CCOC Budget Committee Agenda Date: March 17, 2015 Time: See Times Below Location: Aloft Tallahassee Downtown Meeting Room: Tactic 3

CCOC Budget Committee Agenda Date: March 17, 2015 Time: See Times Below Location: Aloft Tallahassee Downtown Meeting Room: Tactic 3 Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Esq. Palm Beach County Chair Honorable Bob Inzer Leon County Vice Chair Honorable Ken Burke, CPA Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Neil Kelly Lake County Honorable John Crawford Nassau County Honorable Harvey Ruvin Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Honorable Stacy Butterfield, CPA Polk County Clerk Supreme Court Honorable Ron Ficarrotta 13 th Judicial Circuit Judge Senate Honorable Kyle Hudson Holmes County House Honorable Paula S. O Neil Ph.D Pasco County Joe Boyd, Esq. General Counsel John Dew Executive Director 2560-102 Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Phone: 850.386.2223 Fax: 850.386.2224 Page 1 Budget Committee Workshop: Beginning March 17, 2015 at 9:00 AM (ET) (The workshop is open to all interested in attending. Call in capability will not be available.) 1) Call to Order and Introduction... Stacy Butterfield 2) Review Summary of February 2 Meeting and Update on Action Items... Greg Cowan 3) Updates Regarding Ongoing Activities and Issues a. Update on Legislative Issues... Karen Rushing b. Update on Trust Fund Status, Revenue Issues and Distributions... John Dew c. Update on PIE Committee and Financial Analysis and Enhancement Workgroup Issues... Tara Green d. Update on Technology Funding Workgroup Issues... Linda Doggett e. Update on TCBC Activities... John Dew 4) CFY 2014-15 Issues a. Update on Budget and Expenditure Trends... Greg Cowan b. Update on Foreclosure Expenditures... Greg Cowan c. Discuss any Additional Issues... Stacy Butterfield 5) CFY 2015-16 Issues a. Update on Policies and Procedures Regarding 10 Percent Issue for Use in Budget Considerations... Stacy Butterfield b. Update on Budget Forms, Instructions, and PABS... Greg Cowan c. Develop Other Draft Policies and Procedures for Use in the Budget Considerations... Stacy Butterfield d. Discuss any Additional Issues... Stacy Butterfield 6) CFY 2016-17 Issues a. Update on Revised EC Report Form... Greg Cowan 7) Other Business... Stacy Butterfield Lunch - On Your Own Committee Members: Stacy Butterfield, Chair; Bob Inzer, Vice-Chair; Sharon Bock; Dwight Brock; Ken Burke; Pam Childers; Kellie Connell; John Crawford; Kyle Hudson; JD Peacock, Jeffery Smith; Brent Thurmond; Carolyn Timmann; and Angela Vick. CCOC Mission Statement: As a governmental organization created by the Legislature, we evaluate Clerks courtrelated budgetary needs, and recommend the fair and equitable allocation of resources needed to sustain court operations.

Page 2: Budget Committee Agenda - March 17, 2015 Budget Committee Meeting: Beginning March 17, 2015 at 2:00 PM (ET) (The meeting time is subject to change. Please visit the CCOC website (www.flccoc.org) for the latest information. The meeting is open to all interested in attending. Call in capability will be available for full participation. Call in: 1-800-977-8002 and conference code: 407639#) 1) Call to Order and Introduction... Stacy Butterfield 2) Review Summary of February 2 Meeting and Update on Action Items... Greg Cowan 3) Updates Regarding Ongoing Activities and Issues... Stacy Butterfield 4) CFY 2014-15 Issues... Stacy Butterfield 5) CFY 2015-16 Issues... Stacy Butterfield 6) CFY 2016-17 Issues... Greg Cowan 7) Other Business... Stacy Butterfield Page 2

DRAFT Memorandum Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Esq. Palm Beach County Chair To: CCOC Budget Committee Honorable Bob Inzer Leon County Vice Chair Honorable Ken Burke, CPA Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Neil Kelly Lake County Honorable John Crawford Nassau County Honorable Harvey Ruvin Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Honorable Stacy Butterfield, CPA Polk County Clerk Supreme Court Honorable Ron Ficarrotta 13 th Judicial Circuit Judge Senate Honorable Kyle Hudson Holmes County House Honorable Paula S. O Neil Ph.D Pasco County Joe Boyd, Esq. General Counsel John Dew Executive Director 2560-102 Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Phone: 850.386.2223 Fax: 850.386.2224 From: CCOC Staff Date: February 5, 2015 Re: Summary of February 2, 2015 Budget Committee Meeting The Budget Committee of the Clerks of Court Operations Corporation (CCOC) held a meeting on February 2, 2015. An agenda and materials were distributed in advance of the meeting and posted on the CCOC website. Provided below is a summary of staff notes from the meeting. These staff notes are designed simply to document committee action not to be a full record of committee discussions. All motions adopted by the committee are in bold text. All action items based on committee direction are in red and bold text. 1) Call to Order and Introduction The meeting was called to order at approximately 2:10 PM ET. Mr. Burke raised the issue of the summary notes and made a motion for staff to: Include members in attendance in the notes; Bold all action items and motions included in the notes; Review the notes at the beginning of each future Budget Committee meeting; and Provide a report/update on the status of all action items and motions. Mr. Inzer seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: CCOC staff need to follow-up on the direction provided regarding the summary notes and the future reports/updates to the committee.) Following-up on the initial bullet in the above list, members in attendance at the February 2 meeting were: Stacy Butterfield, Chair; Bob Inzer, Vice-Chair; Dwight Brock; Ken Burke; Kellie Connell; John Crawford; Kyle Hudson; JD Peacock, Jeffery Smith; Brent Thurmond; and Carolyn Timmann. Page 3 CCOC Mission Statement: As a governmental organization created by the Legislature, we evaluate Clerks courtrelated budgetary needs, and recommend the fair and equitable allocation of resources needed to sustain court operations.

Page 2: Summary of February 2, 2015 Budget Committee Meeting 2) Update on Trust Fund Status, Revenue Issues, and Distributions John Dew was recognized and provided the committee with an update. No committee action was required or taken. 3) Update on PIE Committee and Financial Analysis and Enhancement Workgroup Issues Ms. Green and Doug Isabelle were recognized to provide an update. Mr. Burke asked about the two committee motions approved at the January 8 Budget Committee meeting. Below is a status update on these two issues. The first motion was a referral to the PIE Committee and/or the Financial Analysis and Enhancement Workgroup requesting information on post judgment workload activities on foreclosure cases. Ms. Green and Doug Isabelle provided a handout to committee members regarding this issue. Based on the discussions, both Mr. Burke and Ms. Rushing advised the information provided met the request as per the motion. The second motion was a referral to the PIE Committee and/or the Financial Analysis and Enhancement Workgroup requesting a survey of clerks regarding court activities with workload implication beyond the current workload measure of new cases. Examples of such workload activities mentioned during the workshop/meeting include possible increases in dispositions, continuances, specialty court activities, etc. Ms. Green and Doug Isabelle advised they still need to follow-up on this motion. (Action Item: The PIE Committee and/or the Financial Analysis and Enhancement Workgroup need to follow-up on this January 8 motion.) 4) Discuss Title IV-D Issues Mr. Inzer was recognized and provided an overview of the issue. Based on the discussion, Mr. Burke made a motion for the issue to be referred by CCOC staff to FCCC staff to be included as a webinar training session. Mr. Burke s motion included a specification that the development of the webinar should include input from the CCOC. Mr. Brock seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: CCOC staff will refer the issue to FCCC staff and provide input into the development of the webinar training.) 5) CFY 2014-15 Issues a. Consider Wakulla Unallocated Budget Authority Request Greg Cowan was recognized and provided an overview of the materials included in the packet. Mr. Thurmond provided an overview of his request and advised it was a one-time funding need. The committee reviewed the request in light of the criteria included in the approved policies and procedures. Mr. Brock made a motion to recommend to the Executive Council the approval of the $16,130.97 request. Mr. Hudson seconded the motion. The motion passed with one no vote. (Action Item: Ms. Butterfield will refer the committee recommendation to the Executive Council. Note: The request was mentioned at the February 3 council meeting but was withdrawn based on Mr. Thurmond s request.) Page 4

Page 3: Summary of February 2, 2015 Budget Committee Meeting b. Update on Foreclosure Expenditures Greg Cowan was recognized to provide an update on the foreclosure expenditures. No committee action was necessary. c. Discuss any Additional Issues 6) CFY 2015-16 Issues There were no other CFY 2015-16 issues for discussion. a. Review Draft Policies and Procedures Regarding 10 Percent Issue for Use in Budget Considerations i. Consider Potential Methodological Impacts Greg Cowan was recognized and provided an overview of the recommended policy statement. The committee discussion led to a review of the recommended six variables included under agenda item 6ai. Based on the discussion of the six variables, Mr. Brock made a motion to approve the inclusion of the six variables in the CFY 2015-16 budget form. The motion also included the delegation of authority to CCOC staff to address any technical issues associated with the implementation of these six variables. The motion was seconded by Mr. Smith. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: CCOC staff will incorporate these variables into the CFY 2015-16 budget forms and address any technical issues.) The committee then considered the policy statement included in the materials. The policy statement reads: For the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberation, the Budget Committee will consider in further detail the 10 percent revenues collected pursuant to section 28.37(5), Florida Statutes, as part of revenue from all sources. The specific methodology for the review of these revenues is still under development by the Budget Committee. Mr. Brock made a motion to approve the policy statement and recommend it to the Executive Council. Mr. Peacock seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: Ms. Butterfield will refer the committee recommendation to the council. Note: The council approved the policy statement at their February 3 meeting.) ii. Consider Business Rules\Instructions The committee then turned to the discussion of the business rules\instructions listed under agenda item 6aii. Mr. Inzer made two motions. His first motion was to collect additional information regarding the above approved ten percent Page 5

Page 4: Summary of February 2, 2015 Budget Committee Meeting variable associated with dollars dedicated at a detailed level. This additional information should include: A definition of the projects/programs to be funded; When the dollars are planned to be expended; and The amount of dollars to be expended. Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Mr. Burke stressed staff should develop a detailed and complex example to help illustrate for clerks and clerk staff how to report this data/information. There was also discussion between staff on how to capture the additional information. The committee directed staff to work with Mr. Inzer on these issues, and local clerk staff input should also be incorporated. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: Working with Mr. Inzer, CCOC and local clerk staff will need to develop a recommendation for how to capture the additional information. Additionally, working with Mr. Inzer, CCOC and local clerk staff will need to develop a detailed and complex example to help illustrate how to report this data/information.) Mr. Inzer s second motion was direction to CCOC staff to work with local clerk staff on the business rules and instructions and provide recommendations to the committee at their March 17 workshop/meeting. The motion was seconded. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: CCOC staff will work with local clerk staff on developing the business rules and instructions for collecting this 10 percent data/information and will report back to the committee at the March 17 workshop/meeting.) iii. Consider Revised Budget Forms Mr. Inzer made a motion to approve the CFY 2015-16 budget forms as presented in the materials. The motion included the delegation of authority to CCOC staff to address any technical issues associated with the implementation of the budget forms. Ms. Connell seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: CCOC staff will work with contract staff on finalizing the budget forms and updating the Performance and Budget System (PABS) for use in the CFY 2015-16 budget cycle.) b. Develop Other Draft Policies and Procedures for Use in the Budget Considerations Ms. Butterfield provided an overview of the issue. Mr. Brock made a motion directing CCOC staff to work with local clerk staff on developing draft budget instructions and present those draft instructions to the committee at the March 17 workshop/meeting. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: CCOC staff will work with local clerk staff on developing the business rules and instructions and will report back to the committee at the March 17 workshop/meeting.) Page 6

Page 5: Summary of February 2, 2015 Budget Committee Meeting Additionally, the committee will further discuss the policies and procedures for use in the budget considerations during the March 17 workshop/meeting. (Action Item: CCOC staff will include this issue on the March 17 agenda.) c. Discuss any Additional Issues 7) CFY 2016-17 Issues There were no other CFY 2015-16 issues for discussion. Doug Isabelle presented the revised EC report form developed under the guidance of the PIE Committee. Mr. Inzer made a motion for the form to be further vetted. Mr. Brock seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (Action Item: CCOC staff will further vet the revised EC report form.) 8) Other business Having no other business, the committee adjourned at approximately 6:00 PM (ET). Page 7

