Connecticut Law Tribune: A New Probate Era

Connecticut Law Tribune: A New Probate Era

A New Probate EraConnecticut Law TribuneMonday, May 18, 2009

A New Probate Era Legislature poised to pass reform bill that would eliminate 67 courts

By DOUGLAS S. MALAN
Long-debated change to the probate court system seems a done deal and 67 probate judges are likely to receive word soon that their posts have been eliminated.

Reform legislation that would trim the number of Connecticut probate courts from 117 to 50 passed overwhelmingly in the state House of Representatives last week, and the Senate is expected to take up – and approve -- the measure as early as Tuesday, May 26. Gov. M. Jodi Rell has said she would sign the bill into law.

The legislation will have a direct impact on dozens of small-town courts throughout the state. Many judges in those towns support the reform as something that is necessary to preserve a 300-year-old system that’s on the verge of insolvency, even though the legislation likely means the end of their judgeships.

Others in small towns, however, are upset because they believe the reform means the end of personalized probate service for residents. They also contend that the smaller towns had little say in the process.
“I think the deck was stacked against us,” said Ralph Eno, Lyme’s first selectman who expects his town to lose its court. “The guys who wanted to consolidate to a 50-court system just bulldozed us.”

Supporters of the bill said the courts will be modernized and more user-friendly with the changes. A 10-member bipartisan group of legislators, probate court representatives and members of Rell’s office were responsible for the drafting the proposal.
“I’m pleased” with the legislation, said Paul J. Knierim, the state’s probate court administrator and probate judge in Simsbury. “This is bittersweet to us as a system, but it results in a long-term position of strength. I can’t help but feel regret that we’ll lose good judges who have served the system well for many years.”

Court fees are supposed to cover the operating costs, but rising costs of health care benefits for judges and staff members have led to projections that the system will go broke by next year. Legislative leaders have told Knierim that $12.4 million will be included in the new state budget to make ends meet until the ranks of judges are thinned in time for the 2010 elections.
The legislature’s Office of Fiscal Analysis expects that the revamped system will save $4.4 million to $5.1 million in fiscal year 2011, and $8.8 million to $10.2 million annually thereafter.

The legislation calls for a 12-member commission to determine the boundaries of the new probate districts. Once those recommendations are made, they will be sent to the General Assembly. It would be up to Rell to appoint the commission members.
Under the legislation, the court system’s finances will be centralized in the administrator’s office, and all courts will be required to be open 40 hours a week.

The target population for each probate district is 40,000, but “there are exceptions allowed based on facilities to house the court and geographic accessibility,” Knierim said.

Probate Magistrates
Some of the probate judges losing their jobs could find themselves working in the system as magistrates. They would be available to fill as needed on probate dockets that are too heavy for one judge to handle.
Probate magistrates would hear cases referred to them by probate judges and then would file reports with the judge, who would schedule a hearing to accept or modify the magistrate’s report. An as-yet-undetermined number of magistrates would be appointed by Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers.

“The idea was that the pool of judges would include those who lost their jobs in the redistricting, but it could include any former probate judge as long as they’re not 70 years old,” the age at which judges are required to retire, Knierim said.
Starting with the November 2010 elections, the reform legislation requires all new judges to be attorneys. Those non-attorneys holding judgeships will be grandfathered in and allowed to remain in their positions.

“The lawyer-judges requirement is long overdue,” said Norman Rogers Jr., an attorney and probate judge in New Hartford. “We have so many contested wills and conservatorships and children’s matters that require training and experience.

“I have been one of those supporting systemic reform,” Norman Rogers added. “I think this is a good compromise. It’s going to be difficult with people losing their jobs. My court, I’m sure, will be one of them merged in.”

Diminished Service?

Woodstock probate judge Nancy Gale is retiring in September when she turns 70, but she fears the revamped system will place burdens on elderly people who will have to travel out of town to do business in probate court. She said that’s no easy task in rural Windham County and other places where transportation options are limited.

“They’re throwing out the baby with the bathwater,” Gale said. “We certainly need to be tweaked, but this is too much.”
She said the personalized service that first-time court users rely on to navigate the probate process “is going to be gone with the industrial-size probate courts they’re going to have.”

Brookfield probate judge Joseph Secola said his biggest concern is that “towns haven’t had a seat at the table. They’ve had no say-so in any of this.”

Secola said proposals such as towns picking up some health care costs, increasing court fees for the first time in 10 years and judges taking reduced salaries were largely ignored in favor of consolidation.

Knierim said that is “absolutely not” a fair characterization. “The participation in the legislative process this year was broad and very open to a whole variety of interested parties,” Knierim said.

Knierim said he foresees no need for new facilities to house the redistricted probate courts, though there could be some costs associated with adjusting existing spaces to support larger court operations. Those spaces “to the maximum extent possible” will be in city and town halls, Knierim added.

“We’re not talking about mega-courts here,” he noted. “The aim of everyone is to maintain the close connection we have with cities and towns.”•