I. Introduction and Overview... John. Review of Revenue Sources for Clerk Budgets... Stacy

Transcription

1 CCOC New Clerks Training Agenda Date: May 16, 2013 Time: 8:20 AM to 3:00 PM Location: The Crowne Plaza La Concha, Key West Meeting Room: The Top Conference Room Honorable Buddy Irby Alachua County Chair Honorable Sharon Bock Palm Beach County Vice-Chair Honorable Ken Burke Pinellas County Secretary/Treasurer Honorable Dwight Brock Collier County Honorable Stacy Butterfield Polk County I. Introduction and Overview... John II. III. Review of Revenue Sources for Clerk Budgets... Stacy Review SFY Clerk Budget Request... John, Doug, Greg a. Review SFY budget instructions b. Review each exhibit in the SFY budget form c. Discuss implications of revenue projections, allocations, outputs projections, and other implications Break from 10:00 to 10:20 Honorable John Crawford Nassau County IV. Review the SFY Budget Approval Process... John and Greg Honorable Harvey Ruvin Miami-Dade County Honorable Tim Sanders Madison County Supreme Court Honorable Thomas McGrady Judge Senate Honorable Pat Frank Hillsborough County House Honorable Paula S. O Neil PHD Pasco County Joe Boyd General Counsel John Dew Executive Director a. Review staff technical review, benchmark budget calculations, and data preparation b. Review Finance and Budget process c. Review Executive Council process d. Review Legislative Budget Request V. Review and Discuss Out Year Budget Processes... John, Doug, Greg Lunch 12:00 to 1:00 a. Review recent legislative actions b. Review July through September 2013 c. Review county fiscal year d. Review county fiscal year e. Review other issues f. Discuss implications and issues Barrington Circle Tallahassee, Florida Phone: Fax: VI. VII. VIII. Resume Morning Discussion, Address any Outstanding Questions, and/or Recap Materials Covered in the Morning... All Participants Review Fiscal Year Budget Management Activities... John, Doug, Greg Activity... All Participants Page 1 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.

2 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request DECEMBER 2012 Page 2

3 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 1 Contents Contents... 1 I. Executive Summary... 2 II. SFY Legislative Budget Request Summary and Previous Year Comparisons... 4 III. SFY Legislative Budget Request Explanations... 7 IV. Summary of SFY Budget Policy and Process V. Ten Core Service Budget Requests: Statewide and Individual Clerks Page 3 November 30, 2012

4 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 2 I. Executive Summary Per section 28.36(7), Florida Statutes, the Clerks of Court Operations Corporation (CCOC) is required to review and make adjustments to individual clerk budget requests and provide recommendations to the Legislature and the Supreme Court by December 1 each year. Per this statutory requirement, the SFY Legislative Budget Request for clerk operations and associated issues is $461,659,018. The CCOC is also requesting funding for two additional issues. First, the CCOC is requesting funding to help alleviate any backlog in foreclosure cases. The requested funding level is at 50 percent of any funds provided to the state courts to help alleviate any backlog in foreclosure cases. Given the state courts current request of $4,000,000, the current request for clerks is $2,000,000. Second, a $538,773 contingency fund is requested to be established in case one or more clerks must respond to extraordinary issues not anticipated in the CCOC s SFY budget request. Criteria for the use of the dollars in the contingency fund will be collectively developed by Legislative and CCOC staff. Given the three issues requested, the total Legislative Budget Request is $464,197,791. In previous years, the Legislature has not provided funding for expected health insurance premium increases nor increases associated with changes in the contribution rates for the Florida Retirement System (FRS). Unlike other agencies/entities, the clerks have borne these additional expenses for the last several years within their existing operational budget. The result is tantamount to an additional budget cut above and beyond the other reductions in budget authority imposed upon the clerks. Therefore, included in the above SFY Legislative Budget Request for clerk operations is a moderate request for health insurance premium increases and changes in the contribution rates for FRS. Additionally, recognizing the need to attract, hire, and retain a qualified and competent workforce, the CCOC approved the inclusion of an across the board pay increase for clerk staff. To be consistent with our partners within the core court system, a modest salary adjustment of 3.5 percent has been included in the above SFY Legislative Budget Request for clerk operations. The CCOC conducted a budget process that thoroughly reviewed the clerk budget requests. This review included the establishment of ten divisional unit costs for each clerk and comparisons of these unit costs with peer clerks of a similar size (i.e., peer groups). Additionally, the CCOC analyzed clerk budget requests through the use of the "benchmark budget." These benchmark budgets were calculated by multiplying the projected units by the peer group average unit cost. Based on CCOC policies, clerk budget requests above their benchmark budget were reviewed for adjustments. These adjustments resulted in a statewide reduction of over $500,000 from the SFY budget authority. Page 4 November 30, 2012

