Trial Court Budget Commission Meeting Minutes June 23, 2011

Transcription

1 Trial Court Budget Commission Meeting Minutes Attendance Members Present The Honorable John Laurent, Chair Mr. Mike Bridenback The Honorable Catherine Brunson The Honorable Joseph Farina The Honorable Ronald Ficarrotta The Honorable Charles Francis Mr. Tom Genung Ms. Sandra Lonergan The Honorable Thomas McGrady The Honorable Mark Mahon The Honorable Margaret Steinbeck, Vice Chair The Honorable Wayne Miller The Honorable Debra Nelson The Honorable Gregory Parker The Honorable Robert Roundtree The Honorable Elijah Smiley Mr. Walt Smith The Honorable Patricia Thomas Mr. Mark Weinberg Ms. Robin Wright Attendance Members Absent Ms. Carol Ortman The Honorable Belvin Perry, Jr. Welcome and Approval of Meeting Minutes Judge Laurent called the Trial Court Budget Commission (TCBC) meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. The roll was taken and a quorum was present. Judge Laurent welcomed the members and asked the guests to introduce themselves. Judge Farina introduced 11 th Circuit Chief Judge Joel Brown, the new chair of the Judicial Administration Section, Florida Conference of Circuit Court Judges. Judge Laurent asked if there were any revisions to the April 4, 2011 meeting minutes. A motion was made by Judge Miller to adopt the minutes as drafted. Judge Brunson seconded and the motion was passed without objection. Wrap Up on 2011 Legislative Session Final Conference Report, Implementing and Conforming Bills for FY Charlotte Jerrett reported that a chart of the final Conference Report on SB 2000 with vetoes has been presented at various chief judges calls and legislative team calls and was included in the materials for informational purposes. Also included for informational purposes was a listing and detail of proviso language, back of the bill language, and the items vetoed.

2 Page 2 of 15 Governor s Vetoes Kris Slayden reported on this agenda item and stated that SB 2116 relating to Court Appointed Counsel costs was vetoed. Due to the amount of cases paid over the flat fee increasing greatly, the need exists to address this issue. In FY , the total amount paid over the flat fee was $1,067,590. For FY the amount was $2,742,140 and in FY through June 15 was $4,654,956. The Executive Committee has identified the need to examine this issue before the next legislative session. Ideas, data, and analysis will be needed. Cases will be reviewed and compared with the data that the Justice Administrative Commission presented to legislators. Legislators will need to be educated on the situation. The information will be provided to the Funding Methodology Committee and presented to the Trial Court Budget Commission. Studies Due to Legislature Prior to 2012 Legislative Session Revenue Stabilization Workgroup Kris Slayden reported that SB 2000 included proviso language requiring the Office of the State Courts Administrator to work with the Clerk of Courts Operations Corporation to jointly develop and recommend to the legislature appropriate revenue streams to be directed to the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund and the Clerk of Court Trust Fund to eliminate cash flow problems and to ensure that revenue streams are adequate to support appropriations. Chief Justice Canady appointed a group of judges, including Judges Mahon, Laurent, Farina, and Miller from the TCBC, to work on this project with the clerks of court that have also been appointed. The group will meet in person in July, August, and September. The report will be submitted to the Supreme Court in October and is due to the legislature by November 1, Study on Resolving Civil Disputes Kris Slayden reported that with the assistance of Judge Steinbeck and Rick Callanan, Trial Court Administrator of the 20 th Circuit, data and performance measures were submitted to the legislature, in response to their proposal regarding civil disputes. The legislature has requested a report due January 2, 2012 on how to resolve civil disputes in a timely manner. The Trial Court Performance and Accountability Commission and Workload and Statistics Committee will work on this project and report back to the TCBC for review and approval of the funding component before submitting to the Supreme Court for approval. Status of Current Year Budget Trust Fund Cash Statements Charlotte Jerrett reviewed trust fund cash statements for May.

