Trial Court Budget Commission Meeting Minutes June 26, 2018 Orlando, Florida

Transcription

1 Trial Court Budget Commission Meeting Minutes Attendance Members Present The Honorable Margaret Steinbeck, Chair The Honorable Mark Mahon, Vice Chair The Honorable Monica Brasington The Honorable Catherine Brunson Ms. Holly Elomina The Honorable Ronald Ficarrotta The Honorable Robert Hilliard The Honorable Frederick Lauten Ms. Sandra Lonergan The Honorable Diana Moreland The Honorable Debra Nelson The Honorable Gregory Parker Ms. Kathleen Pugh The Honorable Anthony Rondolino Mr. Grant Slayden The Honorable Elijah Smiley Mr. Walt Smith The Honorable Bertilla Soto The Honorable John Stargel Mr. Mark Weinberg Attendance Members Absent The Honorable Patricia Thomas The Honorable Joseph Williams The Honorable Scott Bernstein Special Note: It is recommended these minutes be used in conjunction with the meeting materials. Chair Steinbeck called the Trial Court Budget Commission (TCBC) meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. Chair Steinbeck acknowledged Justice Lawson and Marti Harkness from Senate staff, and thanked them for their continued support of the TCBC. She then invited TCBC members and audience participants to introduce themselves. Agenda Item I: Approval of Prior Meeting Minutes Chair Steinbeck presented the draft meeting minutes from the May 16, 2018 and June 4, 2018, TCBC meeting and asked if there were any changes necessary before approval. Judge Mahon moved to approve the minutes as drafted. Judge Stargel seconded, and the motion passed without objection. Agenda Item II: FY Budget Status A. Salary Budgets Dorothy Willard provided an overview of the trial court salary budgets for FY as of May 31, The salary liability for the trial courts General Revenue/State Court Revenue Trust Fund was approximately $1,789,377 under the salary appropriation. The Administrative Trust Fund salary liability was under the appropriation by $34,985, and the Federal Grants Trust Fund liability was under the appropriation by $443,639. B. Positions Vacant More Than 180 Days Beatriz Caballero presented the positions vacant for more than 180 days as of June 13, Ms. Caballero noted the majority of the vacancies were interpreters.

2 Page 2 of 14 C. Operating Budgets Jessie McMillan reviewed the operating budget expenditures for FY as of June 21, D. Trust Fund Cash Balances Jessie McMillan provided an overview of the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund (SCRTF) cash balance as of May 31, 2018, for both current and next fiscal year. E. Year-End Spending Plan Jessie McMillan reported expenditures related to the FY year-end spending plan. Overall, approximately 87% of funds have been expended as of June 21, Ms. McMillan continued reporting on expenditures related to the virtual remote interpreting spending plan. Overall, more than 58% of requested funding has been expended as of June 21. Judge Steinbeck noted there are expenditures that are still in the process of being incurred that are not reflected in the materials. Agenda Item III: FY Allocations A. Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officers and General Magistrates Kelsey Harper presented the proposed allocations. Ms. Harper first presented the proposed allotments for Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officers using the current funding formula based on workload. She noted there is currently a vacant 0.25 full-time equivalent (FTE) hearing officer and 0.25 FTE administrative support position in the 1st Circuit. Although these positions are not required to be re-allocated, the 1st Circuit will voluntarily return these positions for re-allocation to another circuit. Based on net need, the 10 th Circuit is eligible to receive the vacant hearing officer position and the 4 th Circuit is eligible for the vacant administrative support position. Both circuits have been contacted and have expressed interest in receiving the positions. The Funding Methodology Committee (FMC) recommended approval of all three decisions. Judge Ficarrotta moved approval of the recommendations, and Judge Hilliard seconded the motion. Walt Smith asked how a quarter of a position can be allocated to two different circuits. Judge Mahon answered the 4 th Circuit is working with OSCA to determine how best to utilize the position. The motion passed without objection. Kelsey Harper presented the proposed allocations for General Magistrate positions and noted there are currently no new resources or resources in reserve available for re-allocation. The FMC recommended approval of the proposed allotments and direction to OSCA staff to monitor vacancies throughout the year. Judge Nelson moved approval of the proposed allotments, and Judge Parker seconded the motion. The motion passed without objection. B. Full-Time Equivalent and Base Operating Budgets Kelsey Harper presented the proposed allocations for FTE and base operating budgets and noted unless new appropriations or budget reductions are received from the legislature, these budgets are not adjusted. For FY , the legislature did not appropriate any new FTE to the trial courts. Ms.

