Report Urges Scrapping 4 Planned Courthouses for Lack of Funds

Faced with dwindling revenue and escalating costs for new courthouse construction, Los Angeles County officials are recommending the completion of only two of eight projects that already have cost millions of dollars.

The recommendations released late Wednesday by Chief Administrative Officer Sally R. Reed touched off protest from officials who have lobbied for an $80-million courthouse in the Antelope Valley city of Lancaster and from residents of Chatsworth, who have sued the county to block construction of a $51.5-million facility there.

The projects recommended for completion are the facility near Chatsworth and one near Los Angeles International Airport.

In a 16-page report, Reed recommends that the Board of Supervisors indefinitely postpone construction of the six proposed courthouses, which already have cost the county $16 million for land acquisition, design and other expenses. Besides Lancaster, the facilities were to be located in Pasadena, West Los Angeles, the South Bay, Santa Monica and North Hollywood.

As a stop-gap measure, Reed recommends that the county lease space for traffic cases and other non-criminal matters to free up courtrooms in the Antelope Valley, South Bay and Santa Monica until there are sufficient funds to build new courthouses.

Courthouse construction funds come from a portion of general court fines, court-imposed traffic school fees and parking citations. After increasing during the late 1980s, annual revenue for courthouse construction has been dropping steadily since 1989. Annual revenue fell from $25 million that year to $16.5 million in the last fiscal year, according to the report.

The county will face deficits of up to $312 million over a nine-year period if it continues with plans to build all 10 courthouses, the report states.

The issue is scheduled to come before the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.

The projects in Chatsworth and near LAX should go forward, Reed said, because the county has sunk about $40.2 million in those facilities, compared to about $5.8 million in the Lancaster project.