Memorandum Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Esq. Palm Beach County Chair Honorable Bob Inzer Leon County Vice Chair Honorable Ken Burke, CPA Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Neil Kelly Lake County Honorable John Crawford Nassau County Honorable Harvey Ruvin Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Honorable Stacy Butterfield, CPA Polk County Clerk Supreme Court Honorable Ron Ficarrotta 13 th Judicial Circuit Judge Senate Honorable Kyle Hudson Holmes County Date: February 18, 2015 To: From: Subject: Honorable Joe Smith, President, Florida Court Clerks and Comptrollers Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Chair, Clerks of Court Operations Corporation Title IV-D Training At the February 2, 2015 meeting of the CCOC Budget Committee, Clerk Inzer advised of a potential issue with the processing of Title IV-D reimbursements/expenditures which may be negatively impacting the Clerk s Trust Fund. For example, a recent audit in Lee County identified $2M which was due to the Clerk s Trust Fund as a result of a Title IV-D issue. While this issue has been resolved in Lee County, it may exist in other counties as well. To address this concern, the CCOC Budget Committee recommended training be provided to all Clerks via a FCCC developed webinar. Per the committee s direction, John Dew will be contacting Ken Kent to discuss the development of this training. As always, CCOC staff will be available to assist with this effort. Please do not hesitate to contact John or me should you have any questions or concerns. I appreciate the continued collaboration between the FCCC and CCOC. Thank you in advance for your assistance. House Honorable Paula S. O Neil Ph.D Pasco County Joe Boyd, Esq. General Counsel John Dew Executive Director 2560-102 Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Phone: 850.386.2223 Fax: 850.386.2224 cc: Honorable John Crawford, Chair, FCCC Education Committee Page 8 CCOC Mission Statement: As a governmental organization created by the Legislature, we evaluate Clerks courtrelated budgetary needs, and recommend the fair and equitable allocation of resources needed to sustain court operations.

Agenda Item 3c Agenda Item 3c Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Esq. Palm Beach County Chair Honorable Bob Inzer Leon County Vice Chair Honorable Ken Burke, CPA Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Neil Kelly Lake County Honorable John Crawford Nassau County Honorable Harvey Ruvin Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Honorable Stacy Butterfield, CPA Polk County Clerk Supreme Court Honorable Ron Ficarrotta 13 th Judicial Circuit Judge Senate Honorable Kyle Hudson Holmes County House Honorable Paula S. O Neil Ph.D Pasco County Joe Boyd, Esq. General Counsel John Dew Executive Director 2560-102 Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Phone: 850.386.2223 Fax: 850.386.2224 Date: March 17, 2015 Subject: Committee Action: No action is required. Agenda Item 3c: Update on PIE Committee and Financial Analysis Workgroup Issues Overview: The PIE Committee and the Financial Analysis Work Group have been working on numerous projects which are summarized below. 1) Operation Green Light. The objective of this statewide initiative is to provide the public with safer roads. The project is designed to encourage persons who have had their driver licenses suspended to pay their outstanding court obligations by waiving collection fees. a. Statewide orientation meeting was held March 3. This was followed-up by a meeting held on March 12. b. Saturday, April 18 was agreed as the one-day event. However, if some Clerk offices could not participate on Saturday April 13 through 17 th is suggested. c. Three subcommittees/teams were created to facilitate implementation Communications, Logistics, and Reporting. The following counties agreed to lead the teams Palm Beach, Citrus, and Lee. d. The teams have met and have begun their work. 2) Financial Analysis Work Group Project status report as of March 7. For additional details see attachment. Project Due Date Status Continuing Case Workload March 4 52 of 67 Toll Violation Survey March 6 11 of 16 Civil Indigent Survey March 6 16 of 25 Collection Process Survey March 13 8 of 23 Page 9 CCOC Mission Statement: As a governmental organization created by the Legislature, we evaluate Clerks courtrelated budgetary needs, and recommend the fair and equitable allocation of resources needed to sustain court operations.

3) At the January 8 Budget Committee meeting Mr. Burke made two motions that were referred to the PIE Committee and/or the Financial Analysis Work Group. The first motion requested information on post judgment workload activities on foreclosure cases. At its February 2 meeting Ms. Green and I provided handouts to the Budget Committee that showed post judgment workload activities for Pinellas and Polk counties at which time the information provided met Mr. Burke s request. The second motion Mr. Burke requested a survey of clerks regarding court activities with workload implications beyond the current workload measure new cases. Ms. Green and I provided information to the Council on February 3 on workload data from 18 test counties. The data shows that although there is a decline in new cases, over 60% of the clerks current year workload is work continuing from prior years. The continuing case work includes reopening cases, continuances, and specialty court activities. I requested Mr. Burke s opinion on whether the information provide is sufficient to meet his request. If the information is not sufficient, other surveys of Clerks will have to be conducted. Lead Staff: Doug Isabelle, Deputy Executive Director Attachment: 1) Description of projects Page 10

Attachment Brief Description of Projects Financial Analysis Work Group a) Continuing case workload. The objective of this project is to collect reliable data on the number of cases Clerks work on in the current year that were filed in previous years. For example, in CFY 2014 in the circuit criminal division clerk staff may work on 500 new case filings and 700 continuing cases from prior years. The ultimate goal of using this data as a workload measure in future annual budget cycles. At its February 3 rd meeting the Council approved a form which to collect the case data and asked that all 67 Clerk offices report their data to the CCOC by COB March 4. b) Toll violation survey. The objective of this project is to estimate the revenue impact to Clerks because of changes by toll entities in their enforcement of toll violators. This issue was brought to light last month as CCOC was preparing for the State Revenue Estimating Conference (REC). In preparing for these quarterly REC meetings CCOC staff hold conference calls with Clerk finance staff to review case trends, revenue collections, and revenue projections. At February conference call Miami-Dade staff indicated that the decline in their revenues was primarily due to loss toll revenues which was associated with less toll violations being filed with the courts. Other Clerk staff with toll facilities in their counties also acknowledged a decline in toll violations as well. Polk County staff held a conference call with Florida s Turnpike Enterprise (aka SunPass) staff. They shared reasons for the lack of toll violations being filed with the courts was due to increased costs associated with legislation that requires certified mailing, signed return receipt required. FTE began internal collection efforts and decided not to suspend drivers for failing to pay the toll violations. FTE also began working with an outside collection agency to go after the toll amount. In April 2015, FTE plans on starting a Registration Stop Project with the Tax Collector in each county. FTE will be forwarding the outstanding accounts in whom have failed their internal and external collection efforts to request for the Tax collector to place a stop/hold on the driver s tag/registration renewal. Moving forward, FTE is planning on writing citations again but only for the aggressive toll violators which may represent 2-5% of the violators. c) Civil indigence survey. There are two objectives for project. First is to determine the number of civil indigent applications approved compared to the number of filings by civil court division. It is expected that a significant number of family court cases do file for indigent status and are approved. Secondly, is to estimate the loss revenues to the Clerk because a case that is approved indigent statutes filing fees are statutorily waived. The survey is being completed by 25 counties. d) Collection survey. Not unexpectedly most of the uncollected court fines, fees, service charges, and court costs are reported by large county Clerk offices; in particular their civil traffic and criminal court divisions. The Council and PIE Committees approved CCOC surveying the large counties (peer groups 4, 5, and 6) as part of their overall collection plan. A survey was sent to 23 counties. Page 11

Date: March 17, 2015 Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Esq. Palm Beach County Chair Subject: CCOC Technology Funding Strategies Workgroup-Information for 10% Dollars Honorable Bob Inzer Leon County Vice Chair Honorable Ken Burke, CPA Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Neil Kelly Lake County Honorable John Crawford Nassau County Honorable Harvey Ruvin Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Honorable Stacy Butterfield, CPA Polk County Clerk Supreme Court Honorable Ron Ficarrotta 13 th Judicial Circuit Judge Senate Honorable Kyle Hudson Holmes County House Honorable Paula S. O Neil Ph.D Pasco County Joe Boyd, Esq. General Counsel John Dew Executive Director 2560-102 Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Phone: 850.386.2223 Fax: 850.386.2224 Overview: The CCOC Technology Funding Strategies Workgroup has been meeting to establish goals for the workgroup and identify technology needs for the Clerks. The basis for identifying the technology needs has been the approved FCCC Technology Strategic Plan document. Part of The Plan is to provide statewide data and business intelligence (BI) to the courts using CCIS version 3.0 which is estimated to be implemented in by the end of 2016. The goal of providing this service to is eliminate the need for the courts to replicate the court records held by the Clerks. Essentially, replication of the court records by the Courts is cost prohibitive and not sustainable financially or operationally. In a meeting on February 16, 2015 between strategic Judges, OSCA and Clerks there was agreement on the concept of the courts using CCIS for BI and not replicating the records. Given the direction and overall goals, the first goal for the Funding Strategies Workgroup is to Establish a plan to identify and help fund the individual needs of the Clerk offices to achieve strategic collaborative technical goals. This goal relates to the Local Systems and Transition Layers in the chart attached. As part of the workgroup s funding discussion it was noted that 10% funds have often been used by Clerk offices to cover the costs of IT related issues. Some offices may be planning to use those dollars to help fund several specific mandates and projects that we have already identified as part of the next Budget Cycle and beyond. The Budget Committee is now requesting additional information regarding the use of the 10% dollars. We recommend the attached list of technology initiatives be available for Clerks to consider listing one or more initiatives as part of their budgeted allocation reasons for the next Budget Cycle, if needed. Thank you for your time and consideration, Linda Doggett, Lee County Clerk of Court Chair of the CCOC Technology Funding Strategies Workgroup Lead Staff: Lisa Daws, CCOC Information and Technology Resources Director John Dew, CCOC Executive Director Attachments: 1. Technology Strategies Overview Chart 2. List of IT Initiatives for Budget Committee Page 12

Technology Strategies - Overview Chart Local Systems Clerk's CMS, Jury Mgmt, Collections Local Purpose and Funding Local problem solving and flexibility to meet local challenges. The Clerks are the central hub for all court cases and data flowing through the judicial process from filing to disposition. Local Clerks are responsible for keeping the official court records and maintaining the security and integrity of the records on behalf of the Courts. Transition Layer Consistent Statwide Technology Environment CCIS Interface - Real-time, accurate, security, complete, timely data. Continuity of operations and information security. Security of orders as they are moved between the Clerk, Judges, and Attorneys. Security of records in regards to replication, confidential records and information, and ability to protect the records of the Courts. Establish a plan to identify and help fund the Individual Needs of the Clerk offices to achieve strategic Collaborative Technical Goals Statewide Systems CCIS 3.0, efiling Portal, ProSe Interactive Forms, Judicial Viewers State Purpose and Funding Maintain the integrity and accuracy of court records in support of the judiciary. Provide acurrate, complete, secure, and timely data to the courts and other stakeholders. Funding sources available through current sources. BI/Analytics Layer "Redefine how courts use information to make decisions. Flexible system that can evolve with technology and the court's needs. Allows the courts and other stakeholders to be more self sufficient. Provides infrastructure needed to effectively manage court business processes. Consistent access to and avalability of data ajcross counties, circuits, and statewide. Provide more complete information to judges from other data sources for improved efficiencies and judicial decision making. Monitoring tools / dash boards that allow courts to tailor performance measures to improve case management and adjudication of cases."¹ Establish a plan for sustainable funding to provide advanced information services including Business Analytics for statewide integrated Judicial Case Management to the courts and others These four technology layers facilitate the infrastructure and ability of local clerks to act together as an enterprise when appropriate. One of the great strengths of the Florida Courts [and Clerks] is their ability to innovate and experiment at the local level. The goal of this Plan is to achieve a balance of local flexibility, operational efficiency, and public accessibility to provide a consistent statewide level of services to court customers. ¹ ¹Taken from the State Court s Strategic Plan Page 13