3 Page 3 of 15 Administrative Trust Fund The ending cash balance for May was $909,271. Mediation Arbitration Trust Fund The ending cash balance for May was $2,571,539. This trust fund will be merged into the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund as of July 1, OSCA staff is currently working on transitional tasks including moving positions. The organization code structure will not change. The merge will allow circuit courts the added flexibility to transfer funds from mediation cost centers. State Courts Revenue Trust Fund The ending cash balance for May was $2,284,188 and will carry forward to June. Ms. Jerrett also reviewed the cash analysis and reported that staff have been monitoring daily. The estimated revenue as of June 22 is under the estimate. Management of operating expenditures will be critical to ensure that payroll obligations are met. OSCA staff are holding invoices to meet these obligations. The estimates do not account for any certified forward expenditures. Judge Laurent reminded the members that Chief Justice Canady directed that only critical expenditures should be paid. He stressed that no one has overspent their budget allocation and the issue is due to cash not coming in. Ms. Jerrett stated that as of Friday, June 24, the FLAIR system will be shut down for year end processing. She also noted to the trial court administrators that certified forward expenditures for FY may be paid with FY cash. After payroll and encumbrance obligations are met, any remaining cash may be used to pay invoices. The members discussed prioritization of expenditures and what should be paid with FY funds. The Executive Committee recommended that after payment of payroll and encumbrance obligations, invoices for due process, Operating Capital Outlay, civil traffic hearing officers, and contractual services be paid with FY funds and pay other invoices with FY funds. Judge Steinbeck made the motion to approve the Executive Committee recommendation. Judge Farina seconded and the motion passed without objection. Judge Laurent stated that payments are dependent upon having available cash. Salary Budgets Dorothy Wilson provided a status of the salary budgets for the trial courts. After application of leave payments and savings for vacancies, the trial courts were under the salary appropriation in the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund by $5.7 million. The Administrative Trust Fund was under appropriation by $7,291, the Mediation and Arbitration Trust Fund was under by $742,601, and the Federal Grants Trust Fund was under by $79,314. The OSCA Budget Office should have the upcoming year s payroll projections completed by August. The office will begin an audit of the payroll registers and apply changes in appropriations for the changes in the contribution rates for the retirement system.

4 Page 4 of 15 Operating Budgets Dorothy Wilson reported on the status of the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund trial court operating budgets as of May 31, She noted that 51% was expended or encumbered in the Expense category, 48% in Operating Capital Outlay, and 53% in Contracted Services, which increased compared with last year s expenditures. Due Process Budgets Ms. Wilson reviewed the due process budgets and reported that 72.25% has been expended and is in line with typical spending compared to the previous year. Additional Compensation to County Judges Dorothy Wilson reported on this item stating that in FY , five circuits have overspent their allotment. Three of these circuits were able to correct the negative balances through internal transfers with other circuits. OSCA is unable to process a budget amendment to correct the negative balances due to statutory limitations. Because we requested new funding for the Additional Compensation to County Court Judges category in the FY Legislative Budget Request and it was not funded by the Legislature, chapter (1)(c), Florida Statutes, prohibits any increase in funding to this category via budget amendment. Additionally, since the expenditures are for payroll, we cannot transfer from other categories. The members were presented with the following two options: 1. Utilize remaining allotment balances from other circuits to cover the deficits and reduce the 8 th and 11 th Circuits FY allotments by the amount given to cover the FY negative balances, and credit the other circuits allotments in the amount used to cover the negative balances. 2. Require repayment from the judges in the 8 th and 11 th Circuits who received compensation in excess of the circuits allotments. Ms. Wilson noted that after the meeting materials were distributed, the 15 th Circuit has transferred funds to the 8 th Circuit to cover their deficit. The Executive Committee approved recommendation of Option 1. Judge Roundtree suggested that circuits continue to collect invoices after funds are depleted to have data available for legislative or other requests. Judge Farina reported that the 11 th Circuit has put processes in place to prevent this issue in the future and he asked Commission for assistance in meeting their deficit. Judge Mahon made a motion to approve Option 1. Judge Brunson seconded and the motion passed without objection.

