The closure would save the state about $194,000. It would mean all trials involving custody would move to Van Nuys or near the Los Angeles Airport.
By Jonathan Friedman/Staff Writer
Malibu Lost Hills Sheriff’s Capt. Tom Martin and Mayor Pro Tem Andy Stern said they were displeased with a proposal to close the Malibu Court lockup on July 1. The closure is part of a countywide plan to cut $5 million from its budget for security in the state court system.
Stern said it was a bad decision because cases in which a suspect were in custody would no longer go to the Malibu Court, forcing Sheriff’s deputies and witnesses to drive to the court in Van Nuys or the one near the Los Angeles Airport. He said this would lead to a smaller caseload for the Malibu Court, which could then lead to the courthouse being on the chopping block next time budget cut proposals are made.
The proposal to close the lockup was made by retired Judge Cecil Mills, who heads court security for the county. He has also proposed for lockups to be closed at the Santa Monica and South Gate courts, and he proposed to shut down the entire courthouse system in Monrovia and Culver City. Mills could not be reached for comment. He was expected to bring the proposal on Wednesday, after The Malibu Times went to print, to a committee of 20 judges who oversee the state’s L.A. County court system budget.
The state has approximately $110 million budgeted for its court system in Los Angeles County. It has ordered $22 million to be cut from that budget. It is not known where the other $17 million in cuts will come from. But Stern said to eliminate the Malibu lockup would mean the costs go to taxpayers here.
“The problem is by doing that, deputies will have to drive to Van Nuys or LAX,” Stern said. “So either they are going to have to be paid overtime or we will just lose patrol time.”
Martin said he was also concerned about taking deputies so far out of the field to testify in cases. Also, he said detectives would have to drive long distances to file cases.
“That’s going to be more time consuming,” Martin said. “It’s going to create a burden for us.”
The Malibu Court lockup is used to hold people who are on trial in Malibu. Martin said that does not happen frequently, since Malibu is not a crime-ridden area. But he said it does occur several times a month. Also, if a warrant were issued for a person in Malibu, and that person is found, he is brought to the lockup. In addition, if a judge orders a person during a trial in Malibu to be jailed, the person is sent to the lockup here.
If the lockup were closed, all trials involving a person in custody would automatically be moved out of Malibu. Stern said he feared that would lead to a slippery slope.
“If you use the court less, the state will look at the court and say ‘Jeez, we don’t need the Malibu Court,’ and then they will close the Malibu Court entirely,” Stern said.
Stern said it would be terrible not to have a local courthouse, with people having to travel long distances for jury duty, to challenge a speeding ticket or for any other reason one would need to go to court.
Cmdr. Juan Rodriguez, who oversees court security for the Sheriff’s Department, said he understands why Malibu would be upset about the proposed closure. But he said there is probably no other option.
“The bottom line is there is no money,” Rodriguez said. “If the state is going to give you $5 million less, you have to do whatever you can do.”
At last week’s City Council meeting, the council unanimously voted to have City Manager Katie Lichtig send a letter to the state communicating that the council is in strong opposition to the closure. Stern said he had not heard yet about any reaction to the letter, although he stressed that it might be too soon for a response. Stern said he is hopeful there is still a chance to prevent the closure.