Campus safety

Just a week after the horrific murder of Yeardley Love, University of Virginia President John T. Casteen III met with Governor Bob McDonnell to explore ways that changes in state law can make our campuses safer. Casteen believes that UVA would have been able to take preemptive steps to prevent Love's death if university officials had been aware of George Huguely's arrest in Lexington two years ago. Casteen said, such information "would have lit our system." He continued, "It becomes almost an obligation for the student to demonstrate that whatever behavior caused the [issue] has been in some way addressed. We regularly require students to leave the university to undergo psychological or other treatment and in some cases we don’t readmit them."

Perhaps President Casteen is correct in this instance, however it is hard to imagine that any safeguard would provide complete protection against the uncertainties of human behavior. But, perhaps a few changes in state law, with funding, can help universities better protect students. Knowledge is power and colleges and universities should know as much as possible (within reasonable privacy rights) about their students to best assure a safe learning environment.

Whatever approaches are being considered, we must be very careful to not place extra burdens on law enforcement and on our judicial system. Doing so may help one problem while creating many others. The main burden of securing this information should be placed squarely on those who will use it - the college or university.

It seems to me that one fairly simple and reasonably inexpensive change could be the way the Virginia Judicial System reports the status of cases online. Currently, if I want to check up on John Doe's case, his sentence, etc., I have to know which court has jurisdiction so I can conduct a search. Was John busted in Waynesboro or Augusta County? Or was it Albemarle? To conduct an effective search I must have some prior knowledge and be persistent in what may be a time consuming search. If I find the case, great! But, with the current system, I'm not alerted to John's other case(s) pending in Virginia Beach and Harrisonburg.

If the Virginia Judicial System had a truly global search of all district and circuit courts, college officials could more effectively and efficiently find out about students arrests, cases, and convictions. The information would be retrievable, but the burden of searching for it would be placed where it belongs - on college and university officials. Surely the technology exists to automate such searches. Both public and private schools would be empowered.

Would this fairly simple change "fix" the problem? No way! Juvenile convictions would not (and should not) be part of the public record. Likewise, we'd not be aware of John's arrest during spring break in Daytona Beach - with many out-of-state and foreign students, college and university officials will remain unaware of criminal issues beyond the commonwealth.

A simple, but partial, solution that is relatively inexpensive and might even be in place during the next academic year. A change that would not pile unnecessary and distracting work on police and courts. And, since all of these court records are already public, there are no significant privacy concerns.

Schools, VRS, public safety take heavy hits

The first reports about the Virginia General Assembly's budget actions are hitting the media and everything is a bit sketchy. The Senate gave in to the House on a majority of the fee increases so many of the cuts hit bone. Some emerging details:

• K-12 education will see $646 million less over the next two years meaning teacher/staff layoffs, school closings, and larger classes. Apparently the Senate held tough and prevented the even more drastic cuts proposed by the House of Delegates.
• As predicted in an earlier post, judges who retire or die will not be replaced. Full dockets. Backlogs. Irate citizens. Justice delayed. Justice denied.
• Although some of the worst proposals for the Virginia Retirement system were averted, the system takes still another hit. In the past couple of years the state has underfunded the retirement system and now the General Assembly is borrowing $620 million from it. I don't trust them to repay it - do you? What recourse will members have - can we sue the bastards?
• $1 billion was cut from health programs. Only 250 additional adults with mental disabilities will receive community-based services - the waiting list tops 6,000. A human and a public safety disaster.
• Funding for sheriff's offices drops by 6%. Expect slower response times, a reduced presence of resource officers in schools, and fewer crime prevention programs.

But rejoice. The rest areas are reopening even as the potholes grow big enough to gobble up a Prius. Maybe the pedal will stick and it will fly over it!

House budget courts judicial disaster

There are 19 vacant judgeships around the Commonwealth, including one at the Staunton General District Court and the Augusta County General District Court. The vacancy should have been filled during the 2009 session of the General Assembly, but political squabbles ended in a deadlock with no appointment. When a judgeship is vacant, the court has to rely on substitutes that can sometimes mean inconsistencies, delays, and other costs that can't simply be measured in dollars.

Now the budget crisis means that the vacancies will probably continue or even, as if by magic, disappear. Some of Virginia's busiest courts, including a big one in Fairfax and others in Hampton Roads, will take the hit. The House of Delegates proposes to eliminate the vacancies and the need to appoint new judges by simply eliminating the positions. Poof! No vacancy... no political fight... no cost (at least not in the budget). The House proposal goes even further by essentially eliminating any judgeships that become vacant over the next two years. The Senate budget keeps the positions funded.

If the House position prevails, the judicial system will have to shuffle the remaining judges around to provide judges for courts that have a vacancy... correction, lost the entire position. There will be travel expenses and other inefficiencies, and perhaps fewer court days meaning full dockets and justice delayed or even denied. There is simply no way that fewer judges will be able to handle the workload with the same care. The House proposal is a recipe for disaster, especially when you consider that many judges are eligible to retire and some may well do so rather than put up with a untenable workload. Of course, each retirement will leave another position unfunded and additional burdens for those who remain.

Hopefully prudence and common sense will prevail in the budget negotiations, although the more one sees of the House plans, the more one wonders if those are lost commodities around the State Capitol.

Maybe now

The News Leader's headline story today is about a Staunton attorney being a defendant in a $1.4 million lawsuit. The attorney is also up for appointment as judge for the Staunton and Augusta General District Courts. While I have no idea about the merits of this suit, the fact of its existence appears to place a cloud over his potential selection.

