ALTHOUGH A MAYOR HAS NO STATUTORY AUTHORITY OVER COURT OPERATIONS, THERE ARE TIMES WHEN, FOR OPERATIONAL, POLITICAL, AND EVEN MORAL REASONS, THE MAYOR MUST TRY TO DIRECT THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, AND NOT JUST THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE ONLY PART OF THE SYSTEM UNDER THE MAYOR'S DIRECT COMMAND IN MOST JURISDICTIONS. DESPITE VARIOUS HANDICAPS, CITY OFFICIALS AND EXPERTS AGREE THAT A WELL-INFORMED AND DILIGENT MAYOR CAN HAVE CONSIDERABLE INFLUENCE ON HOW THE COURTS AND PROSECUTORS IN A GIVEN LOCAL JURISDICTION HANDLE THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES. SOME STRATEGIES THAT CAN BE USED BY MAYORS TO INFLUENCE COURTS ARE AS FOLLOWS: (1) FUNDS CONTRIBUTED TO THE COURTS BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN BE USED TO ENCOURAGE REFORM; (2) IN RELATIVELY FEW JURISDICTIONS, THE MAYOR CAN APPOINT JUDGES; (3) THE MAYOR HAS THE POWER TO SEEK LEAA CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING FUNDS, WHICH REQUIRES COOPERATIVE INTERACTION WITH LOCAL COURTS AND PROSECUTORS; (4) IN A NUMBER OF LARGE CITIES, MAYORS HAVE OBTAINED FUNDS FROM A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT SOURCES TO DEVELOP CENTRALIZED SYSTEMS THAT PERMIT THE COLLECTION OF STATISTICS FROM WHICH THE PERFORMANCE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, PROSECUTORS, AND JUDGES CAN BE MEASURED; (5) POLICE PLANNING UNITS CAN MAKE STUDIES OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN HANDLING SPECIFIC CRIME PROBLEMS; (6) CITIZEN GROUPS AND LOCALLY FINANCED CRIME COMMISSIONS CAN INFLUENCE COURTS; AND (7) INFORMATION GAINED ABOUT THE COURT SYSTEM CAN BE USED BY THE MAYOR TO GREAT EFFECT IN PRIVATE NEGOTIATIONS WITH COURT PERSONNEL. IN DIRECTING EFFORTS TOWARD COURT REFORM A MAYOR MIGHT USE HIS INFLUENCE IN TWO BROAD STRATEGIES: (1) CHANGE THE STRUCTURE OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM BY GREATER UNIFICATION OR INTEGRATION; OR (2) REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CASES COMING INTO THE COURTS THROUGH DECRIMINALIZATION, DIVERSION, AND THE USE OF MEDIATION, ARBITRATION, AND CONCILIATION THROUGH INFORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES. EACH OF THESE ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES IS DISCUSSED. (RCB)