List of IT Initiatives for Budget Committee Submitted by the Technology Funding Strategies Workgroup March 4, 2015 Timeframe Description Explanation Starts Ends May-15 ongoing (VOR = Viewable On Request) This manual process may require additional AOSC 14-19's VOR Process - staffing, depending on the volume which an unknown. A specific Manual review and redaction of performance metric for VOR turn-around time has not been set. However, certain court records when the taskforce felt that a reasonable time, at least initially, is 2 business days requested for remote viewing or less. Jun-14 Feb-17 eportal Statewide Uniformity for Docket Codes, etc. Clerks have committed to work toward uniformity and standardization for docketing and docket codes. Depending on past practices, the CMS, local AOs, etc., this may require changes to systems and business processes. Jun-15 Jan-16 CCIS 3.0 County Interface Jun-15 TBD Jun-15 TBD ongoing New eroa format (Record on Appeal) OBTS Changes Payment Card Industry (PCI) Compliance The documentation that defines the new interface to CCIS 3.0 will be available Summer 2015. The current interface to CCIS must be modified and, depending on the CMS, may require work by the CMS vendor. The courts are re-defining the eroa format. This will likely require system changes. Changes to OBTS reporting have been requested. Can this be done from CCIS 3.0? What is the timeframe for compliance? Any Clerks Office that accepts credit card payments must meet some level of PCI compliance. This requires, at minimum, professional services to determine current level of compliance and regular auditing to ensure continued compliance. IT infrastructure changes are usually required to reach compliance. Oct-15 ongoing Enhanced infrastructure to provide information services with appropriate level of Security, Performance, and Availability As part of the FCCC IT Srategic Plan, the Technology Subcommittee is attempting to define service levels that match industry-standards and are appropriate for each Clerk's Office based on size and other factors. The results may show a need to augment, enhance, and/or upgrade some of the components of each Clerk's infrastructure. TBD Standardized Format for Court Records (searchable PDF) The FCTC is currently attempting to set a specific file format standard for all court records. If they do, the timeframe for compliance is expected to be in the 5-to-10 year range and the costs for some Clerks will be very high. The Clerks have technology representatives working with the court's CTO to provide a recommendation to the FCTC. Page 14

Agenda Item 4a Agenda Item 4a Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Esq. Palm Beach County Chair Honorable Bob Inzer Leon County Vice Chair Honorable Ken Burke, CPA Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Neil Kelly Lake County Honorable John Crawford Nassau County Honorable Harvey Ruvin Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Honorable Stacy Butterfield, CPA Polk County Clerk Supreme Court Honorable Ron Ficarrotta 13 th Judicial Circuit Judge Senate Honorable Kyle Hudson Holmes County House Honorable Paula S. O Neil Ph.D Pasco County Joe Boyd, Esq. General Counsel John Dew Executive Director Date: March 17, 2015 Subject: Agenda Item 4a: Update on Budget and Expenditure Trends Committee Action: Consider the current expenditure rates and provide direction. Overview: Based on specific requests from staff with the Florida Court Clerks and Comptrollers (FCCC), CCOC staff provided a series of data slides highlighting budget and expenditure trends. Copies of the final slides are provided in the materials. Additionally, CCOC staff have provided in the materials a summary of clerk expenditure trends for the first four months of CFY 2014-15. Options: 1. Direct staff to follow-up with clerks expending at a high rate. 2. Provide additional direction. Recommendation: Option 1. (Staff recommend follow-up by phone with any clerk with expenditures (without the 1/12 th excess trust fund payments) greater than 33.3% above their budget authority.) Lead Staff: Greg Cowan, Budget Director Attachments: 1. Updated version of the final data slides provided by CCOC to FCCC. 2. Summary of approved budget authority amounts with contingency fund. 3. Summary of clerk expenditure trends for the first four months of CFY 2014-15. 2560-102 Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Phone: 850.386.2223 Fax: 850.386.2224 Page 15 CCOC Mission Statement: As a governmental organization created by the Legislature, we evaluate Clerks courtrelated budgetary needs, and recommend the fair and equitable allocation of resources needed to sustain court operations.

Data Request from FCCC Summary of Requested Data with Additional Historical Reference Data Page 16 Produced by Staff of the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation March 2015

Percent Change in Budgets FY 2005-06 to FY 2014-15 25.0% 20.0% 23.7% 22.0% 22.5% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 4.8% 0.0% State Court System State Attorneys Public Defenders Clerks of the Court Budget Page 17 Data was developed jointly between CCOC and Palm Beach Clerk staff. For more information, please contact CCOC staff at (850) 386-2223.

Percent Change in Reference Variables FY 2005-06 to FY 2014-15 35.0% 30.0% 33.8% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 17.9% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% CPI for Health Insurance CPI State Population Clerks of the Court Budget 9.7% 4.8% Page 18 Data was developed jointly between CCOC and Palm Beach Clerk staff. For more information, please contact CCOC staff at (850) 386-2223.

Budgeted Full Time Equivalents (FTE) 10,000.00 9,000.00 8,000.00 7,000.00 8,748.18 9,138.50 9,378.83 9,645.49 8,457.51 8,372.77 Note: FTE figures are based either on the budget requests or the operational budgets. Figures are either gross or net depending on reporting issues for the different years. 7,999.74 8,095.81 8,073.22 7,979.39 6,000.00 Page 19 The data for CFY 2005-06 through CFY 2008-09 is based on the Certified Article V Budget compiled by the CCOC and included in the annual Legislative Report. The data from SFY 2009-10 through CFY 2014-15 is pulled from PABS on 12/23/2014, and the data is dynamic and subject to change. The data for SFY 2009-10 is based on the nine month budgets submitted for October 2009 to June 2010. The data for SFY 2010-11 is based on the budgets submitted for July 2010 to June 2011 and has NOT been adjusted for any estimated fourth quarter adjustment as required by law. The data for SFY 2011-12 is based on the operational SFY 2011-12 budgets, is a net budgeted FTE, and has NOT been adjusted for either the first or fourth quarter adjustments as required by law. The data for SFY 2012-13 is based on the operational SFY 2012-13 budgets, is a net budgeted FTE, and has NOT been adjusted for either the first or fourth quarter adjustments as required by law. The data for SFY 2013-14 is based on the budget requests and is net budgeted FTE. The data for CFY 2014-15 is largely based on the operational budgets; however for counties not yet submitting their operational budgets, data is based on their budget requests. The data for CFY 2014-15 is net budgeted FTE.

Historic Budgets, Revenues, and Expenditures $550 $500 Note 1: Revenues in yellow are clerk projections based on operational budgets. Dollars (in millions) $450 $400 $350 $424.0 $463.4 $401.9 $471.4 $502.7 $446.5 $502.7 $540.6 $478.5 $539.3 $519.1 $482.0 $451.4 $470.6 $441.2 $445.2 $426.4 $433.1 $444.5 $414.9 $434.2 $443.4 $426.0 $427.6 $443.4 $423.0 $424.1 $444.4 $421.6 $300 CFY 2005-06 CFY 2006-07 CFY 2007-08 CFY 2008-09 SFY 2009-10 SFY 2010-11 SFY 2011-12 SFY 2012-13 CFY 2013-14 CFY 2014-15 Note 2: Historic data are actuals. There is a three month overlap between CFY 2008-09 and SFY 2009-10 and a three month gap between SFY 2012-13 and CFY 2013-14. Budgets Revenues Expenditures Page 20 Note 3: The budget data for CFY 2005-06 through CFY 2008-09 is based on the Certified Article V Budget compiled by the CCOC and included in the annual Legislative Report. The budget data for SFY 2009-10 through SFY 2012-13 is based on Legislative appropriations and includes all applicable true-ups. The budget and expenditures data does not include any foreclosure dollars. All data is draft and may fluctuate as revised reports are submitted.

Change in Cost of Benefits $140 $135 $133.6 $130 Dollars (in Millions) $125 $120 $120.3 $119.7 $115 $115.1 $110 $105 FY 2011-12 FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 Page 21 Data is based on operational budgets for FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13 and FY 2014-15. Data for FY 2013-14 is based on budget requests. Data represents gross budgeted expenditures. Breakdown of these costs is not available in prior years. Data was pulled from PABS on 1/22/2015.

Change in Salary per FTE $50,000 $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $36,470.63 $36,028.21 $36,475.83 $36,522.05 Dollars $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 FY 2011-12 FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 Salary per FTE Page 22 Data is based on operational budgets for FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13 and FY 2014-15. Data for FY 2013-14 is based on budget requests. Calculations are based on gross budgeted FTE and expenditures. Breakdown of these costs is not available in prior years. Data was pulled from PABS on 1/22/2015.

Data Request from FCCC Summary of Requested Data with Additional Historical Reference Data Page 23 Produced by Staff of the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation March 2015

Clerks of the Court and Clerks of Court Operations Commission (CCOC) County Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Proposed Budgets County SSC* CFY 2014-15 Budget Liberty 1 $ 307,806 Lafayette 1 $ 282,570 Franklin 1 $ 636,843 Glades 1 $ 496,348 Hamilton 1 $ 443,356 Jefferson 1 $ 405,779 Calhoun 1 $ 452,789 Union 1 $ 447,950 Gulf 1 $ 463,773 Dixie 1 $ 495,381 Gilchrist 1 $ 548,707 Madison 1 $ 444,751 Holmes 1 $ 431,525 Taylor 2 $ 545,148 Washington 2 $ 590,093 Baker 2 $ 632,223 Bradford 2 $ 674,066 Hardee 2 $ 839,727 Wakulla 2 $ 709,000 Desoto 2 $ 800,102 Hendry 2 $ 1,081,155 Okeechobee 2 $ 1,239,977 Levy 2 $ 1,042,944 Suwannee 2 $ 1,125,851 Gadsden 2 $ 1,196,765 Jackson 2 $ 994,962 Walton 2 $ 1,662,456 Columbia 2 $ 1,332,170 Nassau 2 $ 1,645,238 Flagler 2 $ 1,633,226 Sumter 2 $ 1,575,010 Putnam 3 $ 2,117,255 Monroe 3 $ 3,238,289 Highlands 3 $ 1,837,114 Indian River 3 $ 3,308,782 Citrus 3 $ 2,450,367 Martin 3 $ 3,552,948 Santa Rosa 3 $ 3,105,399 Charlotte 3 $ 3,736,453 Bay 3 $ 3,571,870 Hernando 3 $ 3,344,000 Page 24 149

Clerks of the Court and Clerks of Court Operations Commission (CCOC) County Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Proposed Budgets County SSC* CFY 2014-15 Budget Okaloosa 3 $ 3,807,133 Clay 3 $ 3,346,245 St. Johns 3 $ 3,732,667 Alachua 4 $ 5,879,840 Leon 4 $ 6,003,470 St. Lucie 4 $ 7,530,736 Osceola 4 $ 7,395,444 Escambia 4 $ 6,797,308 Lake 4 $ 6,088,074 Collier 4 $ 7,185,600 Manatee 4 $ 6,050,917 Marion 4 $ 6,387,328 Sarasota 4 $ 8,056,356 Seminole 4 $ 8,675,200 Pasco 5 $ 12,322,427 Volusia 5 $ 11,347,284 Brevard 5 $ 13,800,638 Polk 5 $ 12,790,568 Lee 5 $ 11,820,039 Duval 5 $ 16,807,590 Pinellas 6 $ 22,975,139 Orange 6 $ 28,302,946 Hillsborough 6 $ 28,717,935 Palm Beach 6 $ 33,100,629 Broward 6 $ 40,014,826 Dade 6 $ 69,669,469 Subtotal Clerks' Operational Budget $ 444,045,976 Clerk of the Court Contingency Fund $ 354,024 TOTAL Clerk of the Court Proposed Budget $ 444,400,000 TOTAL Clerks of Court Operations Commission Proposed Budget $ 1,617,097 * Similarly Situated Clerks (SSC) - Peer groupings used for performance comparisons. Groupings are based on factors such as population size, number of case filings, and prison admissions. Page 25 150