3 Page 3 of 14 Harper summarized a letter received from the 19 th Circuit requesting to convert three countyfunded FTE to three state-funded FTE or file a Legislative Budget Request (LBR) for additional resources. She stated no additional FTE were appropriated to address this request; however, new funding was appropriated for problem-solving courts in a new special appropriations category. Ms. Harper presented the proposed FY base operating budget allotments and stated the proposed allocations are based on FY allotments with adjustments for permanent budget amendments, TCBC approved actions, non-recurring items, and approved personnel actions. Judge Stargel moved approval of the base operating budgets, and Judge Rondolino seconded the motion. The motion was approved without objection. C. Non-Due Process Contractual Allocations: Senior Judge Days, Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Officers, Additional Compensation to County Judges, and Mediation 1. Senior Judge Days Kris Slayden presented the proposed allocation of senior judge days. She reminded the commission that since FY , the trial courts received additional senior judge days either through the foreclosure initiative, or by the legislature re-appropriating any unused senior judge days back to the trial courts. She stated for FY , the legislature did not re-appropriate any unused days. Ms. Slayden further noted additional resources were received specifically for Flagler and Citrus Counties for FY Ms. Slayden then summarized requests from five circuits for additional senior judge days. Ms. Slayden stated the FMC is recommending allocating available senior judge days using the official funding formula based on each circuit s percent of judicial need and holding 50 days in reserve. The committee did not recommend allocating additional days based on circuit requests. Judge Lauten moved approval of the recommendation, Grant Slayden seconded the motion. Judge Steinbeck noted that historically the trial courts have been able to meet the needs of circuits by sharing resources. She anticipates resources will need to be shared more in the upcoming year due to fewer available days. Judge Mahon clarified the resources provided to Citrus and Flagler counties are limited to those specific counties through proviso language in the General Appropriations Act. The motion passed without objection. 2. Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Officers (CTIHO) Kris Slayden provided an overview of the proposed allocations based on the historic funding formula and the FMC s recommendation for approval of the proposed allotments. Grant Slayden moved approval, and Judge Lauten seconded the motion. The motion passed without objection.

4 Page 4 of Additional Compensation to County Judges Kris Slayden presented the FMC s recommendation for allotments based on the historical funding formula. Judge Nelson moved approval and Judge Mahon seconded the motion. The motion passed without objection. 4. Mediation Kris Slayden provided and overview of the historical funding formula for mediation services. She noted under the funding formula, three circuits (the 2 nd Circuit, 6 th Circuit, and 13 th Judicial Circuit) have exceeded their funding ceilings based on estimated number of events and total budget. The 6 th and 13 th Circuits proposed contractual allocations are held to within their funding ceilings. The 2 nd Circuit s proposed contractual allocation is held partially harmless. Ms. Slayden reported the 11 th Circuit is requesting $390,000 in additional funds, and even with the additional funds, the 11 th Circuit is still under their funding ceiling. Ms. Slayden noted the FMC recommended modifying the funding formula to hold $100,000 in reserve and allocating the remaining funds (approximately $89,000) to the 11 th Circuit. Judge Brunson moved approval of the FMC s recommendation. Sandra Lonergan seconded the motion, and the motion passed without objection. D. Due Process Contractual Allocations: Court Interpreting, Expert Witness, Court Reporting and Cost Recovery Kris Slayden provided a historical overview of the previous methodology use for determining due process contractual funding allocations approved by the commission. 1. Joint Due Process Workgroup Ms. Slayden noted the commission s previous approval of the Joint Due Process Workgroup recommendations including using available FY contractual funds to fund virtual remote interpreting, redistributing FY contractual funds to meet additional interpreting needs in the circuits, implementing a mechanism for tracking increased delivery of interpreting services, and the potential reallocation of 4.0 FTE in the 11 th Circuit. 2. Revise Due Process Contractual Allocations: Court Interpreting (including Remote Interpreting), Expert Witness, Court Reporting (including OpenCourt), Cost Recovery a. Open Court Ms. Slayden presented a cost analysis relating to the cost effectiveness of OpenCourt, an inhouse solution for providing digital court reporting services, in comparison to other vendor solutions. Based on the information provided, the FMC recommended approving an