5 Page 5 of 15 Ms. Wilson reported that procedures were developed by OSCA Office of Personnel Services and Budget Services to ensure that overpayments do not occur in the future. The following procedures will be effective July 1, 2011: 1. Timesheets submitted for payment must include an Available Balance Template certifying sufficient funds. 2. Timesheets must be submitted to OSCA Budget Services for verification of available balance prior to submission to OSCA Personnel Services for payment. 3. Payments will be processed once a month. This will allow time for any discrepancies between hours, costs, and available balance to be reconciled by the circuit prior to payment. Submissions received by the 20 th of each month will be paid on the first supplemental payroll of the following month. State Courts Revenue Trust Fund FY Cash Statements and Forecasts Kris Slayden reported on official revenue estimates for FY by the Revenue Estimating Conference on February 14, The projected total amount of revenue is $431.9, which included revenues from the merger of the Mediation Arbitration Trust Fund, and is an increase of almost $200 million from FY projections. Ms. Slayden reviewed a monthly trend of revenues received since the trust fund was created in OSCA staff has developed high and low revenue estimates for FY which assumes a delay in the upward trend of foreclosures. The high estimates are much as $300 million and the low estimates using last year s trends are almost less than half of the official estimates. Using the official revenue estimate of $432 million, the ending cash balance is projected to be $31.6 million for FY Judge Laurent stated that Ms. Slayden attends all revenue estimating conferences and communicates the difference in estimates. If the actual revenue comes in line with OSCA s projections, we will be in the same situation as last fiscal year. Proposed Process for Accessing the $54M Loan Dorothy Wilson reported that language in SB 2002 provided access to the Chief Justice for a loan of up to $54 million to address cash shortfalls during the first quarter. Using OSCA Court Services Research and Data revenue estimates, a $51 shortfall is expected in the first quarter and $191 for the year. The shortfall decreases to $47 million for the first quarter and $185 million for the year using OSCA Court Services Research and Data revenue estimates, historical expenditure data for the first quarter, estimated salary expenditures with the 3% reduction for retirement, and the FY appropriation amounts for the remaining categories and months.

6 Page 6 of 15 Ms. Wilson stated that the $54 million loan amount will be insufficient to cover necessary expenditures for the entire fiscal year and the State Courts System may need to request an additional loan through the Governor before the start of legislative session in January The members were provided the following options for consideration: 1. Request $51,239,224 based on the appropriation. 2. Request $47,459,832 based on what is actually anticipated to be spent during the first quarter. 3. Request the entire $54,000,000 loan amount authorized in Section 21 of SB The Executive Committee approved recommendation of Option 3. Judge Nelson made a motion to approve Option 3. Judge Roundtree seconded and the motion passed without objection. FY Budget Allotments Maintain Existing Allotments: Expert Witness, Court Reporting, Court Interpreting, Senior Judges, Other Operating Categories Kris Slayden reported on this agenda item and stated that for FY , the trial courts were not appropriated any new resources by the Legislature. The OSCA Office of Budget Services reports that in FY , circuits requested only a few budget transfers which produced only minimal variability from their beginning allotment for the following elements: Expert Witness, Court Reporting, Court Interpreting, Senior Judge Days, Circuit Judges and Judicial Assistants, County Judges and Judicial Assistants, Case Management, Magistrates, Trial Court Administration, Drug Court, Post Conviction Law Clerks, Trial Court Law Clerks, Cost Sharing, and Child Support Enforcement. The Funding Methodology Committee and Executive Committee approved a recommendation to maintain existing allocations for all the circuits contractual authority based on FY allotments for all elements excluding Mediation, Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Officers, Due Process Cost Recovery, and Additional Compensation to County Judges. Judge Roundtree made the motion to approve the recommendation. Judge Brunson seconded and the motion passed without objection. Revise Allotments ADR/Mediation Kris Slayden provided background information for this element stating that a funding ceiling that factors in actual workload and cost of providing services in the funding