County CFY 2015 Budget Authority CFY 2015 EC Analysis Ver 1 Year End Print Format w/ TF Payments w/o TF Payments w/o TF Payments Court-Related Expenditures Payments to the Trust Fund Expended % of Budget Authority Expended % of Budget Authority Remaining Authority Alachua $5,879,840.00 $1,729,293.85 $0.00 29.4% 29.4% $4,150,546.15 Baker $632,223.00 $187,284.69 $0.00 29.6% 29.6% $444,938.31 Bay $3,571,870.00 $1,099,664.51 $167,368.43 35.5% 30.8% $2,472,205.49 Bradford $674,066.00 $208,986.17 $2,321.87 31.3% 31.0% $465,079.83 Brevard $13,800,638.00 $4,966,224.27 $0.00 36.0% 36.0% $8,834,413.73 Broward $40,014,826.00 $12,467,784.20 $270,439.34 31.8% 31.2% $27,547,041.80 Calhoun $452,789.00 $131,030.68 $0.00 28.9% 28.9% $321,758.32 Charlotte $3,736,453.00 $1,174,559.75 $0.00 31.4% 31.4% $2,561,893.25 Citrus $2,450,367.00 $776,483.66 $0.00 31.7% 31.7% $1,673,883.34 Clay $3,346,245.00 $1,041,802.04 $67,347.81 33.1% 31.1% $2,304,442.96 Collier $7,185,600.00 $1,801,916.17 $0.00 25.1% 25.1% $5,383,683.83 Columbia $1,332,170.00 $472,053.16 $55,215.54 39.6% 35.4% $860,116.84 Dade $69,669,469.00 $24,392,554.05 $80,848.62 35.1% 35.0% $45,276,914.95 Desoto $800,102.00 $218,585.63 $0.00 27.3% 27.3% $581,516.37 Dixie $495,381.00 $160,518.65 $0.00 32.4% 32.4% $334,862.35 Duval $16,807,590.00 $5,190,483.18 $162,341.59 31.8% 30.9% $11,617,106.82 Escambia $6,797,308.00 $1,907,124.55 $0.00 28.1% 28.1% $4,890,183.45 Flagler $1,633,226.00 $503,444.15 $62,441.00 34.6% 30.8% $1,129,781.85 Franklin $636,843.00 $178,580.54 $0.00 28.0% 28.0% $458,262.46 Gadsden $1,196,765.00 $365,514.91 $0.00 30.5% 30.5% $831,250.09 Gilchrist $548,707.00 $137,956.12 $0.00 25.1% 25.1% $410,750.88 Glades $496,348.00 $128,480.22 $0.00 25.9% 25.9% $367,867.78 Gulf $463,773.00 $148,251.88 $0.00 32.0% 32.0% $315,521.12 Hamilton $443,356.00 $156,750.89 $20,805.12 40.0% 35.4% $286,605.11 Hardee $839,727.00 $281,010.74 $0.00 33.5% 33.5% $558,716.26 Hendry $1,081,155.00 $302,693.50 $0.00 28.0% 28.0% $778,461.50 Hernando $3,344,000.00 $1,014,554.74 $142,992.16 34.6% 30.3% $2,329,445.26 Highlands $1,837,114.00 $571,869.39 $0.00 31.1% 31.1% $1,265,244.61 Hillsborough $28,717,935.00 $8,100,677.00 $29,843.00 28.3% 28.2% $20,617,258.00 Holmes $431,525.00 $131,303.23 $255.97 30.5% 30.4% $300,221.77 Indian River $3,308,782.00 $946,567.86 $0.00 28.6% 28.6% $2,362,214.14 Jackson $994,962.00 $275,478.33 $0.00 27.7% 27.7% $719,483.67 Jefferson $405,779.00 $137,749.46 $6,906.99 35.6% 33.9% $268,029.54 Lafayette $282,570.00 $79,302.25 $0.00 28.1% 28.1% $203,267.75 Lake $6,088,074.00 $1,825,977.00 $2,937.50 30.0% 30.0% $4,262,097.00 Lee $11,820,039.00 $4,060,449.06 $424,759.37 37.9% 34.4% $7,759,589.94 Page 26 3/12/201510:43 AM R:\CFY1415\EC Analysis\CFY 2015 EC Analysis Ver 1

County CFY 2015 Budget Authority CFY 2015 EC Analysis Ver 1 Year End Print Format w/ TF Payments w/o TF Payments w/o TF Payments Court-Related Expenditures Payments to the Trust Fund Expended % of Budget Authority Expended % of Budget Authority Remaining Authority Leon $6,003,470.00 $1,857,635.31 $0.00 30.9% 30.9% $4,145,834.69 Levy $1,042,944.00 $333,508.75 $0.00 32.0% 32.0% $709,435.25 Liberty $307,806.00 $95,230.07 $0.00 30.9% 30.9% $212,575.93 Madison $444,751.00 $155,038.75 $85,695.40 54.1% 34.9% $289,712.25 Manatee $6,050,917.00 $1,984,605.41 $0.00 32.8% 32.8% $4,066,311.59 Marion $6,387,328.00 $1,895,919.66 $0.00 29.7% 29.7% $4,491,408.34 Martin $3,552,948.00 $1,123,503.77 $78,849.73 33.8% 31.6% $2,429,444.23 Monroe $3,238,289.00 $604,154.44 $0.00 18.7% 18.7% $2,634,134.56 Nassau $1,645,238.00 $521,664.69 $3,082.39 31.9% 31.7% $1,123,573.31 Okaloosa $3,807,133.00 $1,221,652.76 $98,807.24 34.7% 32.1% $2,585,480.24 Okeechobee $1,239,977.00 $347,432.88 $0.00 28.0% 28.0% $892,544.12 Orange $28,302,946.00 $7,970,466.69 $947,524.09 31.5% 28.2% $20,332,479.31 Osceola $7,395,444.00 $2,400,152.12 $374,504.19 37.5% 32.5% $4,995,291.88 Palm Beach $33,100,629.00 $9,565,125.03 $0.00 28.9% 28.9% $23,535,503.97 Pasco $12,322,427.00 $3,914,678.79 $0.00 31.8% 31.8% $8,407,748.21 Pinellas $22,975,139.00 $7,563,234.63 $0.00 32.9% 32.9% $15,411,904.37 Polk $12,790,568.00 $4,043,843.89 $0.00 31.6% 31.6% $8,746,724.11 Putnam $2,117,255.00 $673,629.15 $0.00 31.8% 31.8% $1,443,625.85 Santa Rosa $3,105,399.00 $996,964.49 $0.00 32.1% 32.1% $2,108,434.51 Sarasota $8,056,356.00 $2,364,437.12 $25,264.54 29.7% 29.3% $5,691,918.88 Seminole $8,675,200.00 $2,360,326.05 $1,698.14 27.2% 27.2% $6,314,873.95 St. Johns $3,732,667.00 $1,087,071.63 $21,749.21 29.7% 29.1% $2,645,595.37 St. Lucie $7,530,736.00 $2,375,422.33 $0.00 31.5% 31.5% $5,155,313.67 Sumter $1,575,010.00 $527,968.36 $60,799.17 37.4% 33.5% $1,047,041.64 Suwannee $1,125,851.00 $382,748.91 $0.00 34.0% 34.0% $743,102.09 Taylor $545,148.00 $192,720.55 $30,656.10 41.0% 35.4% $352,427.45 Union $447,950.00 $140,082.46 $0.00 31.3% 31.3% $307,867.54 Volusia $11,347,284.00 $3,520,588.38 $0.00 31.0% 31.0% $7,826,695.62 Wakulla $709,000.00 $273,913.08 $0.00 38.6% 38.6% $435,086.92 Walton $1,662,456.00 $472,875.16 $0.00 28.4% 28.4% $1,189,580.84 Washington $590,093.00 $185,352.28 $0.00 31.4% 31.4% $404,740.72 Total $ 444,045,976.00 $138,424,908.07 $3,225,454.51 31.2% 31.2% $ 305,621,067.93 1/12th Distribution Difference $ (444,045,976.00) Page 27 3/12/201510:43 AM R:\CFY1415\EC Analysis\CFY 2015 EC Analysis Ver 1

Agenda Item 4b Agenda Item 4b Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Esq. Palm Beach County Chair Honorable Bob Inzer Leon County Vice Chair Honorable Ken Burke, CPA Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Neil Kelly Lake County Honorable John Crawford Nassau County Honorable Harvey Ruvin Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Honorable Stacy Butterfield, CPA Polk County Clerk Supreme Court Honorable Ron Ficarrotta 13 th Judicial Circuit Judge Senate Honorable Kyle Hudson Holmes County House Honorable Paula S. O Neil Ph.D Pasco County Joe Boyd, Esq. General Counsel John Dew Executive Director 2560-102 Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Phone: 850.386.2223 Fax: 850.386.2224 Date: March 17, 2015 Subject: Agenda Item 4b: Update on Foreclosure Expenditures Committee Action: Consider the current expenditure rates and provide direction. Approve revised foreclosure report form. Overview: Per Chapter 2013-106, Laws of Florida, the clerks of court were appropriated $9.7 million to enhance levels of service to assist and support the courts in expediting the processing of backlogged foreclosure cases. Based on committee recommendations, approximately $6.5 million of this appropriation was allocated for a 15 month period (July 2013 through September 2014) with just over $231,000 remitted back as unexpended. At the January 8 meeting, the committee approved the full nine month (October 2014 through June 2015) allocation of the remaining $3.5 million including the reallocation of the 15 month unexpended amount. Provided in the materials are the currently available summaries for committee consideration. Options: 1. Direct staff to follow-up with clerks expending at a low rate. 2. Approved revised foreclosure report form. 3. Provide additional direction. Recommendation: Option 1 and 2. Lead Staff: Greg Cowan, Budget Director Attachments/Handouts: 1. Excerpt from Chapter 2013-106, Laws of Florida. 2. Summaries detailing the foreclosure allocations and expenditures. 3. Revised foreclosure report form. Page 28 CCOC Mission Statement: As a governmental organization created by the Legislature, we evaluate Clerks courtrelated budgetary needs, and recommend the fair and equitable allocation of resources needed to sustain court operations.

Ch. 2013-106 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 2013-106 documents when disposing of foreclosure cases, produce orders electronically, provide for electronic calendaring, serve orders electronically, and generate case management reports. All technology enhancements to expedite mortgage foreclosure cases must be completed in accordance with the standards set by the Florida Court Technology Commission regarding functionality as outlined in the Case Processing Application Standards. Section 3. The nonrecurring sum of $16 million is appropriated from the General Revenue Fund to the state courts system to provide supplemental resources, including, but not limited to, additional senior judge days and temporary case management staff in the trial courts to reduce the backlog of pending foreclosure cases. Section 4. The nonrecurring sum of $9.7 million is appropriated from the General Revenue Fund to the clerks of the court to enhance levels of service to assist and support the courts in expediting the processing of backlogged foreclosure cases. Section 5. The nonrecurring sum of $10 million is appropriated from the General Revenue Fund to the Office of the Attorney General, who must contract directly with regional legal aid service providers to provide legal aid services to low-income and moderate-income homeowners facing foreclosure. Administrative costs or fees may not be collected or used by the Office of the Attorney General, any association, or any foundation for providing services with the funds appropriated in this section. Section 6. The nonrecurring sum of $10 million is appropriated from the General Revenue Fund in a fixed capital outlay appropriation category to the Department of Children and Families for capital improvement grants to certified domestic violence centers in accordance with s. 39.9055, Florida Statutes. The Florida Coalition Against Domestic Violence shall serve as the lead entity to create a competitive request for proposals with the primary focus of increasing bed space and expanding capacity of emergency shelter services. Award decisions shall be completed within 60 days after the effective date of this act. Section 7. (1) The nonrecurring sum of $20 million is appropriated from the General Revenue Fund to the Department of Economic Opportunity to provide a grant to Habitat for Humanity of Florida for the acquisition and rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing housing stock to provide affordable housing to low-income applicants. Habitat for Humanity of Florida may use up to 1 percent of the grant award for direct administrative costs. (2) Habitat for Humanity of Florida shall provide compliance and oversight for the grant award and shall: (a) Provide to the Department of Economic Opportunity the name and contact information for the Habitat for Humanity of Florida compliance officer, to be updated within 10 business days after any change. 2 CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions. Page 29