5 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 3 Through the development of revised peer grouping and the use of improved data collection and management, the CCOC made strides to improve the data quality and calculations used to develop the SFY LBR. More progress on these efforts will continue to be a priority in the year ahead. Page 5 November 30, 2012

6 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 4 II. SFY Legislative Budget Request Summary and Previous Year Comparisons Request Summary The table below provides a summary of the funding issues included in the clerks' SFY Legislative Budget Request. Summary of Legislative Budget Request Funding Issues Clerk Operations and Associated Issues $461,659,018 Foreclosure Initiative $2,000,000 Contingency Fund $538,773 Total Legislative Budget Request $464,197,791 The CCOC is requesting $461,659,018 to cover clerks operations and associated issues. This request represents a $538,773 cut in clerks operational budget authority from SFY and includes funding for associated issues received and/or requested from other core court partners. These associated issues include expected health insurance premium increases, increases associated with changes in the contribution rates for the Florida Retirement System (FRS), and pay increases recognizing the need to attract, hire, and retain a qualified and competent workforce. The CCOC is requesting funding to help alleviate any backlog in foreclosure cases. The requested funding level is at 50 percent of any funds provided to the state courts to help alleviate any backlog in foreclosure cases. Given the state courts current request of $4,000,000, the current request for clerks is $2,000,000. A contingency fund in the amount of $538,773 is requested to be established in the clerks operation trust fund in case one or more clerks must respond to extraordinary issues not anticipated in the CCOC s SFY budget request. Criteria for the use of the dollars in the contingency fund will be collectively developed by Legislative and CCOC staff. The dollar amount represents savings through reductions in the SFY budget authority developed in the comparison of budget requests to the benchmark budgets. Additionally, the CCOC respectfully requests future additional funding consideration if any of the other core court partners are funded for significant issues impacting the court-related operations of the clerks (e.g., more certified judgeships). Page 6 November 30, 2012

7 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 5 Revenue Summary In SFY and previous years, the Legislature has recognized the sufficiency issues regarding the revenues in both the court and clerk trust funds. A number of recommendations for resolving the issues with the clerk trust fund are being submitted by the CCOC for Legislative consideration. A summary of these recommendations is provided below. In response to current and past trust fund sufficiency issues, the Legislature charged a Revenue Stabilization Work Group to produce a report on possible options to stabilize annual trust fund revenues. The report was produced in November 2011 for consideration by the 2012 Legislature. The Work Group's recommendations have not yet been implemented, and the CCOC Executive Council continues to support and recommended the adoption of the Work Group's recommendations. Additionally, the CCOC Revenue Enhancement Committee, staff with the National Center for State Courts, and staff with the CCOC have developed additional information regarding options and methods to improve revenue collections. Details regarding these options and methods are being provided to the Legislative under separate cover. It is recommended these options and methods be given substantive consideration. If the 2013 Legislature allowed the same process as provided by the 2012 Legislature, the chart below provides the potential revenues for the clerk trust fund for SFY SFY Potential Revenues Revenue Estimating Conference - Clerk Remittance Projection Revenue Estimating Conference - Unexpended Budget Authority Projection General Revenue Support Cash Carry Forward from SFY General Revenue - Foreclosures Total Potential Revenues $406.7 million $10.9 million $25.0 million $13.3 million $2.0 million $457.9 million November 30, 2012 Page 7

