of “continuity of excellence” some would argue it’s a continuity of the same old song and dance of appointing diehard bureaucrats who continue to push a reality that has nothing to do with what is going on in California’s courts.

Judge David Lampe of the Alliance of California Judges had this to say about the appointment:

Kern Superior Court Judge David Lampe, serving as a spokesperson for the Alliance of California Judges yesterday expressed some concern that Overholt “has been closely tied to AOC policies in the past,” but emphasized that the group’s criticisms of existing branch management dealt with “structural issues,” and “has nothing to do with personalities or individuals.”

Lampe predicted that “whoever is ultimately chosen as the new director will undoubtedly be required to oversee a significant dismantling of the Administrative Office of the Courts,” and is “going to have to be dealing with changes,” such as the direct funding of trial courts by the Legislature proposed in AB 1208.

Well, all I can say is, Ron, you’re going to be in for an incredible term. And I believe you should heed the advice given by the lady below.