In a stern and fervent address to the Portsmouth City Council, Judge Steven Mowery, presiding over the Portsmouth Municipal Court, raised serious concerns regarding the council’s proposal to reduce the number of courtrooms in the new city building.
The Judge, opening his discourse, immediately sought an extension beyond the usual five-minute time limit, emphasizing the gravity of the matter at hand. He expressed bewilderment at the notion of eliminating one of the courtrooms to save costs, questioning the council’s rationale.
According to Judge Mowery, just as members of the council are duly elected, so are judges. Thus, eliminating a judgeship, or their ability to conduct court proceedings, is beyond the council’s jurisdiction.
Addressing the misconception that two courtrooms were unnecessary, the Judge clarified that the two judgeships at the Portsmouth Municipal Court were statutory creations, mandated by the Ohio legislature to fulfill the court’s duties. He emphasized that eliminating a judgeship was not feasible.
The Judge refuted the idea of having a single courtroom, citing the alternating schedules for different court functions. He challenged the council’s understanding of the court’s workload, highlighting that case numbers, though reduced from previous years, still warranted the presence of two courts.
Judge Mowery questioned the assertion that a city of 18,000 people did not need two courts, reminding the council that the court served the entire county, with a population of 75,000. He argued that even if the council were to eliminate a courtroom, it would not result in staff reductions in crucial court departments.
In a blunt proposition, Judge Mowery declared “You want to save money? Eliminate building a city council chambers. You meet twice a month.”
The judge ended his summation with this strongly worded declaration. “Did you touch a nerve? You’re dadgum right you did. Eliminating a court or judgeship can not be done. I’m hopeful that no one will pick a fight on that issue. If they do, I’ll see you again. I want to work with you, not against you.”
You may wish to listen to the judge’s statement. The following is the entirety of his address.