Foreclosure Allocations and Expenditures (October 2014 through June 2015) County Percent Unremitted 15 9 Month Expenditures (October 2014 through June 2015) 9 Month Balance Allocation Month Balance Allocation Q1 Q2 Q3 Total Remaining Alachua $ 43,108.77 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 43,108.77 100.0% Baker $ 3,295.74 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,295.74 100.0% Bay $ 10,849.15 $ 3,950.25 $ - $ - $ 3,950.25 $ 6,898.90 63.6% Bradford $ 3,295.74 $ 740.70 $ - $ - $ 740.70 $ 2,555.04 77.5% Brevard $ 122,723.36 $ 44,684.43 $ - $ - $ 44,684.43 $ 78,038.93 63.6% Broward $ 402,030.55 $ 62,638.11 $ - $ - $ 62,638.11 $ 339,392.44 84.4% Calhoun $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Charlotte $ 36,422.09 $ 5,441.10 $ - $ - $ 5,441.10 $ 30,980.99 85.1% Citrus $ 26,782.36 $ 11,753.48 $ - $ - $ 11,753.48 $ 15,028.88 56.1% Clay $ 28,055.11 $ 4,082.32 $ 28,055.11 $ - $ - $ 28,055.11 $ 4,082.32 12.7% Collier $ 42,458.62 $ 15,459.48 $ - $ - $ 15,459.48 $ 26,999.14 63.6% Columbia $ 14,829.05 $ 5,399.36 $ - $ - $ 5,399.36 $ 9,429.69 63.6% Dade $ 414,706.06 $ 150,997.35 $ - $ - $ 150,997.35 $ 263,708.71 63.6% Desoto $ 3,295.74 $ 300.00 $ - $ - $ 300.00 $ 2,995.74 90.9% Dixie $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Duval $ 182,549.66 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 182,549.66 100.0% Escambia $ 39,627.94 $ 17,769.55 $ - $ - $ 17,769.55 $ 21,858.39 55.2% Flagler $ 35,138.03 $ 12,794.00 $ - $ - $ 12,794.00 $ 22,344.03 63.6% Franklin $ 7,137.18 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,137.18 100.0% Gadsden $ 8,267.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 8,267.00 100.0% Gilchrist $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Glades $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Gulf $ 10,849.15 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 10,849.15 100.0% Hamilton $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Hardee $ 2,539.96 $ 640.44 $ - $ - $ 640.44 $ 1,899.52 74.8% Hendry $ 6,314.18 $ 2,299.04 $ - $ - $ 2,299.04 $ 4,015.14 63.6% Hernando $ 37,847.67 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 37,847.67 100.0% Highlands $ 14,290.85 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 14,290.85 100.0% Hillsborough $ 212,829.07 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 212,829.07 100.0% Holmes $ 10,849.15 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 10,849.15 100.0% Indian River $ 22,993.33 $ 8,176.52 $ - $ - $ 8,176.52 $ 14,816.81 64.4% Jackson $ 10,849.15 $ 3,950.25 $ - $ - $ 3,950.25 $ 6,898.90 63.6% Jefferson $ 7,539.11 $ 1,693.66 $ - $ - $ 1,693.66 $ 5,845.45 77.5% Lafayette $ 9,062.40 $ 3,299.68 $ - $ - $ 3,299.68 $ 5,762.72 63.6% Lake $ 50,560.45 $ 14,191.79 $ - $ - $ 14,191.79 $ 36,368.66 71.9% Lee $ 73,053.90 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 73,053.90 100.0% Page 30 Last updated 3/11/2015

Foreclosure Allocations and Expenditures (October 2014 through June 2015) County Percent Unremitted 15 9 Month Expenditures (October 2014 through June 2015) 9 Month Balance Allocation Month Balance Allocation Q1 Q2 Q3 Total Remaining Leon $ 33,123.39 $ 12,060.45 $ - $ - $ 12,060.45 $ 21,062.94 63.6% Levy $ 3,295.74 $ 499.37 $ - $ - $ 499.37 $ 2,796.37 84.8% Liberty $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Madison $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Manatee $ 77,205.34 $ 9,181.31 $ - $ - $ 9,181.31 $ 68,024.03 88.1% Marion $ 51,343.62 $ 17,498.60 $ - $ - $ 17,498.60 $ 33,845.02 65.9% Martin $ 24,808.01 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 24,808.01 100.0% Monroe $ 50,955.25 $ 16,985.08 $ - $ - $ 16,985.08 $ 33,970.17 66.7% Nassau $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Okaloosa $ 34,240.61 $ 12,467.24 $ - $ - $ 12,467.24 $ 21,773.37 63.6% Okeechobee $ 13,772.28 $ 5,014.58 $ - $ - $ 5,014.58 $ 8,757.70 63.6% Orange $ 162,557.46 $ 50,861.79 $ - $ - $ 50,861.79 $ 111,695.67 68.7% Osceola $ 69,708.08 $ 23,350.86 $ - $ - $ 23,350.86 $ 46,357.22 66.5% Palm Beach $ 307,371.78 $ 98,461.19 $ - $ - $ 98,461.19 $ 208,910.59 68.0% Pasco $ 111,154.15 $ 74,610.45 $ - $ - $ 74,610.45 $ 36,543.70 32.9% Pinellas $ 166,097.90 $ 60,477.40 $ - $ - $ 60,477.40 $ 105,620.50 63.6% Polk $ 81,116.82 $ 29,535.20 $ - $ - $ 29,535.20 $ 51,581.62 63.6% Putnam $ 7,690.60 $ 1,687.50 $ - $ - $ 1,687.50 $ 6,003.10 78.1% Santa Rosa $ 19,387.07 $ 2,500.00 $ - $ - $ 2,500.00 $ 16,887.07 87.1% Sarasota $ 77,205.34 $ 5,206.52 $ - $ - $ 5,206.52 $ 71,998.82 93.3% Seminole $ 101,009.24 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 101,009.24 100.0% St. Johns $ 25,253.57 $ 9,195.00 $ - $ - $ 9,195.00 $ 16,058.57 63.6% St. Lucie $ 57,113.31 $ 20,795.36 $ - $ - $ 20,795.36 $ 36,317.95 63.6% Sumter $ 6,457.44 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,457.44 100.0% Suwannee $ 9,062.40 $ 3,299.68 $ - $ - $ 3,299.68 $ 5,762.72 63.6% Taylor $ 9,062.40 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 9,062.40 100.0% Union $ 6,042.18 $ 2,200.00 $ - $ - $ 2,200.00 $ 3,842.18 63.6% Volusia $ 54,901.46 $ 13,025.62 $ - $ - $ 13,025.62 $ 41,875.84 76.3% Wakulla $ 8,041.04 $ 2,927.80 $ - $ - $ 2,927.80 $ 5,113.24 63.6% Walton $ 17,830.98 $ 6,492.38 $ - $ - $ 6,492.38 $ 11,338.60 63.6% Washington $ 10,849.11 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 10,849.11 100.0% Totals $ 28,055.11 $ 3,466,834.26 $ 872,567.68 $ - $ - $ 872,567.68 $ 2,622,321.69 75.0% Total Allocation with 100% Remaining $ 756,264.33 Page 31 Last updated 3/11/2015

Foreclosure Allocations and Expenditures (July 2013 through June 2015) County 15 Month 15 Month 9 Month 24 Month Adjusted 15 Month Total 9 Month Total 24 Month Total 24 Month Allocation Remitted Allocation Allocation Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Balance Alachua $ 78,481.00 $ - $ 43,108.77 $ 121,589.77 $ 78,481.00 $ - $ 78,481.00 $ 43,108.77 Baker $ 6,000.00 $ - $ 3,295.74 $ 9,295.74 $ 6,000.00 $ - $ 6,000.00 $ 3,295.74 Bay $ 19,751.25 $ - $ 10,849.15 $ 30,600.40 $ 19,751.25 $ 3,950.25 $ 23,701.50 $ 6,898.90 Bradford $ 6,000.00 $ - $ 3,295.74 $ 9,295.74 $ 6,000.00 $ 740.70 $ 6,740.70 $ 2,555.04 Brevard $ 223,422.15 $ - $ 122,723.36 $ 346,145.51 $ 223,422.15 $ 44,684.43 $ 268,106.58 $ 78,038.93 Broward $ 731,910.57 $ 67,636.19 $ 402,030.55 $ 1,066,304.93 $ 664,274.38 $ 62,638.11 $ 726,912.49 $ 339,392.44 Calhoun $ 19,751.25 $ 19,673.25 $ - $ 78.00 $ 78.00 $ - $ 78.00 $ 0.00 Charlotte $ 66,307.68 $ 9,844.94 $ 36,422.09 $ 92,884.82 $ 56,462.74 $ 5,441.10 $ 61,903.84 $ 30,980.98 Citrus $ 43,891.00 $ - $ 26,782.36 $ 70,673.36 $ 43,891.00 $ 11,753.48 $ 55,644.48 $ 15,028.88 Clay $ 56,530.00 $ - $ 4,082.32 $ 60,612.32 $ 28,474.89 $ 28,055.11 $ 56,530.00 $ 4,082.32 Collier $ 77,297.39 $ - $ 42,458.62 $ 119,756.01 $ 77,297.39 $ 15,459.48 $ 92,756.87 $ 26,999.14 Columbia $ 26,996.80 $ - $ 14,829.05 $ 41,825.85 $ 26,996.80 $ 5,399.36 $ 32,396.16 $ 9,429.69 Dade $ 754,986.77 $ - $ 414,706.06 $ 1,169,692.83 $ 754,986.77 $ 150,997.35 $ 905,984.12 $ 263,708.71 Desoto $ 6,000.00 $ - $ 3,295.74 $ 9,295.74 $ 6,000.00 $ 300.00 $ 6,300.00 $ 2,995.74 Dixie $ 16,498.40 $ 16,498.40 $ - $ (0.00) $ - $ - $ - $ (0.00) Duval $ 332,338.00 $ 12,944.49 $ 182,549.66 $ 501,943.17 $ 319,393.51 $ - $ 319,393.51 $ 182,549.66 Escambia $ 72,144.06 $ - $ 39,627.94 $ 111,772.00 $ 72,144.06 $ 17,769.55 $ 89,913.61 $ 21,858.39 Flagler $ 63,970.00 $ - $ 35,138.03 $ 99,108.03 $ 63,970.00 $ 12,794.00 $ 76,764.00 $ 22,344.03 Franklin $ 12,993.47 $ - $ 7,137.18 $ 20,130.65 $ 12,993.47 $ - $ 12,993.47 $ 7,137.18 Gadsden $ 15,050.38 $ - $ 8,267.00 $ 23,317.38 $ 15,050.38 $ - $ 15,050.38 $ 8,267.00 Gilchrist $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Glades $ 8,747.59 $ 8,747.59 $ - $ (0.00) $ - $ - $ - $ (0.00) Gulf $ 19,751.25 $ - $ 10,849.15 $ 30,600.40 $ 19,751.25 $ - $ 19,751.25 $ 10,849.15 Hamilton $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Hardee $ 8,719.00 $ 4,613.63 $ 2,539.96 $ 6,645.33 $ 4,105.37 $ 640.44 $ 4,745.81 $ 1,899.52 Hendry $ 11,495.18 $ - $ 6,314.18 $ 17,809.36 $ 11,495.18 $ 2,299.04 $ 13,794.22 $ 4,015.14 Hernando $ 68,903.00 $ - $ 37,847.67 $ 106,750.67 $ 68,903.00 $ - $ 68,903.00 $ 37,847.67 Highlands $ 26,017.00 $ - $ 14,290.85 $ 40,307.85 $ 26,017.00 $ - $ 26,017.00 $ 14,290.85 Hillsborough $ 387,462.70 $ - $ 212,829.07 $ 600,291.77 $ 387,462.70 $ - $ 387,462.70 $ 212,829.07 Holmes $ 19,751.25 $ - $ 10,849.15 $ 30,600.40 $ 19,751.25 $ - $ 19,751.25 $ 10,849.15 Indian River $ 41,860.15 $ - $ 22,993.33 $ 64,853.48 $ 41,860.15 $ 8,176.52 $ 50,036.67 $ 14,816.81 Jackson $ 19,751.25 $ - $ 10,849.15 $ 30,600.40 $ 19,751.25 $ 3,950.25 $ 23,701.50 $ 6,898.90 Jefferson $ 8,468.28 $ - $ 7,539.11 $ 16,007.39 $ 8,468.28 $ 1,693.66 $ 10,161.94 $ 5,845.45 Lafayette $ 16,498.40 $ - $ 9,062.40 $ 25,560.80 $ 16,498.40 $ 3,299.68 $ 19,798.08 $ 5,762.72 Lake $ 82,942.00 $ - $ 50,560.45 $ 133,502.45 $ 82,942.00 $ 14,191.79 $ 97,133.79 $ 36,368.66 Lee $ 132,997.17 $ - $ 73,053.90 $ 206,051.07 $ 132,996.73 $ - $ 132,996.73 $ 73,054.34 Page 32 Last updated 3/11/2015