8 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 6 Previous Year Comparison Provided below are a series of charts comparing the SFY LBR with data from previous years. A comparison of statewide budgeted full time equivalents (FTE) for clerks from CFY to SFY is provided as Chart One. Generally, clerk FTE have remained constant since SFY and represent a minimal staffing level necessary to provide satisfactory clerks services to the courts, the public and state government. The SFY LBR represents a funding request for a continuation of this minimal staffing level. Chart One: Budgeted Full Time Equivalents (FTE) 10, , , , , for SFY is based on the SFY budget requests and is a net budgeted FTE. A comparison of the available data for historic budgets, revenues, and expenditures is provided as Chart Two. Additionally, while the $461.7 million request appears higher than the most recent years' budget authority, this is not the case. Rather, included in the $461.7 million figure are issues funded for other state agencies/entities but not funded in these most recent years for clerks. Two specific examples are expected health insurance $550 premium increases and increases associated with $500 changes in the contribution rates for the Florida $450 Retirement System (FRS). The clerks' SFY LBR $400 request actually represent a $350 $538,773 cut in clerks operational budget authority $300 from SFY while Note: There is a three month overlap between CFY and SFY Data in yellow are potential revenues. Data including funding for these in green is SFY LBR. associated issues received budget authority) plus 1) cash carry forward and 2) general revenue (including general revenue for the foreclosure initiative). and/or requested from other core court partners. 9, , , , CFY CFY CFY SFY SFY SFY SFY SFY , The data for CFY through CFY is based on the Certified Article V Budget compiled by the CCOC and included in the annual Legislative Report. The data for SFY is based on the nine month budgets submitted for October 2009 to June The data for SFY 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 is based on the operational SFY 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 is based on the operational SFY 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 Chart Two: Budgets, Revenues, and Expenditures Dollars (in millions) $405.6 $424.9 $392.3 $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 $441.5 $445.2 $426.4 $ , $444.5 $414.8 $ , $443.4 $ , Potential revenues for SFY and SFY include revenues remitted by the clerk, unexpended budget authority, general revenue, and cash carry forward. Revenues projected to be remitted by the clerks for the two fiscal years are: SFY : $409.8 million SFY : $406.7 million $461.7 $457.9 CFY CFY CFY CFY CFY SFY SFY SFY SFY SFY Budgets Revenues Expenditures The budget data for CFY through CFY is primarily based on the Certified Article V Budget compiled by the CCOC and included in the annual Legislative Report. The budget data for SFY through SFY is based on Legislative appropriations and includes all applicable true-ups as of November, The budget and expenditures data does not include foreclosure dollars. The revenues for SFY and SFY include revenues projected by REC (clerk remittances and unexpended Page 8 November 30, 2012

9 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 7 III. SFY Legislative Budget Request Explanations Clerk Operations and Associated Issues: $461,659,018 Florida s clerks support ten court divisions, performing court-related functions. Per section 28.35(3)(a), Florida Statutes, these functions include the following: case maintenance; records management; court preparation and attendance; processing the assignment, reopening, and reassignment of cases; processing of appeals; collection and distribution of fines, fees, service charges, and court costs; processing of bond forfeiture payments; payment of jurors and witnesses; payment of expenses for meals or lodging provided to jurors; data collection and reporting; processing of jurors; determinations of indigent status; and reasonable administrative support to enable the clerk of the court to carry out these court-related functions. Projected operating workloads across clerks offices include the following projected service units. These projections are based on the data for new cases provided by each of the clerks and calculations approved by the CCOC Finance and Budget Committee for prior year clerk activity and reopens. Total Projected SFY Service Units Circuit Criminal 1,199,068 County Criminal 1,181,303 Juvenile Delinquency 267,680 Criminal Traffic 1,140,756 Circuit Civil 1,278,909 County Civil 1,142,937 Probate 344,205 Family 984,575 Juvenile Dependency 108,419 Civil Traffic 5,601,184 Total 13,249,036 In addition to the projected service units, additional projected court-related workloads for SFY include: 111,372,350 docket entries into case files; 11,523,400 financial (revenue collection) receipts provided; 2,010,295 jurors summoned; 230,174 jurors paid; and 25,355 notices of appeal processed. Additionally, clerks have performance standards for revenue collection, timely case processing, timely docket entry, timely payment of jurors, and fiscal management reporting. The CCOC, in Page 9 November 30, 2012