7 Page 7 of 15 methodology calculated for FY and FY was approved for use by the TCBC. The ceiling is calculated using a standard cost per mediation session held with modifiers applied for coordination, multi court facilities, and the use of volunteers. Contractual allotment for FY were approved by the TCBC based on annualized FY expenditures, with a 5% cushion applied, as long as the allotment did not cause a circuit to exceed the ceiling calculation. Under the approved allocation methodology for FY , Circuits 1, 6, 14, and 16 each had projected expenditures exceeding the ceiling calculation. The Funding Methodology Committee recommended holding these circuits harmless with instructions that OSCA staff work with the circuits whose expenditures are projected to exceed the ceiling to identify operational changes that may lead to increased cost efficiency and increased compliance with Supreme Court approved standards of operations and best practices. At the June 4, 2010 meeting the TCBC agreed and further recommended that FY be the last year that circuits exceeding the ceiling are held harmless. Since this meeting, OSCA staff has communicated with the four circuits individually, through video and teleconferencing, to identify ways to maximize the services provided and potential cost efficiencies that can be utilized to bring each circuit within their funding ceiling. Ms. Slayden stated that circuit level FY contractual authority allotments need to be determined for mediation/arbitration contractual services. The total statewide contractual authority appropriation is $3,307,332. In addition, a potential issue for consideration of the funding methodology is the use of a minimum funding floor to aid with compliance of the Supreme Court approved standards of operation and best practices for court alternative dispute resolution staffing and functions. Using the approved standard of operation of having a minimum of three staff positions within a circuit, a prospective floor could be based on the total cost of salaries, benefits, and expenses for an Alternative Dispute Resolution Director, a Mediation Services Coordinator, and an Administrative Assistant I position. The total minimum cost for salary, benefits, and expenses for these three positions is $181,401. In addition to a funding floor based on salaries, benefits, and expenses, the floor may need to be adjusted to account for contractual needs. The following options were presented for consideration: Option 1 A. Allot contractual authority based on the funding formula that uses annualized FY expenditures plus a 5% cushion, as long as the allotment does not cause a circuit to exceed the ceiling calculation. Place the $305,387 balance in statewide reserve. B. Allot contractual authority based on the funding formula that uses annualized FY expenditures plus a 5% cushion, as long as the allotment does not cause a circuit to exceed the ceiling calculation. Reduce contractual authority and salaries, benefits, and

8 Page 8 of 15 Option 2 expenses to within the ceiling for those circuits exceeding the funding ceiling. Use of a funding floor may be needed for the 16 th Circuit based on the Supreme Court approved standards of operation and best practices. Allot contractual authority based on the funding formula that uses annualized FY expenditures plus a 5% cushion and: Reduce the amount over the ceiling for the 6 th Circuit by one half; Provide one half of FY estimated contractual expenditures to the 14 th Circuit; and Provide the total FY estimated contractual expenditures to the 16 th Circuit. Place the $241,038 balance in the statewide reserve. The Funding Methodology Committee and the Executive Committee approved recommendation of Option 2 and the funding floor. Judge Francis made a motion to approve Option 2 and the funding floor. Judge Roundtree seconded and the motion passed without objection. Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Officers In FY , the total available contractual appropriation of $1,339,864 was allotted based on each circuit s percent of the total statewide expenditures using expenditures from October 2009 to April In December 2010, the legislature approved a budget amendment that transferred $783,990 additional funding from the Expense Reserve to the Civil Traffic cost center. The allocation of these dollars was based on each circuit s percent of the total statewide expenditures and also held circuits harmless to their FY total allotments. The total allotment for FY was $2,123,854. For FY , the total statewide contractual authority appropriation is $1,339,864. A budget amendment may be filed to temporarily transfer additional funds from Expense to Civil Traffic category. Additionally, the implementation of red light cameras has not increased the FY expenditures as expected. However, this issue may require attention during the FY LBR process, possibly as a supplemental issue. The members considered the following options for allocation: Option 1 Will require a budget amendment of $412,240. The total allotment is $1,752,104. The option allots the contractual authority of $1,339,864 and the budget amendment (pending legislative approval) of $412,240 based on each circuit s percent of the total statewide annualized FY expenditures.