Foreclosure Allocations and Expenditures (July 2013 through June 2015) County 15 Month 15 Month 9 Month 24 Month Adjusted 15 Month Total 9 Month Total 24 Month Total 24 Month Allocation Remitted Allocation Allocation Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Balance Leon $ 60,302.26 $ - $ 33,123.39 $ 93,425.65 $ 60,302.26 $ 12,060.45 $ 72,362.71 $ 21,062.94 Levy $ 6,000.00 $ - $ 3,295.74 $ 9,295.74 $ 6,000.00 $ 499.37 $ 6,499.37 $ 2,796.37 Liberty $ 6,822.76 $ 6,822.76 $ - $ 0.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 0.00 Madison $ 16,498.40 $ 15,550.07 $ - $ 948.33 $ 948.33 $ - $ 948.33 $ (0.00) Manatee $ 140,555.00 $ - $ 77,205.34 $ 217,760.34 $ 140,555.00 $ 9,181.31 $ 149,736.31 $ 68,024.03 Marion $ 89,071.00 $ 19,368.61 $ 51,343.62 $ 121,046.01 $ 69,702.39 $ 17,498.60 $ 87,200.99 $ 33,845.02 Martin $ 45,163.82 $ - $ 24,808.01 $ 69,971.83 $ 45,163.82 $ - $ 45,163.82 $ 24,808.01 Monroe $ 92,765.81 $ - $ 50,955.25 $ 143,721.06 $ 92,765.81 $ 16,985.08 $ 109,750.89 $ 33,970.17 Nassau $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Okaloosa $ 62,336.20 $ - $ 34,240.61 $ 96,576.81 $ 62,336.20 $ 12,467.24 $ 74,803.44 $ 21,773.37 Okeechobee $ 25,072.92 $ - $ 13,772.28 $ 38,845.20 $ 25,072.92 $ 5,014.58 $ 30,087.50 $ 8,757.70 Orange $ 395,345.00 $ 26,033.31 $ 162,557.46 $ 531,869.15 $ 369,311.69 $ 50,861.79 $ 420,173.48 $ 111,695.67 Osceola $ 126,906.00 $ - $ 69,708.08 $ 196,614.08 $ 126,906.00 $ 23,350.86 $ 150,256.86 $ 46,357.22 Palm Beach $ 492,305.96 $ - $ 307,371.78 $ 799,677.74 $ 492,305.96 $ 98,461.19 $ 590,767.15 $ 208,910.59 Pasco $ 202,360.00 $ - $ 111,154.15 $ 313,514.15 $ 202,360.00 $ 74,610.45 $ 276,970.45 $ 36,543.70 Pinellas $ 302,387.00 $ - $ 166,097.90 $ 468,484.90 $ 302,387.00 $ 60,477.40 $ 362,864.40 $ 105,620.50 Polk $ 147,676.00 $ - $ 81,116.82 $ 228,792.82 $ 147,676.00 $ 29,535.20 $ 177,211.20 $ 51,581.62 Putnam $ 14,001.00 $ 601.96 $ 7,690.60 $ 21,089.64 $ 13,399.04 $ 1,687.50 $ 15,086.54 $ 6,003.10 Santa Rosa $ 35,294.82 $ - $ 19,387.07 $ 54,681.89 $ 35,294.82 $ 2,500.00 $ 37,794.82 $ 16,887.07 Sarasota $ 140,555.00 $ - $ 77,205.34 $ 217,760.34 $ 140,555.00 $ 5,206.52 $ 145,761.52 $ 71,998.82 Seminole $ 183,890.85 $ - $ 101,009.24 $ 284,900.09 $ 183,890.85 $ - $ 183,890.85 $ 101,009.24 St. Johns $ 45,975.00 $ - $ 25,253.57 $ 71,228.57 $ 45,975.00 $ 9,195.00 $ 55,170.00 $ 16,058.57 St. Lucie $ 103,976.78 $ - $ 57,113.31 $ 161,090.09 $ 103,976.78 $ 20,795.36 $ 124,772.14 $ 36,317.95 Sumter $ 11,756.00 $ - $ 6,457.44 $ 18,213.44 $ 11,756.00 $ - $ 11,756.00 $ 6,457.44 Suwannee $ 16,498.40 $ - $ 9,062.40 $ 25,560.80 $ 16,498.40 $ 3,299.68 $ 19,798.08 $ 5,762.72 Taylor $ 16,498.40 $ - $ 9,062.40 $ 25,560.80 $ 16,498.40 $ - $ 16,498.40 $ 9,062.40 Union $ 11,000.00 $ - $ 6,042.18 $ 17,042.18 $ 11,000.00 $ 2,200.00 $ 13,200.00 $ 3,842.18 Volusia $ 99,950.00 $ - $ 54,901.46 $ 154,851.46 $ 99,950.00 $ 13,025.62 $ 112,975.62 $ 41,875.84 Wakulla $ 14,639.00 $ - $ 8,041.04 $ 22,680.03 $ 14,639.00 $ 2,927.80 $ 17,566.80 $ 5,113.23 Walton $ 32,461.92 $ - $ 17,830.98 $ 50,292.90 $ 32,461.92 $ 6,492.38 $ 38,954.30 $ 11,338.60 Washington $ 19,751.25 $ - $ 10,849.11 $ 30,600.36 $ 19,751.25 $ - $ 19,751.25 $ 10,849.11 Totals $ 6,464,500.94 $ 231,335.20 $ 3,466,834.26 $ 9,700,000.00 $ 6,205,110.19 $ 872,567.68 $ 7,077,677.87 $ 2,622,322.13 Total Percent Expended 72.97% Page 33 Last updated 3/11/2015

Clerk of the Circuit Court National Mortgage Settlement 9 Month Report Form Quarterly Foreclosure Report Report for Quarter Ending: Contact Person: Version #: Telephone #: County: E-mail: Budget 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 10/1/2014-12/31/2014 1/1/2015-3/31/2015 4/1/2015-6/30/2015 To Date Allocation 1 #N/A #N/A Expenditure 2 #N/A #N/A Net (Appropriation minus Expenditure) #N/A Notes 1. Allocations are for nine months (October 2014 through June 2015). Allocations include unremitted 15 month balance where applicable. 2. Per section 4, chapter 2013-106, Laws of Florida, "The nonrecurring sum of $9.7 million is appropriated from the General Revenue Fund to the clerks of the court to enhance levels of service to assist and support the courts in expediting the processing of backlogged foreclosure cases." 3. Any performance reporting requirements will be determined by the CCOC Performance Improvement and Efficiency Committee. Page 34

Agenda Item 5a Agenda Item 5a Honorable Sharon R. Bock, Esq. Palm Beach County Chair Honorable Bob Inzer Leon County Vice Chair Honorable Ken Burke, CPA Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Neil Kelly Lake County Honorable John Crawford Nassau County Honorable Harvey Ruvin Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Honorable Stacy Butterfield, CPA Polk County Clerk Supreme Court Honorable Ron Ficarrotta 13 th Judicial Circuit Judge Senate Honorable Kyle Hudson Holmes County House Honorable Paula S. O Neil Ph.D Pasco County Joe Boyd, Esq. General Counsel John Dew Executive Director 2560-102 Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Phone: 850.386.2223 Fax: 850.386.2224 Date: March 17, 2015 Subject: Agenda Item 5a: Update on Policies and Procedures Regarding 10 Percent Issue for Use in the Budget Considerations Committee Action: Review the adopted policies, procedures, and methodological issues regarding 10 percent issue for use in the budget considerations. Concur with the developed method for implementing the committee guidance regarding the 10 percent issue or provide additional guidance. Overview: The statutory language outlining the clerks budgeting process is largely contained in section 28.35(2)(f), Florida Statute. A copy of the statutory language is provided in the materials. In advance of the CFY 2014-15 budget process, the Finance and Budget Committee established budget policies and a broad operational framework through answering specific questions posed by local clerk staff. These efforts undertaken by the committee and the establishment of this framework proved highly successful in support of the clerks budget request during the Legislative Budget Commission review. A copy of the document outlining this framework is included in the materials. The immediate issue is an extension and elaboration of the previously developed and successfully utilized policy framework. For example, the applicable statutory provision for the immediate issue is section 28.35(2)(f)3, Florida Statute, which includes direction to the corporation to examine revenues from all sources as part of the annual budget review and exercise. While the committee complied with this provision during the CFY 2014-15 budget review and exercise, the committee has elaborated on their previously established policies associated with this specific statutory provision. Specifically, the committee has recommended and the Executive Council has approved policy language included in the attached question and answer document. The approved language reads: For the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberation, the Budget Committee will consider in further detail the 10 percent revenues collected pursuant to section 28.37(5), Florida Statutes, as part of revenue from all sources. The specific methodology for the review of these revenues is still under development by the Budget Committee. Page 35 CCOC Mission Statement: As a governmental organization created by the Legislature, we evaluate Clerks courtrelated budgetary needs, and recommend the fair and equitable allocation of resources needed to sustain court operations.

Page 2: Agenda Item 5a: Update on Policies and Procedures Regarding 10 Percent Issue for Use in the Budget Considerations Six Variables Related to 10 Percent Issues In addition to the approved policy statement, the committee approved the inclusion of six variables or items in the CFY 2015-16 budget forms. These six variables are: V1. The 10 percent net revenue available as of September 30, 2015. (This will be based on actuals as of the submission of the budget request and an estimate through September 30, 2015). V2. An estimate of the 10 percent collections for CFY 2015-16. V3. The 10 percent dollars under contract through CFY 2015-16. V4. The 10 percent dollars dedicated at a detailed level. (The definition of detailed level is still to be determined.) V5. The 10% dollars to be used to assist with funding court related operations. (The value in this variable would equal the value of the 10% expenditures included on Exhibit H as non-ccoc funding if approved.) V6. The available balance in 10 percent dollars. (Using the five variables above this can be calculated as V1 + V2 V3 V4 V5 = V6.) Provided in the materials is an illustration of how these variables/items have been incorporated as a new Section 3 on Exhibit I of the CFY 2015-16 budget forms. Additional Guidance Regarding the Six Variables Regarding the implementation of the six variables/items, the committee provided additional guidance. First, the committee approved the collection of additional information regarding the variable/item associated with dollars dedicated at a detailed level (variable/item 4). The specific additional information to be collected is as follows: A definition of the projects/programs to be funded; When the dollars are planned to be expended; and The amount of dollars to be expended. Second, the committee directed CCOC staff to work with Mr. Inzer and local clerk staff on the business rules and instructions and provide recommendations to the committee at their March 17 workshop/meeting. Third, the committee directed CCOC staff to work with Mr. Inzer and local clerk staff to include a detailed and complex example to help illustrate for clerks and clerk staff how to report data for the six variables/items. Provided in the materials is an excerpt from the CFY 2015-16 budget instructions regarding the three points of guidance provided by the committee. Page 36