10 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 8 consultation with the Legislature, has set standards for these performance measures. When clerks do not meet the standards, the law requires the submission of an action plan for addressing the issues. Provided in the table below is the SFY annual action plan summary report. This report provides a summary of the number of action plans issued during the fiscal year compared to the potential number of plans. Based on this summary, clerks are currently performing at greater than 90 percent efficiency. State Fiscal Year Annual Action Plan Report Collections Timeliness in filing new cases Timeliness in docketing cases Timeliness in paying jurors Fiscal Management Reporting Total Potential Action Plans Required 2,412 2,680 2, ,107 Action Plans Required Percentage 16.3% 4.4% 5.2% 6.0% 0.0% 8.2% Maintaining this level of efficiency will require adequate funding as requested in this budget request. For example, the single biggest hindrance related to the timely filing of new cases and the timely docketing of cases is a lack of staffing. Given clerks budgets are over 90 percent salary and personnel costs, any budget reductions will result in further reductions to already minimal staffing levels and therefore further impact clerks' abilities to maintain current levels of performance. Foreclosure Initiative: $2,000,000 The CCOC is requesting funding to help alleviate any backlog in foreclosure cases. The requested funding level is at 50 percent of any funds provided to the state courts to help alleviate any backlog in foreclosure cases. Given the state courts current request of $4,000,000, the current request for clerks is $2,000,000. Contingency Fund: $538,773 A contingency fund to cover unexpected expenses resulting from extraordinary issues (e.g., high profile/high cost type trials, the potential for the smaller county approved budgets to be insufficient to cover unexpected court needs related to natural disasters and/or other emergency conditions, requirements to implement non-funded state mandates) represents sound fiscal policy. Recent events associated with Tropical Storm Debby impacting the Suwannee County Clerk highlight the importance of this issue. Therefore, the CCOC is requesting $538,773 as contingency funds in case one or more clerks must respond to extraordinary issues not anticipated in the CCOC s SFY budget request. Criteria for the use of the dollars in the contingency fund will be collectively developed by Page 10 November 30, 2012

11 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 9 Legislative and CCOC staff. The funding request is equal to the savings generated through the CCOC's benchmark budgeting process. Lump Sum Funding The CCOC respectfully requests the Legislature approve a "lump sum funding" amount and authorize the CCOC to allocate the lump sum to individual clerks based on its established, credible, and long-standing budget process. Flexibility to Reallocate The CCOC respectfully requests Legislative consideration for the flexibility to reallocate funds among clerks to respond to emergency or other budget issues. The CCOC also respectfully requests consideration for allowing individual clerks the flexibility to voluntarily transmit part of their budget authority to another clerk during a fiscal year due to budget needs. As an example, chief judges may reassign a circuit judge from one county to another county within the judicial circuit. These reassignments impact clerk operations by increasing workload in one county and decreasing workload in another county. Providing the requested fiscal flexibility would allow the CCOC to adjust resources based on such externalities impacting clerk operations. The requested fiscal flexibility is currently provided to other core court partners. Additional Funding Consideration Additionally, the CCOC respectfully requests future additional funding consideration if any of the other core court partners are funded for significant issues impacting the court-related operations of the clerks (e.g., more certified judgeships). Page 11 November 30, 2012