9 Page 9 of 15 Option 2 Will require a budget amendment of $783,990. This option is the same as Option 1 but the total allotment is $2,123,854. The option allots the contractual authority of $1,339,864 and the budget amendment (pending legislative approval) of $798,990 based on each circuit s FY total contractual allotments. Option 3 Will not require a budget amendment. The total allotment is the $1,339,864 in contractual authority and is based on each circuit s percent of the total statewide annualized FY expenditures. The Funding Methodology Committee and the Executive Committee approved recommendation of Option 2. Judge Roundtree made a motion to approve Option 2. Judge Brunson seconded and the motion passed without objection. Additional Compensation to County Court Judges Kris Slayden stated that in FY the legislature appropriated spending authority of $75,000. The TCBC approved the contractual allotment based on each circuit s percent of the total statewide expenditures using three years of historical expenditure data. As of April 30, 2011, a total of $62,822 of the $75,000 appropriated has been expended. Although there is a balance remaining, three circuits have expenditures greater than their allotment and two circuits have only $1 remaining. The following options were presented for consideration: Option 1 Allot contractual authority based on each circuit s percent of the total statewide expenditures using three years of historical expenditure data. Option 2 Allot contractual authority based on each circuit s percent of the total statewide expenditures using only annualized FY expenditure data. The Funding Methodology Committee recommended Option 1. The Executive Committee approved a recommendation of a third option to: Eliminate FY circuit deficits using current year unobligated funds from other circuits. Allot FY contractual authority based on each circuit s percent of the total statewide expenditures using three years of historical expenditure data; minus deficit amounts from circuits that overspent, and distribute back to the other circuits. Judge Mahon made a motion to approve Option 3. Judge Francis seconded and the motion passed without objection. Due Process Cost Recovery Dorothy Wilson presented this agenda item reporting that for FY , there was no change in the allotment as each circuit was projected to have

10 Page 10 of 15 sufficient cash to cover their allotment. As of April 30, 2011, all circuits, except the 2 nd Circuit, continue to project sufficient cash. The 2 nd Circuit is projecting to exceed revenue by $6,434. For FY , analysis indicates that several circuits will not have revenue sufficient to cover current allotment. The following options were presented for consideration: Option 1 Allot the Due Process category appropriation based on each circuit s pro rata share of projected FY revenue collections (based on actual revenue as of April 30, 2011). In those circuits (2 nd, 6 th, and 13 th ) where the pro rata share is greater than projected revenue, allot the difference ($28,349) to Reserve. Option 2 Allot the Due Process category appropriation based on each circuit s pro rata share of FY cumulative revenue (cash carried forward plus FY projected revenue collections based on actual FY revenue as of April 30, 2011). The Funding Methodology Committee approved recommendation of Option 1 and to utilize the reserve budget authority on a first come, first served basis. The Executive Committee approved recommendation of a third option, to allot the Due Process category appropriation based on each circuit s pro rata share of projected FY revenue collections (no Reserve). Judge Brunson made a motion to approve Option 3 recommended by the Executive Committee. Judge Miller seconded and the motion passed without objection. Statewide Allotments Dorothy Wilson reviewed a chart of the proposed statewide allotments for Florida Bar dues, Unemployment Compensation, National Center for State Courts dues, Trial Court Budget Commission, State Court Network lines, and legal services. Judge Roundtree made a motion to approve the allotments as presented. Judge Brunson seconded and the motion was approved without objection. Courthouse Furnishings Dorothy Wilson reported that the FY Legislative Budget Request included a non recurring request for non public courthouse furnishings in the amount of $2,194,669, within the General Revenue Fund ($1,101,159 in the Expense category and $1,093,510 in the Operating Capital Outlay (OCO) category) for the 1 st, 2 nd, 4 th, 5 th, 13 th, 15 th, and 20 th Circuits. In the FY General Appropriations Act, the Legislature approved nonrecurring funding in the amount of $1,492,848 for the 4 th Circuit ($678,213 in the Expense category and $747,619 in the OCO category) and 13 th Circuit ($50,856 in Expenses category and $16,160 in the OCO category). However, the Governor vetoed Line Item 3011 Operating Capital Outlay within the circuit court budget in the amount of $1,050,662. Line Item 3011 also included the circuit courts base OCO of $286,883, which was vetoed. This action leaves no OCO funds in the circuit courts budget.