The judgeship should not be allowed to remain vacant while legislators wrangle. Nor, should a decision be held hostage to the resolution of this suit - which could take months or years. Maybe now this person might withdraw from consideration thus helping to end the gridlock over this appointment so the vacancy can be filled at the reconvened session.

Pitchfork Rebellion

Virginia is one of only two states in which the legislature appoints judges, frequently in a partisan deal made largely behind closed doors. The other state with legislative judicial appointments is South Carolina. Some other states elect judges complete with all the campaign funds, lobbyists, and political parties - talk about partisan and potentially corrupting.

But, about 30 states use a variation of the Missouri Plan which attempts to remove most of the partisanship. Judges are selected on the basis of merit through a process that uses a nonpartisan commission to review applications, interview candidates, and select three names which are submitted to the governor. Usually the governor picks one, but if not, the commission selects one after 6o days. Not to be left out, the voters also have a say. After serving for a year the judge stands for a retention election at the next general election.

CCC commented on the Virginia's system of Judging Judges back in August. The 2009 session of the General Assembly saw some of the same deal making and gridlock over appointments that characterized prior sessions. Also bitter arguments over the evaluations of judges. The legislature ended this year with vacancies in several courts (although rumor is they may try to deal with that at the reconvened session next month).

Meanwhile, a citizens group calling itself the Pitchfork Rebellion is calling for term limits for judges, citizen input in the selection of judges, open hearings, and a new judicial evaluation system. It grew out of dissatisfaction with the selection of judges in Fairfax Co., Hampton Roads, and Chesterfield Co. Organizers connected with each other online and now plan to set up a nonprofit group to coordinate activities and raise the issue statewide. Elizabeth Hering of Leesburg, one of the leaders of the movement, said:

"Overall, our goal is to take back our courts and achieve some measure of judicial accountability in Virginia and weed out bad jurists. No man should be above the law. However, we have a judiciary with absolute, unfettered power."

In fundamental ways, the judge selection process shares some striking similarities with the redistricting process for legislative seats. Both processes:

• are controlled by the General Assembly
• bring out the worst abuses of partisanship
• sometimes result in unnecessary gridlock
• are more about holding power than good government
• run contrary to ideals of democracy - citizen involvement, liberty, fairness, and accountability of public officials
• have been successfully reformed in other states by delegating responsibility to nonpartisan commissions
• require (for meaningful and lasting reform) amending the Virginia Constitution

Things move slowly in Virginia politics. There is a bit of arrogance that we do things right in the Commonwealth and can't learn better ways from other states. It often takes many years and multiple sessions to finally enact good ideas. With a gubernatorial election and 100 members of the House of Delegates facing voters (in their gerrymandered districts), 2009 would be a good time to put reform of redistricting and the selection of judges squarely on the front burner of political discussions. Grab your pitchfork!

Judging judges

Virginia is one of only a couple states in which the legislature selects judges. Since judges have set terms (varies by court) with no limits on the number, the legislature also reappoints judges. In cases where the legislature fails to fill a vacancy, or if a vacancy occurs when the legislature is not in session, the governor or circuit court judges (depending on the vacancy) makes the appointment.

Giving legislators this much power over the Virginia judicial system seems to violate our cherished separation of power and checks and balances. The lengthy and clumsy process can also means judgeships are empty for months forcing courts to use substitute or retired judges, delays in cases being heard, and dockets to burst. And justice for all?

The process also creates a potentially unhealthy local political dynamic in which judges get appointed based more on connections with local politicians and bar associations than on experience and expertise. Lawyers, who have rarely seen the inside of courtroom are often appointed to a judgeship where they know little of procedures and processes. Most often, this occurs at the General District and Juvenile & Domestic Relations District courts because they are "entry level." Judges of circuit courts and appellate courts are more often chosen from sitting judges who have a track record. District courts handle most of the cases affecting everyday folks - family and juvenile issues, traffic, civil disputes, minor crimes, etc.

Lest you think there is a shortage of lawyers wanting to be judges, think again. Generally, when a retirement or vacancy is known in advance, there is lots of behind the scenes jockeying to line up political support. Promises are made and campaign donations are probably tallied up. Why would a lawyer take a likely pay cut to become a judge? Perhaps power? Perhaps a change? Perhaps to tap into the Virginia Retirement System which fast tracks judges to full benefits much faster than state employees, teachers, and most others covered by the program.

This year, with control of the General Assembly divided between the parties, vacancies went unfilled. Governor Tim Kaine then made the appointments. Now, House Republican Leader Morgan Griffith is complaining that the governor didn't get input from the House GOP caucus. Of course, Griffith forgets that the hard partisan line taken by the House is partly responsible for the deadlock that resulted in the governor making the appointments. Duh!

Any change to the judicial selection process would require an amendment to the Virginia Constitution, a lengthy and difficult process with many political roadblocks. Models can be found in other states that either elect judges in a nonpartisan elections (nonpartisan but still very political) or have a nonpartisan judicial selection commission. In the federal system judges are appointed, for life, by the president with approval from the Senate. This rooster prefers a nonpartisan commission.

As The Roanoke Times notes, convincing the General Assembly to change the judge selection process will not be easy - politicians rarely want to give up power. But, taking politics (as much as possible) out of what should be an independent branch of government is a good thing (no matter what the politicians say). Hopefully this year's impasse will prompt those very politicians to look at meaningful reforms. Maybe it is an issue we can bring to the forefront in 2009 when we elect a governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and all 100 delegates.