12 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 10 IV. Summary of SFY Budget Policy and Process Budget Policy The CCOC established a series of policies for conducting the SFY budget process. The results of the implementation of these policies included: 1. Each clerk s CCOC budget request was compared to its benchmark budget and adjustments were made based on this comparison. A savings of over $500,000 was achieved based on this effort. 2. Per Chapter 28.36, the CCOC considered individual clerk circumstances related to cost factor pressures. 3. Final budget recommendations for the clerks were based on requesting minimum funding for providing satisfactory clerks services to the courts, the public and state government. 4. Final budget recommendations for the clerks included moderate adjustments for health insurance increases and changes in the contribution rates for FRS. Unlike other agencies/entities, the clerks have borne these additional expenses for the last several years within their existing operational budget. The result is tantamount to an additional budget cut above and beyond the other reductions in budget authority imposed upon the clerks. 5. Recognizing the need to attract, hire, and retain a qualified and competent workforce, the CCOC approved the inclusion of an across the board pay increase for clerk staff commensurate with a request from our core court partner. Budget Process During the development of the SFY LBR, the CCOC performed specific functions in support of the request. These functions, in chronological order, include. 1. January 2012: The CCOC Finance and Budget Committee began discussions in preparation for the SFY budget process. 2. February 2012: Conducted a series of workshops to improve the projections for service units. 3. May 2012 to August 2012: Improved the existing functionality and developed new functionality within the CCOC Performance and Budget System (PABS). 4. June 2012: Based on recommendations from an independent statistician, the CCOC Finance and Budget Committee and the CCOC Executive Council approved recommended changes to clerk peer groups. 5. July and August 2012: Conducted a series of workshops to improve the allocation of net FTE and expenditures among the ten court divisions. 6. August 1, 2012: Collected and began analyzing the initial projections for service units. 7. August 22, 2012: Distributed the beta-version of the SFY budget forms and instructions. Page 12 November 30, 2012

13 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request August and September 2012: Conducted a series of workshops to train on the budget forms and instructions. 9. September 4, 2012: Released the final version of both the Excel and browser-based budget forms along with the final version of the budget instructions. 10. October 1, 2012: Clerks and clerk staff completed and submitted their SFY budget requests. 11. October 2012: Completed technical reviews of the SFY budget requests and began analysis of the budget requests. 12. October 25, 2012: The CCOC Finance and Budget Committee met to prepare for their two-day budget deliberations. 13. November 2, 2012: The CCOC Finance and Budget Committee set November 2 as the final day for the clerks and clerk staff to submit revisions for the SFY budget requests. 14. November 8 and 9, 2012: The CCOC Finance and Budget Committee held their two-day budget deliberations and finalized their SFY budget recommendations. 15. November 13, 2012: The CCOC Executive Council met to consider the CCOC Finance and Budget Committee recommendations. The Council unanimously passed the Committee recommendations. 16. December 1, 2012: The CCOC submitted the SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request by the statutory deadline of December 1. All meetings associated with the budget process described above were advertised and open to the public. Further efforts were taken by the CCOC to provide call-in capability so meetings could be attended via conference call thus increasing transparency while minimizing costs. Page 13 November 30, 2012

14 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 12 V. Ten Core Service Budget Requests: Statewide and Individual Clerks The following table presents the CCOC s statewide and clerk by clerk budget recommendations for each of the judicial systems ten court divisions. These are the ten core services required in law. The table also documents each clerk s unit costs for each of the ten court divisions. The clerks are placed into six peer groups for comparative purposes based on case counts and county population. The methodology used to develop the data in the table below includes the following: 1. The SFY budget requests include increases for FRS, health insurance, and salary adjustments as approved by the CCOC Executive Council. The budget requests do not include any dollars associated with the foreclosure initiative or the contingency fund request. 2. The divisional dollar amounts in the table are calculated based on the ratios available from the final SFY budget requests provided by each clerk. 3. The service units in the table are projections for new cases included in the final SFY budget requests with calculated prior year activity and reopens based on the CCOC Finance and Budget Committee approved methodology. Page 14 November 30, 2012

15 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 13 November 30, 2012 Page 15

16 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 14 November 30, 2012 Page 16

17 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 15 November 30, 2012 Page 17

18 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 16 November 30, 2012 Page 18

19 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 17 November 30, 2012 Page 19