11 Page 11 of 15 The non recurring expense funding of $729,069 for this issue remains in the budget (4 th Circuit $678,213 and 13 th Circuit $50,856). Drug Court Grant Charlotte Jerrett provided the status of Adult Post Adjudicatory Drug Court Expansion. She reported that the Florida Legislature s Office of Program Policy and Government Accountability (OPPAGA) released a report in October The report explains that counties are not reaching their admission goals in large part because the initial estimates of the potential population were overstated and the strict eligibility criteria by law. During the 2011 legislative session, SB 400 was enacted into law expanding the eligibility criteria for adult post adjudicatory drug court and effective July 1, The expanded eligibility criteria are expected to increase program admissions; however, the level of impact these changes will have on the program for increasing admissions is not yet known. OSCA staff conducted site visits to observe program operations in 2010 and are in the process of conducting follow up visits to each county to conduct grant monitoring reviews. Nearly $5 million has been spent on the program through May The OSCA released an Invitation to Negotiate to develop the statewide drug court case management system. An executed contract is expected in June The case management system will be accessible to all adult drug courts statewide with the ability to expand to other types of drug courts in the future. The system is expected to be implemented in all eight expansion programs by September 30, 2011 and to other adult drug courts in Florida soon thereafter. Renew Non Recurring Allotment 8 th Circuit OpenCourt Fred Buhl, 8 th Circuit Court Technology Officer, provided a status report on the open source digital court reporting software. As of June, OpenCourt meets the state s court reporting standard. The software works well with slow network connections, which is currently not possible. The circuit plans to migrate all of its courtrooms and hearing rooms by October The 8 th Circuit is requesting continued funding in FY for other software needs such as Microsoft updates and hardware updates. Pilot projects have begun in other circuits. Judge Francis asked what would be required from the other circuits. Mr. Buhl responded that the 8 th Circuit would provide the software; however, depending on the number of other circuits that participate, the 8 th Circuit will need additional support. Walt Smith asked if there are savings in other parts of the budget to offset the cost. Mr. Buhl responded that substantial savings would be realized. Mike Bridenback added that the cost to convert to a new vendor is approximately $250,000 to $300,000 and that circuits can carve out funds for support from these savings. Mr. Buhl welcomed circuit visits to meet local needs and stated that all information technology staff in the 8 th Circuit is cross trained in audio and visual. The Funding Methodology Committee approved a recommendation to renew the 8 th Circuit s OpenCourt FY non recurring allotment. For FY , allocate $100,000 in non

12 Page 12 of 15 recurring contractual services from the Due Process Reserve to allow the 8 th Circuit to continue the ongoing development of OpenCourt. Judge Parker made a motion to approve the recommendation. Judge Thomas seconded and the motion passed without objection. FY Budget and Pay Policies Salary Management Schedules Gary Philips reported that legislation passed in 2011 merged the Mediation and Arbitration Trust Fund into the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund effective July 1, The mediation positions will need to be grouped in the Salary Management Schedule. The Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum will not be issued until after payroll projections are ready in August. In the interim, a revised salary management policy is needed. The current Salary Management Schedule as indicated in the August 4, 2010 Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum is as follows: 0 Days Vacant Judicial Assistants, Federal Grants, Mediation/Arbitration, and the Administrative Trust Fund positions 30 Days Vacant General Magistrate and associated support positions 60 Days Vacant Due Process positions 90 Days Vacant All remaining State Courts Revenue Trust Fund positions Mr. Philips presented the following options for consideration: Resume the Salary Management Schedule from FY with the exception of moving Mediation positions into the 90 day category under one of the following scenarios: Option 1 Allow credit for the full number of days positions have been vacant, allowing positions that have been vacant for respective number of days to be filled immediately. Lapse generated: $159,736. Option 2 Start counting vacant days as of June 1. Lapse generated: $343,468. Option 3 Start counting vacant days as of July 1. Lapse generated: $1,135,530. The Executive Committee approved recommendation of Option 1 with a caveat that Mediation positions be placed in the 60 day category. Judge Farina made a motion to approve the recommendation. Judge Brunson seconded and the motion passed without objection.