5 Page 5 of 14 additional $90,000 in contractual funding to the 8 th Circuit on a non-recurring basis to continue developing OpenCourt. Ms. Slayden noted the new statewide cross-jurisdictional unit in OSCA is starting its review and potential management of vendor contracts. Roosevelt Sawyer stated the commission approved funding for two positions for the cross-jurisdictional technology support unit to look at circuits that were using in-house technology systems. He further stated an advisory group consisting of eight court technology officers has been created to look at both in-house and vendor technology solutions. Based on recommendations of the advisory group, a developer position and a manager position have been hired to look at operations involving Court Applications Processing Systems (CAPS) and transitioning OpenCourt operations and contract management from the 8 th Circuit to the statewide level. Once the transition of the contract management of OpenCourt has occurred, Mr. Sawyer noted staff will be able to provide more information as it relates to the benefits of the OpenCourt funding. Judge Steinbeck noted the Executive Committee discussed concerns related to having a single statewide system. She stated that it is not the intent of either the Executive Committee or the commission to have a single system, but recognized the value of having some in-house systems available to prevent the reliance on vendors and associated maintenance costs. Additionally, Judge Steinbeck noted the cost comparison between in-house systems and vendor solutions will be an ongoing value in having the cross-jurisdictional unit supporting all circuits through data collection and analysis. Walt Smith moved approval of the FMC s recommendation. Judge Ficarrotta seconded, and the motion was approved without objection. b. Statewide Call Manager Remote Interpreting Kris Slayden provided an overview of the commission s previous approval to provide $113,931 in funding ($108,100 recurring) to support virtual remote interpreting services. She noted the recurring amount is included in the proposed allocations for FY This items was presented to the commission for informational purposes only. c. Element Allocations Kris Slayden stated the FMC considered two options for allocating contractual funding among the due process elements. She referred to the commission s previous directive to consider providing additional funding towards supporting court interpreting. Ms. Slayden noted the FMC recommended approval of Option 2, placing 2.5% of the appropriation in the statewide due process reserve, removing funds for the statewide call manager and OpenCourt, and proportioning the remaining funds among the three due process elements based on estimated FY expenditures. A 5% cushion is provided to the expert witness and court reporting elements to address unforeseen events. Judge Stargel moved approval of the committee s recommendation. Judge Mahon seconded the motion. Judge Steinbeck

6 Page 6 of 14 recognized the Due Process Workgroup and the FMC for their work in developing policies for generating cost savings in the expert witness element and then redistributing those savings to meet the needs for court interpreting services. Judge Lauten described discussions that have expressed concerns as to whether the new expert witness policies would provide costs savings. He highlighted the cost savings shown in the materials and expressed a desire for more education to the circuits regarding the revised procedures and the cost savings realized. Judge Steinbeck responded that the Supreme Court has issued a new administrative order clarifying procedures, specifically payment responsibility. She further encouraged members of the commission to continue to assure people that due process rights will not be sacrificed to save funding. With no further discussion, the motion was approved without objection. d. Circuit Allocations Kris Slayden provided an overview of the proposed circuit allotments, as recommended by the FMC, using the official funding methodologies utilizing the three-year average expenditures for court interpreting and court reporting. The expert witness element is proportioned among the circuits based on fiscal year estimated expenditures. Grant Slayden moved approval of the FMC s recommendation. Judge Soto seconded the motion, and the motion was approved without objection. e. Updating the Uniform Data Reporting System Kris Slayden stated the FMC recognizes that as resources are provided there is a need for accountability in how those resources are being used. Ms. Slayden described the current system of reporting and collecting court events related to due process through the Uniform Data Reporting (UDR) System and described the need for tracking the different case types using due process resources and the manner in which services are being provided. She reported the FMC recommended expanding the UDR system to capture additional information and to refer the issue to the Office of the State Courts Administrator (OSCA) for development. Judge Lauten moved approval of the committee s recommendation. Walt Smith seconded, and the motion was approved without objection. f. Due Process Cost Recovery Dorothy Willard presented three options considered by the FMC for allocation of cost recovery authority. Ms. Willard noted historically the allocations have been based on the prorated share of projected revenue for the upcoming fiscal year. Ms. Willard emphasized that cost recovery is not general revenue but rather spending authority within a trust fund and allocations cannot be spent unless the cash to support the authority has been collected. She then described a new option based on the three year average expenditures for each circuit. This option will allow the trial courts to create a reserve that could be accessed if additional spending authority is needed. Ms. Willard noted this option will not impact any circuit s cash that has been collected, only the circuit s spending authority. Ms. Willard