Page 3: Agenda Item 5a: Update on Policies and Procedures Regarding 10 Percent Issue for Use in the Budget Considerations Options: 1. Concur with the developed method for implementing the guidance and direction regarding the 10 percent issue for use in the CFY 2015-16 budget process. 2. Provide additional direction. Recommendation: Options 1. Lead Staff: Greg Cowan, Budget Director Attachments/Handouts: 1. Sections 28.35, 28.36, and 28.37, Florida Statutes. 2. Documentation from CFY 2014-15 budget process with one approved amendment. See document entitled, Highlighted Statutory Provisions and Initial Policy and Operational Questions. 3. Currently available 10 percent data and graphs. 4. Illustration of how the approved variables/items are incorporated into the budget forms. 5. Excerpt from the budget instructions regarding the three points of guidance provided by the committee. Page 37

Page 38

Page 39

Page 40

Page 41

Page 42

Page 43

Highlighted Statutory Provisions and Initial Policy and Operational Questions Guidance utilized during the CFY 2014-15 budget deliberations is provided in red text. Additional guidance for use during the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberations is provided in green text. Statutory Provisions and Initial Policy and Operational Questions 1. Per section 28.35(1)(d)1, Florida Statutes, 'Workload measures' means the measurement of the activities and frequency of the work required for the clerk to adequately perform the courtrelated duties of the office as defined by the membership of the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation." a. Given the above provision, what is the recommendation for operationalizing "workload measures?" (This question is being addressed jointly by the CCOC Performance, Improvement, and Efficiency Committee and the CCOC Finance and Budget Committee with the assistance of Thomas Howell Ferguson. The discussion on December 10, 2013, included possibly using Thomas Howell Ferguson to develop a list of possible "adjustment factors" or "cost drivers" for possible future consideration. The discussion also included the concept of a differentiated approach for small versus large counties.) 2. Per section 28.35(1)(d)2, Florida Statutes, "'Workload performance standards' means the standards developed to measure the timeliness and effectiveness of the activities that are accomplished by the clerk in the performance of the court-related duties of the office as defined by the membership of the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation." a. Given the above provision, what is the recommendation for operationalizing "workload performance standards?" (This question is being addressed by the CCOC Performance, Improvement, and Efficiency Committee.) 3. Per section 28.35(2)(f)1, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Calculate the minimum amount of revenue necessary for each clerk of the court to efficiently perform the list of court-related functions specified in paragraph (3)(a). The corporation shall apply the workload measures appropriate for determining the individual level of review required to fund the clerk s budget. " a. Given the above provision, how do we calculate the "minimum amount of revenue necessary for each clerk of the court to efficiently perform the list of court-related functions?" (For budget submission purposes, the minimum amount of revenue will be calculated per the previously approved calculations in Exhibit B on the budget forms. This recommendation is consistent with the answer provided in question 13a below.) b. How will the workload measures be applied to "determine the individual level of review required to fund the clerk s budget." (The workload measures will be applied via a "weighted workload measure" calculation. This recommendation is consistent with the answer provided in questions 11a and 11b below.) Original: August 02, 2013. Updated: February 3, 2015 Page 1 Page 44

Highlighted Statutory Provisions and Initial Policy and Operational Questions Guidance utilized during the CFY 2014-15 budget deliberations is provided in red text. Additional guidance for use during the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberations is provided in green text. 4. Per section 28.35(2)(f)2, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Prepare a cost comparison of similarly situated clerks of the court, based on county population and numbers of filings, using the standard list of court-related functions specified in paragraph (3)(a)." a. How should the cost comparison be calculated? (The cost comparison will be calculated via a "weighted workload measure" calculation. This recommendation is consistent with the answer provided in questions 11a and 11b below.) b. How should "similarly situated clerks" be operationalized? (Based on the previously approved ITN, ERS Group was selected to develop recommendations for determining "similarly situated" clerks. Dr. Charles Mullin with ERS Group was present during the December 10, 2013, workshop. Dr. Mullin provided an overview of the previously utilized methodology and advised the current methodology would be largely the same as two years ago. He anticipated using both new cases and population data as independent variables and using budgets as the dependent variable in his regression analysis. He anticipated using a similar approach looking for "natural breaks" as a method for developing lists of "similarly situated clerks." The committee seemed to endorse this approach and provided input as to other potential independent variables to use within the model. These variables include, tourist population (or similar) by county, college population by county, prison population by county, and cost of living or per capita income by county.) c. How should the "standard list of court-related functions" be used in these calculations? (This question is addressed through the certification letter.) d. What, if any data will need to be generated for the "standard list of court-related functions?" (This question is addressed through the certification letter.) 5. Per section 28.35(2)(f)3, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Conduct an annual base budget review and an annual budget exercise examining the total budget of each clerk of the court. The review shall examine revenues from all sources, expenses of court-related functions, and expenses of noncourt-related functions as necessary to determine that court-related revenues are not being used for noncourt-related purposes. The review and exercise shall identify potential targeted budget reductions in the percentage amount provided in Schedule VIII-B of the state s previous year s legislative budget instructions, as referenced in s. 216.023(3), or an equivalent schedule or instruction as may be adopted by the Legislature. " a. How does the corporation conduct an annual base budget review? b. How does the corporation conduct an annual budget exercise? c. What are "revenues from all sources?" d. What "expenses of noncourt-related functions " need to be included in the review? i. How do we get the data for these " expenses of noncourt-related functions?" e. How does the corporation "determine that court-related revenues are not being used for noncourt-related purposes?" f. How does the corporation "identify potential targeted budget reductions?" Original: August 02, 2013. Updated: February 3, 2015 Page 2 Page 45

Highlighted Statutory Provisions and Initial Policy and Operational Questions Guidance utilized during the CFY 2014-15 budget deliberations is provided in red text. Additional guidance for use during the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberations is provided in green text. On December 10 2013, Mr. Burke, chair of the CCOC Legislative Committee, provided an update on his discussions with FCCC representatives regarding the above questions. Per these discussions, Mr. Burke advised the previously utilized CCOC budget deliberations process is consistent with the current statutory provisions. Further discussions by the committee and local clerk staff indicated the CFY 2014-15 budget process should include: Budget submission and deliberations as in the past to address issues associated with the "annual base budget review" and "annual budget exercise." Submission of a certification letter to address issues associated with the determination "that court-related revenues are not being used for noncourtrelated purposes." Submission of the external auditor reports to address issues associated with "revenue from all sources," and "expenses of noncourt-related functions." For the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberation, the Budget Committee will consider in further detail the 10 percent revenues collected pursuant to section 28.37(5), Florida Statutes, as part of revenue from all sources. The specific methodology for the review of these revenues is still to be determined by the Budget Committee. Additionally, Mr. Burke advised the Schedule VIII-B exercise should be conducted as an aggregate statewide exercise. CCOC staff should calculate the impact based on appropriate percentage reduction, estimate the impact given a reduction on clerk personnel (it would be a reduction in personnel since this represents most of clerk expenditures), and describe the consequences of such a reduction in personnel. Among others, such consequences might include: Longer lines for service; Longer delays in service; Inability of clerks to meet performance standards; Clerk office closures; Reduction in operational hours; and Furloughs. 6. Per section 28.35(2)(f)4, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Identify those proposed budgets containing funding for items not included on the standard list of court-related functions specified in paragraph (3)(a). " a. How does the corporation operationalize this requirement? (This issue will be addressed through continued use of the budget certification letter.) 7. Per section 28.35(2)(f)5, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Identify those clerks projected to have court-related revenues insufficient to fund their anticipated court-related expenditures." Original: August 02, 2013. Updated: February 3, 2015 Page 3 Page 46

Highlighted Statutory Provisions and Initial Policy and Operational Questions Guidance utilized during the CFY 2014-15 budget deliberations is provided in red text. Additional guidance for use during the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberations is provided in green text. a. How does the corporation operationalize this requirement? (This issue will be addressed through the budget form as currently designed and through the continued use of the budget certification letter.) 8. Per section 28.35(2)(f)6, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Use revenue estimates based on the official estimate for funds accruing to the clerks of the court made by the Revenue Estimating Conference." a. As you know the official forecast for revenue is determined by the State Revenue Estimating conference (at a statewide level). Since Clerks are also required to individually provide revenue estimates, how will CCOC reconcile the Clerk estimate with the REC estimate? (Recommendation: The Finance and Budget Committee may wish to defer to the Revenue Enhancement Committee.) (The Finance and Budget Committee defers to the Revenue Enhancement Committee on this issue.) 9. Per section 28.35(2)(f)7, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Identify and report pay and benefit increases in any proposed clerk budget, including, but not limited to, cost of living increases, merit increases, and bonuses." a. How does the corporation operationalize this requirement? (This issue will be addressed through a revision to Exhibit I on the budget form. CCOC staff will revise the exhibit to address this issue.) 10. Per section 28.35(2)(f)8, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Provide detailed explanation for increases in anticipated expenditures in any clerk budget that exceeds the current year budget by more than 3 percent." a. How does the corporation operationalize this requirement? (This issue will be addressed through the continued use of Exhibit I in the budget form. The Finance and Budget Committee directed staff to continue to capture information in the budget form on all increases in the budget request compared to the previous year's budget authority.) 11. Per section 28.35(2)(f)9, Florida Statutes, the corporation shall, "Identify and report the budget of any clerk which exceeds the average budget of similarly situated clerks by more than ten percent. " a. How does the corporation operationalize this requirement? b. The requirement to identify the average budget of similarly situated clerks presents a much different concern than unit cost. For example: Miami Dade, which has a budget almost double any other County due to size. How can we implement this requirement effectively? Original: August 02, 2013. Updated: February 3, 2015 Page 4 Page 47

Highlighted Statutory Provisions and Initial Policy and Operational Questions Guidance utilized during the CFY 2014-15 budget deliberations is provided in red text. Additional guidance for use during the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberations is provided in green text. The Finance and Budget Committee directed staff to use a "weighted workload measure" concept as opposed to the "average budget" as the calculation for comparison purposes. 12. Per section 28.36(2)(a), Florida Statutes, proposed clerk budget "must provide detailed information on the anticipated revenues available and expenditures necessary for the performance of the court-related functions listed in s. 28.35(3)(a) of the clerk s office" a. How does the corporation operationalize this requirement? (This issue will be addressed through the budget form as currently designed.) 13. Per section 28.36(2)(b), Florida Statutes, "The proposed budget must be balanced such that the total of the estimated revenues available equals or exceeds the total of the anticipated expenditures. Such revenues include revenue projected to be received from fees, service charges, costs, and fines for court-related functions during the fiscal period covered by the budget. The anticipated expenditures must be itemized as required by the corporation." a. How does the corporation operationalize this requirement? (This issue will be addressed through a revision to Exhibit B on the budget form. A cell will be added to calculate the difference between the net budget request and the total projected revenue. This difference will be considered the projected distribution from the trust fund.) b. In what manner will the corporation require expenditures to be itemized? (This issue will be addressed through the budget form as currently designed.) 14. Per section 28.36(3), Florida Statutes, "If a clerk of the court estimates that available funds plus projected revenues from fines, fees, service charges, and costs for court-related services are insufficient to meet the anticipated expenditures for the standard list of court-related functions in s. 28.35(3)(a) performed by his or her office, the clerk must report the revenue deficit to the corporation in the manner and form prescribed by the corporation. The corporation shall verify that the proposed budget is limited to the standard list of court-related functions in s. 28.35(3)(a). If the corporation verifies that a revenue deficit is projected, the corporation shall certify a revenue deficit and notify the Department of Revenue that the clerk is authorized to retain revenues, in an amount necessary to fully fund the projected revenue deficit, which he or she would otherwise be required to remit to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the department s Clerks of the Court Trust Fund pursuant to s. 28.37. If a revenue deficit is projected for that clerk after retaining all of the projected collections from the court-related fines, fees, service charges, and costs, the corporation shall certify the amount of the revenue deficit to the Executive Office of the Governor and request release authority for funds from the department s Clerks of the Court Trust Fund. Notwithstanding s. 216.192 relating to the release of funds, the Executive Office of the Governor may approve the release of funds in accordance with the notice, review, and objection procedures set forth in s. 216.177 and shall provide notice to the Department of Revenue and the Chief Financial Officer. The Department of Revenue shall request monthly distributions from the Chief Financial Officer in equal amounts to Original: August 02, 2013. Updated: February 3, 2015 Page 5 Page 48

