Facing a multi-million-dollar budget shortfall, the Los Angeles County Superior Court is offering eligible full-time employees a one-time $35,000 buyout to voluntarily resign by Christmas Eve.
The buyout program for the nation’s largest trial court, which serves a population of nearly 10 million with 36 courthouses, requires at least five years of continuous service.
Rob Oftring, the court’s chief communications and external affairs officer, said the program is broadly offered to current full-time, regular status employees. But he added the offer does not apply to positions such as court reporters, family court mediators, interpreters, probate investigators and law clerks.
Employees who accept the payout will be barred from rehire for one year, and their positions will be permanently eliminated to achieve long-term savings.
Detailing the timeline, Oftring explained that the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program application period runs through Oct. 12, with potential court approval of applications occurring by Oct. 21. If approved, employees have a 45-calendar-day window to review the agreement – expected to conclude by Dec. 7 -followed by a seven-day rescission period from the day they submit their agreement.
“Because of this timeline, we wouldn’t be able to provide any figures until after Dec. 14,” Oftring told The Center Square via email about the costs and return on investments.
When the same program was launched in 2024, it resulted in approximately $4 million in ongoing budget savings, Oftring said.
Pension savings for approved individuals cannot be finalized until the participant list is set, as marginal retirement savings depend on each employee’s retirement plan, salary and other factors, according to Oftring.
Presiding Judge Sergio C. Tapia II and Executive Officer David W. Slayton cited escalating operational costs that have far outpaced budget resources.
“Just as Los Angeles County residents are struggling to keep pace with rising gas and grocery prices, the Court finds itself in a similar bind – our operational costs continue to outpace our budget resources,” said Tapia II in a joint press release.
Slayton added that parting ways with “dedicated and talented staff” is never something the court takes lightly.
“But with our funding continuing to fall short of what it takes to sustain critical court operations, we are hopeful that enough employees will choose to voluntarily separate, providing critical savings and helping us protect the workforce as we move into the next fiscal year,” said Slayton in the joint press release.
Addressing the broader fiscal picture, Oftring pointed out the annual funding provided by the state has not kept up with inflation.
Projected costs for the current fiscal year exceed state funding by approximately $9.1 million. Since Fiscal Year 2020-21, inflationary funding for the court has fallen short of the state Department of Finance’s calculated inflationary need by 13.1% cumulatively, or roughly $88 million.
Under the current state budget, the Los Angeles County Superior Court’s funding stands at 76.77% of calculated need – the lowest level since 2021 and the largest raw shortfall since at least 2013 – part of a broader overall funding shortfall reaching $233.7 million, according to Oftring.
Oftring emphasized that the court is underfunded by $233.7 million relative to the resources needed to process the 1.3 million filings it receives annually, as calculated by the Judicial Council of California. This gap represents funding the court could otherwise use to hire roughly 1,900 staff to process filings and serve the public in a timely manner.
Court officials have warned the public that the workforce reduction will likely degrade service levels, resulting in longer waits at service windows, slower call center responses and delays in processing legal documents.
However, fiscal policy experts say court administrators should take a much more surgical approach to where those reductions land.
Steve Smith, senior fellow for urban studies at Pasadena-based Pacific Research Institute, said that while reducing government costs is necessary, the court’s leadership should look more closely at its administrative overhead before targeting frontline services.
Pointing to the California Judicial Council’s most recent Court Statistics Report, Smith said Los Angeles County Superior Court budgets allocate roughly $195 million for administrative personnel – accounting for about 21% of total personnel costs. By comparison, Smith said neighboring Riverside County allocates roughly 14% to administration, while San Bernardino County sits at about 10%.”Cuts should be surgical and aimed at improving efficiency,” Smith told The Center Square. “Courtroom clerks, case-processing personnel, court reporters, interpreters, and other frontline employees who keep cases moving should be among the last positions cut.”The operational strain is already showing. Statistics indicate that the percentage of Los Angeles felony cases disposed of within 12 months has dropped from 89% to 74% in a single year. Smith also questions the return on investment from years of technological modernization. For example, Los Angeles has poured substantial resources into e-filing, automated notifications, remote proceedings, modern case-management systems and artificial intelligence-assisted customer service.”Court administrators should explain why years of technological modernization have not produced greater administrative savings,” Smith said.At the same time, the court system faces unique pressures from high litigation rates. Los Angeles County recorded 31.76 civil filings per 1,000 residents, outpacing three neighboring counties – San Bernardino (30.30), Riverside (26.16) and Orange (23.56).Smith pointed to broader structural pressures, including the state’s legal climate and an estimated $1,300 per capita “tort tax” identified by PRI economist Wayne Winegarden.Policy analysts acknowledge that the court’s $30 million-plus structural deficit can’t be solved through administrative cuts alone. But they also maintain that streamlined bureaucracy and realized technological dividends should be the starting point – all while protecting the frontline workers tasked with administering justice.While 80% of the court’s budget expenditures cover salaries and employee benefits, court leadership emphasizes that it continues to examine operations critically for efficiency opportunities amid ongoing funding shortfalls. Officials say they remain committed to identifying every reasonable cost-saving measure available before considering more severe actions such as layoffs or furloughs.