7 Page 7 of 14 stated historically the spending authority in the trust fund has been underutilized so there has not been a justification for filing a budget amendment to increase spending authority. If the trial courts get to the point where the appropriated authority has been exhausted there is an avenue available to request additional spending authority if needed. The methodology helps to better distribute the current level of authority to address needs, provide justification for any potential need for requesting additional authority, and aids in utilizing the cash that is in the trust fund. Both the FMC and the Executive Committee reviewed the options and recommended approval of Option 3, allotments based on the three year average expenditures. Judge Steinbeck stated the idea behind the proposed methodology is to better allocate the authority to address unmet needs. She further stated the Budget Management Committee (BMC) will be responsible for developing standards in regards to accessing the reserve. Ms. Willard stated the goal would be to work with the BMC to develop procedures by the August 2018 commission meeting. Judge Smiley recommended revising Option 3 to reflected allocating the initial due process cost recovery authority based on each circuit s average of three years of expenditures. Judge Smiley moved approval of the modified Option 3. Judge Stargel seconded, and the motion passed with two opposed. E. Statewide Allocations Dorothy Willard provided an overview of the proposed FY statewide allotments. She noted the proposed allotments with recurring amounts that have typically been held in reserve that have a statewide benefit. Ms. Willard also highlighted changes in amounts from FY and FY and changes based on decisions made during previous agenda items. Kris Slayden presented the proposed allocation supporting the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS). The Executive Committee recommended approval of the requested funds on a recurring basis. Judge Steinbeck noted, similar to the issues discussed with OpenCourt, the benefits of supporting an in-house option as an available alternative to for-profit vendor solutions. Mark Weinberg asked when control and management of ICMS will be turned from the 8 th Circuit to the cross-jurisdictional support unit in OSCA. Roosevelt Sawyer responded the transfer will begin starting in FY with the management of ICMS related contracts. Judge Stargel moved approval of the recommendation. Judge Ficarrotta stated, based on the upcoming transfer, allotting the funds on a non-recurring basis would be the better option. Judge Mahon seconded Judge Stargel s motion. Judge Stargel noted by making the funds recurring, they will be spent with a longer-term view. Additionally, the cross-jurisdictional unit will be looking not only at ICMS but at other solutions, both in-house and vendors, as well. Judge Stargel further stated if the funds are non-recurring the commission will be having a similar debate every year. The motion passed with one opposition.

8 Page 8 of 14 Dorothy Willard continued her review of the proposed statewide allotments. Judge Lauten moved approval of the statewide allotments. Katherine Pugh seconded, and the motion passed without objection. F. Problem-Solving Courts/Advisory Group Recommendations Judge Steinbeck recognized Judge Smiley and the Problem-Solving Courts Advisory Group, acknowledging the wide-reaching, complex, and time sensitive issues the Advisory Group is addressing. Judge Smiley acknowledged the members comprising the Advisory Group and noted the cross representation of the TCBC, the Task Force on Substance Abuse and Mental Health Issues in the Court, and the Steering Committee on Children and Families in the Court. Judge Smiley provided an overview of the funds appropriated to the trial courts to support problem-solving courts and the accompanying proviso language in the General Appropriations Act. He further reviewed the commission s prior decision to continue allocating the 10 post-adjudicatory drug courts at the same level of funding as FY as well as problem-solving courts currently receiving non-recurring funds. Of the remaining appropriated funds, there is approximately $1.7 million to be allocated. Judge Smiley stated there were twelve recommendations from the Advisory Group for the commission s review and provided a summary. Judge Mahon noted clarification may be needed regarding the match requirements and whether it applies at the individual court level, at the aggregate county level, or circuit level. Judge Stargel moved approval of all of the recommendations. Grant Slayden seconded the motion. Judge Smiley stated further clarification regarding the match requirements will be provided to the commission at the August 2018 meeting. Judge Steinbeck requested an overview of the framework for the allocation process since the circuits have been inquiring about how to access the recurring funds that have not been allocated. She reminded the commission that there will be criteria that all problem-solving courts, including existing courts, will need to meet in order to access the funding. Judge Smiley provided a brief summary of the anticipated application and review process. He noted it is anticipated the Advisory Group will have final recommendations available for the TCBC in August with the goal of distributing the funds to the circuits by the end of September. Judge Steinbeck clarified the applications can be for enhancements to existing or new programs. Eric Maclure further noted the Advisory Group has provided interpretations of the proviso language in order to help guide circuit s requests for funding as well as operational needs to monitor the implementation of programs and the use of funds as provided in the meeting materials. Walt Smith noted circuits will need to prioritize within their request if seeking funds to address multiple issues or courts. Judge Lauten stated criteria for best practices are available for drug courts but are not available for other problem-solving courts, which may increase the work needed to implement new courts. Judge Lauten further recognized and thanked Judge Smiley for his work as chair of the Advisory Group. The motion to approve the recommendations of the Advisory Group was passed without objection.

