New report on high court spending another reason to end autonomy for judicial budget

It adds up to a simple case of easy come, easy go … of taxpayer dollars.
Last weekend, a legislative subcommittee heard a report that takes the concept of acquiring a lot of money with little effort and spending it with even less to new heights.
At least that is for our state government, specifically, our court system.
Briefly, from 2007-’12, the state Supreme Court, which oversees the budget for West Virginia’s judicial system, accumulated a $29 million surplus. But somehow by the end of 2015, that surplus had shrunk to $333, 514.
Almost as incredibly, the court is set to finish the current fiscal year — which ends Saturday — with about $19 million in surplus.
A representative from the legislative auditor’s office noted the Legislature appropriated more funds than the court needed every year since fiscal year 1997.
Obviously, every institution of government is well advised, and most are required, to maintain reserve funds.
However, when bountiful reserves are built up at the expense of taxpayers far above what’s needed, that’s unfair.
Not to mention that it also only leads taxpayers to rightfully question why they should pay their “fair” share if it’s only to provide “rainy (slush?) day funds.”
But far more disturbing about this roller-coaster of budget surpluses and spending is it happened at a time when the Legislature began zeroing in on the court’s spending.
A November 2016 memo that surfaced at the subcommittee meeting, from a former court administrator, cited an effort to spend the surplus down to nearly zero to mitigate the Legislature’s response.
Apparently it worked, because legislative efforts to oversee the court system’s budget through a resolution in 2016 were deferred.
However, in March, lawmakers unanimously passed a resolution to put a referendum before voters Nov. 6 to strip the court system of its budgetary authority.
This amendment prohibits lawmakers from reducing the court’s budget to an amount less than 85 percent of the most recently enacted one.
Unless, on a separate vote of two-thirds of both chambers, it decides to cut even deeper.
It’s apparent in light of lavish spending by this court, misuse of state vehicles and federal indictments that this amendment is overdue.
Allowing any branch of government this kind of autonomy over its budget only invites such abuses and possible crimes.
Some of that spend-down can be attributed to raises, spending on new drug courts and other valid appropriations.
Still, when reports of $32,000 couches, using state vehicles to commute to work and impeachment proceedings come along, no one should get off easy.