13 Page 13 of 15 Recommendations for Modification to the Chief Justice s Annual Budget and Pay Memorandum Charlotte Jerrett reviewed the proposed changes to the Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum. Other than technical changes, the following revision is proposed: Travel Delegates Chief Justice s authority to chief judges to approve activities that are critical to each court s mission. In accordance with SB 2002, funds may not be used to pay for travel by state employees to conferences or staff training activities unless the agency head (chief judge) has approved in writing that such activities are critical to the courts mission. Education and training activities must be directly related to employees current job duties and have primary benefit to the State. The Executive Committee believed that the language was too broad and would ask the Judicial Administration Section of the Florida Conference of Circuit Court Judges to determine the definition of critical and to suggest more specific guidelines to consistently administer statewide. Judge Roundtree made a motion to approve the travel revision and request for assistance from the Conference. Judge Miller seconded and the motion passed without objection. The remaining technical revisions were reviewed. Judge Miller made a motion to approve the Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum as presented. Judge Brunson seconded and the motion passed without objection. FY Legislative Budget Request Legislative Timeline for 2012 Legislative Session Charlotte Jerrett reviewed the 2012 Legislative Session timeline. Judge Laurent added that the 2012 session will include reapportionment. LBR Timeline Ms. Jerrett reviewed the Legislative Budget Request Timeline for the trial courts. Strategies for FY LBR Judge Laurent requested that members submit ideas of funding alternatives that would increase court efficiencies. Funding may be received if savings can be demonstrated. Kris Slayden reported on this agenda item stating that for the FY Legislative Budget Request (LBR) the TCBC decided to streamline the LBR process and use the official statewide

14 Page 14 of 15 funding methodologies for recurring issues and to include approved requests for non recurring issues. The TCBC were presented with the following three options using the streamlined approach: Option 1 Use the official funding methodologies to address additional needs in all elements. Option 2 Use the official funding methodologies to address additional needs in select elements. Option 3 Do not file LBR. The Funding Methodology Committee and the Executive Committee approved Option 2 and recommended that Law Clerks, General Magistrates, and Case Managers as elements that could be funded to increase efficiencies. Judge Miller made a motion to approve Option 2 and the recommended elements. Judge Steinbeck seconded and the motion passed without objection. The following options were presented for non recurring costs for equipment, maintenance, and courthouse furnishings: Option 1 Circuits may submit requests for non recurring costs similar to the traditional LBR process. Option 2 Do not file an LBR. The Funding Methodology Committee and the Executive Committee recommended Option 1. Judge Steinbeck made a motion to approve Option 1. Judge Mahon seconded and the motion passed without objection. Mike Bridenback made a motion to submit an issue to re establish the Operating Capital Outlay base budget appropriation that was vetoed by the Governor. Judge Francis seconded and the motion passed without objection. Kris Slayden reported that in December 2010, the TCBC approved a new cost sharing methodology and approved filing a supplemental LBR for FY in the amount of $2,097,578. The Commission also recommended that the total cost sharing funding be part of the court s budget. During the 2011 legislative session, consensus on approving the new methodology could not be reached among the parties and the legislative issue did not move forward.

15 Page 15 of 15 Ms. Slayden stated that TCBC decisions were needed for filing a cost sharing issue: Decision 1 Whether or not to file a LBR for FY for the additional cost sharing budget. The $2,097,578 amount from last year s LBR will be updated with more recent data. Decision 2 Whether to request the additional funds for FY in the same manner as last year. The Funding Methodology Committee and Executive Committee recommended filing a LBR for FY for the additional cost sharing budget based on the understanding the $2,097,578 amount from last year s LBR will be updated with more recent data and to request the additional funds in the same manner as last year. The members approved the recommendation without any objections. Ms. Slayden reported that a status update on the Trial Court Performance and Accountability Commission s request to amend existing Supreme Court policy pertaining to producing copies of recordings was included in the meeting materials for informational purposes. Judge Laurent stated that also included in the materials for informational purposes was a memorandum from the Governor to agencies regarding guidelines for the Legislative Budget Request. Adjournment With no other business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m.