9 Page 9 of 14 G. Allocations for Other Special Appropriations Jessie McMillan noted the items presented in this agenda item were for informational purposes only and provided an overview of the special appropriations. 1. Domestic Violence Active Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) Technology The legislature once again appropriated funds to support the Domestic Violence Offender Monitoring program and the funds appropriated for FY are the same amount as received in FY Vivitrol/Naltrexone to Treat Alcohol- or Opioid-Addicted Offenders $7.5 million was appropriated to the trial courts for continued support of the use of Vivitrol/Naltrexone to treat alcohol- or opioid-addicted offenders. Of that amount, $5.0 million is appropriated on a recurring basis and $2.5 million on a non-recurring basis. 3. Electronic Notification (Executive Direction) The legislature appropriated $750,000 in Grant and Aids funding to support the Electronic Notification project. The proviso language directs the OSCA and Clerks of Court Operations Corporation to work together to develop an information technology platform to electronically transmit alert reminders to individuals involved in the criminal justice system. Agenda Item IV: Joint Due Process Workgroup Update Judge Stargel provided an update on the activities of the Due Process Workgroup and referred to the previously discussed Supreme Court administrative order updating the expert witness rate structure chart. Judge Stargel stated the workgroup also addressed issues relating to court interpreter salaries, noting the vacancy report presented in Agenda Item II.B. Judge Stargel further stated a decision is needed from the commission regarding 4.0 vacant FTE positions in the 11 th Circuit. Judge Stargel noted the 11 th Circuit offered to give up 4.0 vacant FTEs, contingent upon approval and funding of the proposed court interpreter salary plan. Prior to addressing the decision needed regarding the vacant positions, the commission discussed the upcoming salary budget in Agenda Item V.A. Kris Slayden provided an overview of Due Process Workgroup s discussions regarding issues impacting court interpreting services. She reviewed the options relating to the positions for the commission s consideration. The Executive Committee recommended approval of Option 4, moving the 4.0 vacant FTE to unallocated status to be allocated by the TCBC at a later date. Walt Smith inquired as to the 11 th Circuit s need for translation services and if Option 3 should be considered. Judge Soto replied there is a need for translation services, but the circuit is willing to wait and see the impacts from the salary increase package. Judge Mahon moved approval of Option 4. Judge Soto seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Walt Smith inquired about the status of the Due Process Workgroup s recommendation to ask the Court Interpreter Certification Board to review the current certification process. Kris Slayden replied a letter