Highlighted Statutory Provisions and Initial Policy and Operational Questions Guidance utilized during the CFY 2014-15 budget deliberations is provided in red text. Additional guidance for use during the CFY 2015-16 budget deliberations is provided in green text. each clerk certified to have a revenue deficit, in accordance with the releases approved by the Governor." a. How does the corporation want clerk to report revenue deficits? b. How will the corporation " verify that the proposed budget is limited to the standard list of court-related functions in s. 28.35(3)(a)?" c. How does the corporation want to operationalize the efforts to "certify a revenue deficit and notify the Department of Revenue that the clerk is authorized to retain revenues?" d. How does the corporation want to operationalize the efforts to "certify the amount of the revenue deficit to the Executive Office of the Governor and request release authority for funds from the department s Clerks of the Court Trust Fund?" At the December 10, 2013, meeting, John Dew presented on these issues and described the current administrative procedures he has developed with DOR and Governor's staff. The committee was content with these procedures. Original: August 02, 2013. Updated: February 3, 2015 Page 6 Page 49

County Fines Collected 1 Enhancements 1 Net 2 3/12/2015 Draft Operations 1 Spending 3 Available Balance 4 Court-Related Program Dedicated to Future Alachua $ 2,534,908.97 $ - $ 2,498,074.33 $ 36,834.64 $ 36,834.64 $ - Baker $ 180,773.84 $ 14,478.47 $ 6,259.30 $ 160,036.07 $ 129,981.09 $ 30,054.98 Bay $ 1,293,216.11 $ 263,952.06 $ 604,946.18 $ 424,317.87 $ 424,317.87 $ - Bradford $ 603,517.43 $ 273,066.51 $ - $ 330,450.92 $ - $ 330,450.92 Brevard $ 3,057,789.42 $ 2,648,419.49 $ - $ 409,369.93 $ 383,297.92 $ 26,072.01 Broward $ 6,133,282.22 $ 374,944.32 $ 4,535,095.14 $ 1,223,242.76 $ 1,223,242.76 $ - Calhoun $ 89,127.32 $ 5,128.89 $ 83,998.43 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ - Charlotte $ 850,207.55 $ 618,145.10 $ - $ 232,062.45 $ - $ 232,062.45 Citrus $ 558,014.30 $ 430,109.14 $ 73,803.51 $ 54,101.65 $ 54,101.65 $ - Clay $ 831,263.82 $ 693,677.85 $ 11,856.04 $ 125,729.93 $ 89,286.77 $ 36,443.16 Collier $ 2,363,035.03 $ - $ 2,363,035.03 $ - $ - $ - Columbia $ 640,425.66 $ 97,419.23 $ 214,606.94 $ 328,399.49 $ 328,399.49 $ - Dade $ 24,851,879.02 $ 1,527,081.75 $ 18,326,289.37 $ 4,998,507.90 $ 4,998,507.90 $ - Desoto $ 165,924.56 $ 30,805.62 $ 46,733.79 $ 88,385.15 $ - $ 88,385.15 Dixie $ 94,872.07 $ 90,054.56 $ - $ 4,817.51 $ 2,465.13 $ 2,352.38 Duval $ 5,230,581.02 $ 2,990,355.14 $ - $ 2,240,225.88 $ 2,240,225.88 $ - Escambia $ 1,591,250.69 $ 79,512.26 $ - $ 1,511,738.43 $ 959,044.49 $ 552,693.94 Flagler $ 332,581.88 $ 183,721.50 $ 68,467.61 $ 80,392.77 $ 41,600.00 $ 38,792.77 Franklin $ 73,942.99 $ - $ 12,599.69 $ 61,343.30 $ 61,343.30 $ - Gadsden $ 347,914.86 $ 299,039.67 $ - $ 48,875.19 $ 48,875.19 $ - Gilchrist $ 48,176.80 $ 16,136.64 $ - $ 32,040.16 $ 5,169.15 $ 26,871.01 Glades $ 205,409.00 $ 76,865.97 $ - $ 128,543.03 $ - $ 128,543.03 Gulf $ 69,628.20 $ 6,939.13 $ - $ 62,689.07 $ 62,689.07 $ - Hamilton $ 196,499.32 $ 147,995.78 $ - $ 48,503.54 $ - $ 48,503.54 Hardee $ 282,992.98 $ 158,693.70 $ - $ 124,299.28 $ 20,000.00 $ 104,299.28 Hendry $ 387,881.03 $ 387,881.03 $ - $ - $ - $ - Hernando $ 1,083,130.03 $ 813,560.83 $ 126,372.66 $ 143,196.54 $ 143,196.54 $ - Highlands $ 692,199.16 $ 524,009.17 $ - $ 168,189.99 $ 168,189.99 $ - Hillsborough $ 7,475,839.00 $ 2,224,715.00 $ 3,683,259.00 $ 1,567,865.00 $ 1,567,865.00 $ - Holmes $ 211,136.65 $ 22,823.22 $ - $ 188,313.43 $ 188,313.43 $ 0.00 Indian River $ 940,343.00 $ 716,507.45 $ 198,224.60 $ 25,610.95 $ 25,610.95 $ 0.00 Jackson $ 509,831.52 $ 267,796.01 $ 138,809.59 $ 103,225.92 $ 103,225.92 $ - Jefferson $ 177,688.20 $ 65,403.96 $ - $ 112,284.24 $ 107,145.63 $ 5,138.61 Lafayette $ 47,076.87 $ 19,874.65 $ - $ 27,202.22 $ - $ 27,202.22 Lake $ 2,149,033.00 $ 654,920.00 $ 876,842.00 $ 617,271.00 $ 617,271.00 $ - Lee $ 3,733,262.84 $ 2,603,073.93 $ 102,759.07 $ 1,027,429.84 $ 1,027,429.84 $ - Leon $ 1,574,171.89 $ 1,291,180.71 $ 282,991.00 $ 0.18 $ - $ 0.18 Levy $ 185,598.40 $ 185,104.69 $ - $ 493.71 $ - $ 493.71 Liberty $ 35,505.22 $ 31,787.98 $ 1,701.00 $ 2,016.24 $ - $ 2,016.24 Madison $ 413,279.69 $ 227,582.82 $ - $ 185,696.87 $ 27,210.20 $ 158,486.67 Manatee $ 1,427,217.08 $ 222,072.00 $ 925,531.00 $ 279,614.08 $ 279,614.08 $ - Marion $ 1,932,978.97 $ 1,932,978.97 $ - $ - $ - $ - Martin $ 1,314,923.60 $ 990,978.62 $ 235,341.07 $ 88,603.91 $ 88,603.91 $ - Monroe $ 1,061,716.10 $ - $ 37,854.00 $ 1,023,862.10 $ 953,323.09 $ 70,539.01 Nassau $ 346,340.00 $ 57,084.00 $ - $ 289,256.00 $ 289,256.00 $ - Okaloosa $ 1,223,368.99 $ 742,472.43 $ - $ 480,896.56 $ 468,660.47 $ 12,236.09 Okeechobee $ 207,369.81 $ - $ - $ 207,369.81 $ - $ 207,369.81 Orange $ 9,426,235.11 $ (0.00) $ 8,766,647.21 $ 659,587.90 $ 659,587.90 $ - Osceola $ 2,079,230.55 $ 1,924,277.11 $ - $ 154,953.44 $ 154,953.44 $ - Palm Beach $ 8,476,940.33 $ 582,329.27 $ 7,581,192.28 $ 313,418.78 $ 313,418.78 $ - Pasco $ 2,430,741.89 $ 2,430,741.89 $ - $ - $ - $ - Pinellas $ 6,551,067.11 $ 5,087,266.37 $ - $ 1,463,800.74 $ 1,463,800.74 $ - Polk $ 3,742,690.92 $ 272,214.58 $ 1,731,583.81 $ 1,738,892.53 $ 1,738,892.53 $ - Putnam $ 228,346.84 $ 178,745.36 $ 10,622.95 $ 38,978.53 $ - $ 38,978.53 Santa Rosa $ 920,572.16 $ 571,171.63 $ - $ 349,400.53 $ 349,400.53 $ - Sarasota $ 2,216,265.00 $ 2,072,070.81 $ - $ 144,194.19 $ 144,194.19 $ (0.00) Seminole $ 4,104,069.71 $ 2,571,898.12 $ 16,403.35 $ 1,515,768.24 $ 732,265.64 $ 783,502.60 St. Johns $ 650,773.42 $ 327,563.14 $ - $ 323,210.28 $ 0.00 $ 323,210.28 St. Lucie $ 2,257,815.38 $ 1,893,935.26 $ - $ 363,880.12 $ - $ 363,880.12 Sumter $ 711,471.48 $ 250,000.00 $ - $ 461,471.48 $ 461,471.48 $ - Suwannee $ 211,710.99 $ 91,328.20 $ - $ 120,382.79 $ 120,382.79 $ - Taylor $ 110,072.54 $ 52,305.57 $ 4,800.00 $ 52,966.97 $ - $ 52,966.97 Union $ 23,725.73 $ 11,767.99 $ - $ 11,957.74 $ 11,566.49 $ 391.25 Volusia $ 2,309,397.06 $ 1,520,082.38 $ - $ 789,314.68 $ 250,000.00 $ 539,314.68 Wakulla $ 159,284.81 $ 37,928.39 $ 113,775.21 $ 7,581.21 $ - $ 7,581.21 Walton $ 393,296.85 $ 142,562.08 $ - $ 250,734.77 $ 250,734.77 $ - Washington $ 141,228.89 $ 77,870.59 $ 57,622.15 $ 5,736.15 $ - $ 5,736.15 Total $ 126,902,042.88 $ 45,104,408.99 $ 53,738,097.31 $ 28,059,536.58 $ 23,814,967.63 $ 4,244,568.95 Notes 1. These variables are calculated as the sum of July 2009 to Current as reported on the monthly EC report. 2. The Net is calculated as the difference of Fines Collected minus the sum of expenditures for Court-Related Operations and Program Enhancements. 3. The formula used to calculate "Dedicated to Future Spending" was updated as of February 2013. 4. The formula used to calculate "Available Balance" was updated as of February 2013. 5. Due to formula, calculation, and reporting issues, data in this summary analysis may vary slightly from data on the EC report form. Page 50

DRAFT Historic Trends in Annual Net Balances for Ten Percent Data $20,000,000 Data as of 3/12/2015 $15,000,000 $15,195,530 $10,000,000 $9,599,098 $5,000,000 $6,678,241 $6,789,989 $ SFY 200910 SFY 201011 SFY 201112 SFY 201213 Trans CFY 201314 CFY 201415 $(1,482,546) $(1,265,228) $(5,000,000) Note 1: Annual Net Balances are calculated by subtracting Annual Expenditures from Annual Collections. Note 2: The Trans period is from July 1, 2013 through September 30, 2013. Note 3: The data is dynamic and subject to ch based on clerk reporting. $(10,000,000) $(7,455,548) Page 51

DRAFT Fines Collected CourtRelated Operations Program Enhancements Net Dedicated to Future Spending Available Balance SFY 200910 $ 22,217,369.68 $ 3,823,285.14 $ 3,198,555.01 $ 15,195,529.53 SFY 201011 $ 24,082,770.75 $ 7,141,004.17 $ 10,263,525.37 $ 6,678,241.21 SFY 201112 $ 24,278,350.10 $ 7,462,940.15 $ 7,216,312.26 $ 9,599,097.69 SFY 201213 $ 23,077,457.12 $ 6,167,315.99 $ 10,120,151.68 $ 6,789,989.45 Trans $ 5,416,422.03 $ 2,856,216.96 $ 4,042,750.77 $ (1,482,545.70) CFY 201314 $ 21,406,122.38 $ 13,745,584.20 $ 15,116,086.08 $ (7,455,547.90) CFY 201415 $ 6,423,550.82 $ 3,908,062.38 $ 3,780,716.14 $ (1,265,227.70) Totals $ 126,902,042.88 $ 45,104,408.99 $ 53,738,097.31 $ 28,059,536.58 $ 23,814,967.63 $ 4,244,568.95 Data of as 3/12/2015 Page 52

Illustration of Section 3 from Exhibit I of the CFY 2015-16 Budget Form Page 53