10 Page 10 of 14 from the chair of the TCBC and the Commission on Trial Court Performance and Accountability will be sent to the chair of the Court Interpreter Certification Board. Sandra Lonergan expressed concerns with changes to the certification process for court interpreters. Judge Stargel replied the Due Process Workgroup did not study the issue, but rather the workgroup is simply asking the Certification Board to review the process to see if there are any areas where small changes can be made without risking the quality of court interpretations being provided. Judge Steinbeck reinforced that the commission is not looking to sacrifice quality interpretations for cost savings. Agenda Item V: FY Budget A. Start-Up Salary Budget and Management Dorothy Willard reviewed the start-up trial court salary budgets for FY She noted adjustments to the projected DROP liability based on information provided by the circuits. Ms. Willard also noted the figures for the trial courts salary appropriation is an estimated amount based on pending supplemental appropriations for health and retirement adjustments that have yet to be received. Ms. Willard stated the adjusted liability over the salary appropriation is approximately $4.1 million. Ms. Willard then reviewed the other salary implementation issues approved by the commission, including liabilities related to court interpreters and senior trial court law clerks. Ms. Willard stated the final adjusted liability deficit is approximately $6.2 million. Ms. Willard provided an overview of issues impacting the FY salary budget including an increase in the turnover rate (4.5%), even after the lifting of the previously implemented hiring freeze, which is generating a higher level of lapse than what was experienced prior to the hiring freeze. Ms. Willard noted a significant amount of turnover in long-term employees that has generated saving and helped in covering any projected deficit and additional items added to the salary budget. Additionally, the trial courts have experienced a 20% increase in leave payouts than were incurred in the previous fiscal year. Ms. Willard continued reporting that salary deficits are covered through the lapse of positions. As noted previously, the final deficit projected for FY is approximately $6.2 million. Ms. Willard stated the historical lapse generated in the trial courts averages approximately $6.5 million which is sufficient to cover the projected FY deficit. Judge Steinbeck noted the trial courts are never fully funded at 100% employment. She reminded the members that the commission previously approved the Due Process Workgroup recommendations regarding court interpreter salaries. Those recommendations were sent to the Supreme Court for approval. Judge Steinbeck informed the commission that the Supreme Court approved the recommendations subject to available salary dollars. She stated, based on the information provided by Ms. Willard, there is sufficient funds to cover the costs of the court interpreter salary increase package. Judge Steinbeck emphasized that the impact of the court interpreter salary package, particularly the impact to the generated lapse, is unknown at the

11 Page 11 of 14 moment and will require close monitoring of the budget throughout the year. If needed, a hiring chill may need to be implemented to help manage the salary dollars. Grant Slayden moved approval of the court interpreting salary increase package. Judge Soto seconded, and the motion passed without objection. B. Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum Prior to reviewing the proposed budget and pay memorandum, Judge Steinbeck addressed concerns regarding the increased number of exception requests submitted to the Executive Committee for review and approval. Judge Steinbeck stated the commission would like to provide rate funds to the chief judges in order to meet unique, critical, unmet needs to the extent the trial courts can afford. She explained the Executive Committee calculated the rate amount the trial courts can afford is 250,000, noting this amount could assist with retention and recruitment of employees. Judge Steinbeck stated the Executive Committee is recommending the distribution of 250,000 in rate. Judge Stargel moved approval of the Executive Committee s recommendation and Judge Rondolino seconded. Judge Steinbeck clarified the discretionary fund is intended to be used to address issues with equity, retention, and recruitment and not as an across the board increase for employees or a particular class of employees. Sandra Lonergan asked if something can be done to increase administrative secretary salaries. Judge Steinbeck replied the Executive Committee discussed continuing the current prohibition against upward reclassification, but also recommended conducting a branch-wide classification study using non-recurring dollars to address inequities in salaries and work responsibilities. She noted such a study would require coordination with the District Courts of Appeal and OSCA, and approval from the Supreme Court. The motion approving the Executive Committee s recommendation of establishing a chief discretionary fund passed without objection. Before presenting the proposed budget and pay memorandum, Dorothy Willard revisited the payroll projections discussed in Agenda Item V.A. and provided an overview of the Administrative Trust Fund and the Federal Grants Trust Fund. She noted the Federal Grants Trust Fund is currently showing a deficit. Ms. Willard stated there are pending contracts that, once approved, will bring the trust fund back into a good posture and alleviate the deficit. Dorothy Willard stated OSCA staff have made technical adjustments to the budget and pay memorandum. She noted one substantive change to the memorandum regarding due process services budget management. Ms. Willard suggested adding temporary employment needs to the expenditures allowed from due process contractual funds. This will allow for the payment of other personnel services (OPS) employees using due process funds. Judge Steinbeck noted the continued prohibition of upward reclassification of positions. She stated the Executive Committee recommends authorizing the OSCA Office of Human Resources to return currently pending requests for reclassification. Judge Steinbeck reminded members that it is prohibited to allow employees to

12 Page 12 of 14 work out of class and to ensure this is not happening within the trial courts. Eric Maclure described another technical change to the memorandum related to the authority given to the Executive Committee to consider and grant exceptions. He stated proposed language will be drafted to clarify the specific areas in which the Executive Committee will have authority to grant exceptions to the memorandum. Judge Mahon made a motion to allow staff to make the necessary changes to the budget and pay memorandum. Judge Ficarrotta seconded, and the motion passed without objection. C. Senior/Supervising Law Clerk Classification Eric Maclure reviewed a report previously submitted to the commission from the Personnel Committee regarding the senior law clerk class. He noted within the class it was possible to have a senior trial court law clerk position with managerial and supervisory duties and senior trial court law clerk positions resulting from five years of experience under the incentive plan. Mr. Maclure noted that when a senior law clerk position became vacant, the position would potentially be re-classed downward and circuits would lose that supervisory position. The Personnel Committee recommended creating a senior supervising law clerk position, setting the minimum salary at 5% above the current minimum, and requiring five years of experience in the practice of law or as a law clerk, including at least two years of managerial experience. Mr. Maclure stated, due to the close management of the salary budget and the prohibition on upward reclassification, the recommendations were held in abeyance for seeking Supreme Court approval. Mr. Maclure noted the fiscal impact of potential reclassifications have been included in the salary projections for FY Judge Nelson moved to seek Supreme Court approval of the proposed reclassification. Judge Ficarrotta seconded the motion. Mark Weinberg asked for clarification concerning the requirement for a supervising senior trial court law clerk to have two years of managerial experience. Mr. Maclure responded noting the Personnel Committee discussed the concerns about gaining managerial experience within existing law clerks. The Committee felt the supervisory role needed to have that experience requirement, but also allowed for the lead worker designation to satisfy the supervisory requirement as part of the consideration for someone to be promoted into that supervisory role. Walt Smith stated the idea is that you can have an internal candidate gain supervisory experience by having them designated as a lead worker. Beatriz Caballero further stated the class specifications include language stating applicable work experience may substitute for certain requirements. Judge Nelson s motion seeking Supreme Court approval passed with no objections. Agenda Item VI: FY Legislative Budget Request A. Timeline Dorothy Willard provided an overview of the trial court Legislative Budget Request (LBR) timeline.

13 Page 13 of 14 She noted, based on the decisions made by the commission today, there will be a notice sent to the circuits on the LBR instructions. Any approved circuit specific issues will be due to the OSCA Budget Office by July 13, Ms. Willard further stated preliminary approval of the LBR recommendations will be scheduled for review by the FMC and then the full commission at the August 28, 2018, meeting. B. Identification and Discussion of Potential Issues Judge Steinbeck noted at this time of year the commission typically provides guidance to OSCA staff for development of the trial court budget requests. She informed the members of an she sent, in preparation of today s meeting, to the chief judges and trial court administrators requesting information about each circuits critical needs and the priority ranking of those needs. Judge Steinbeck stated the critical needs and priority rankings provided by the circuits do not much differ from the requests in past years. She provided a summary of the discussions held during the Executive Committee meeting noting a potential crisis in civil dispute resolution. Judge Steinbeck described some of the challenges circuits have faced in resolving civil cases including increased filings and an overall slowdown in dispositions on a statewide level in both county and circuit courts. Judge Steinbeck stated the Executive Committee is seeking permission from the commission to work with OSCA staff to develop a budget request for resources to support access, efficiency, and equity in resolving civil disputes. Judge Steinbeck noted most of the critical needs submitted by the circuits relate to civil dispute resolution. Judge Brunson asked if the employee pay issue could be incorporated into the new proposals. Judge Steinbeck responded employee pay is still a high priority of the courts and will be considered in the development of the request. Judge Mahon also stated the courts will want to communicate a desire to participate in any across the board raises all state employees may receive. Judge Nelson made a motion to allow the Executive Committee to work with OSCA to develop legislative budget requests to be discussed at the August meeting. Judge Parker seconded, and the motion passed. Agenda Item VII. Cross-Jurisdictional Technology Support Status Report Roosevelt Sawyer indicated there was no further information to be presented at this time. Judge Steinbeck acknowledged the updates discussed in previous agenda items. Agenda Item VIII. Report from Chief Justice Designee to Clerks of Court Operations Corporation Executive Council Judge Ficarrotta provided an update on Clerks of Court Operations Corporation (CCOC) activities. He reported the clerks of courts are also experiencing more of a funding need than projected revenue and noted the clerks are hopeful they will not experience a reduced county fiscal year budget. He also reference the joint funding received to support the electronic notification project mentioned in Agenda Item III.G.3.

14 Page 14 of 14 Agenda Item IX. Other Business Judge Mahon acknowledged Chair Steinbeck for her service as chair of the TCBC for the past year. Adjournment With no other business before the commission, the meeting adjourned at 1:29 p.m.