20 SFY Clerks' Legislative Budget Request 18 November 30, 2012 Page 20

21 Select Year: 2012 Go The 2012 Florida Statutes Title V JUDICIAL BRANCH Chapter 28 CLERKS OF TH E CIRCUIT COURTS Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation. (1)(a) View Entire Chapter The Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation is created as a public corporation organized to perform the functions specified in this section and s and shall be administratively housed within the Justice Administrative Commission. The corporation shall be a budget entity within the Justice Administrative Commission, and its employees shall be considered state employees. The corporation is not subject to control, supervision, or direction by the Justice Administrative Commission in the performance of its duties, but the employees of the corporation shall be governed by the classification plan and salary and benefits plan of the Justice Administrative Commission. The classification plan must have a separate chapter for the corporation. All clerks of the circuit court shall be members of the corporation and hold their position and authority in an ex officio capacity. The functions assigned to the corporation shall be performed by an executive council pursuant to the plan of operation approved by the members. (b) The executive council shall be composed of eight clerks of the court elected by the clerks of the courts for a term of 2 years, with two clerks from counties with a population of fewer than 100,000, two clerks from counties with a population of at least 100,000 but fewer than 500,000, two clerks from counties with a population of at least 500,000 but fewer than 1 million, and two clerks from counties with a population of more than 1 million. The executive council shall also include, as ex officio members, a designee of the President of the Senate and a designee of the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall designate one additional member to represent the state courts system. (c) The corporation shall be considered a political subdivision of the state and shall be exempt from the corporate income tax. The corporation is not subject to the provisions of chapter 120. (d) The functions assigned to the corporation under this section and ss and are considered to be for a valid public purpose. (2) The duties of the corporation shall include the following: (a) Adopting a plan of operation. (b) Conducting the election of directors as required in paragraph (1)(a). (c) Recommending to the Legislature changes in the various court-related fines, fees, service charges, and court costs established by law. (d) Developing and certifying a uniform system of performance measures and applicable performance standards for the functions specified in paragraph (3)(a) and the service unit costs required in s and measures for clerk performance in meeting the performance standards. These measures and standards shall be designed to facilitate an objective determination of the performance of each clerk in accordance with minimum standards for fiscal management, operational efficiency, and effective collection of fines, fees, service charges, and court costs. The corporation shall develop the performance measures and performance standards in consultation with the Legislature and the Supreme Court. The Legislature may modify the clerk performance measures and performance standards in legislation implementing the General Appropriations Act or other law. When the corporation finds a clerk has not met the performance standards, the corporation shall identify the nature of each deficiency and any corrective action recommended and taken by the Page 21

22 affected clerk of the court. The corporation shall notify the Legislature and the Supreme Court of any clerk not meeting performance standards and provide a copy of any corrective action plans. (e) Reviewing proposed budgets submitted by clerks of the court pursuant to s (f) (g) general law. (3)(a) Developing and conducting clerk education programs. Publishing a uniform schedule of actual fees, service charges, and costs charged by a clerk of the court pursuant to The court-related functions that clerks may perform are limited to those functions expressly authorized by law or court rule. Those functions include the following: case maintenance; records management; court preparation and attendance; processing the assignment, reopening, and reassignment of cases; processing of appeals; collection and distribution of fines, fees, service charges, and court costs; processing of bond forfeiture payments; payment of jurors and witnesses; payment of expenses for meals or lodging provided to jurors; data collection and reporting; processing of jurors; determinations of indigent status; and reasonable administrative support to enable the clerk of the court to carry out these court-related functions. (b) The functions that clerks may not fund from state appropriations include: 1. Those functions not specified within paragraph (a). 2. Functions assigned by administrative orders which are not required for the clerk to perform the functions in paragraph (a). 3. Enhanced levels of service which are not required for the clerk to perform the functions in paragraph (a). 4. Functions identified as local requirements in law or local optional programs. (4) The corporation shall prepare a legislative budget request for the resources necessary to perform its duties, submit the request pursuant to chapter 216, and be funded as a budget entity in the General Appropriations Act. The corporation may hire staff and pay other expenses from state appropriations as necessary to perform the official duties and responsibilities of the corporation as described by law. (5) Certified public accountants conducting audits of counties pursuant to s shall report, as part of the audit, whether or not the clerks of the courts have complied with the requirements of this section and s In addition, each clerk of court shall forward a copy of the portion of the financial audit relating to the court-related duties of the clerk of court to the Supreme Court. The Auditor General shall develop a compliance supplement for the audit of compliance with the budgets and applicable performance standards certified by the corporation. History. s. 36, ch ; s. 23, ch ; s. 2, ch ; s. 2, ch ; s. 9, ch ; s. 3, ch ; s. 3, ch Copyright The Florida Legislature Privacy Statement Contact Us Page 22

23 Select Year: 2012 Go The 2012 Florida Statutes Title V JUDICIAL BRANCH Chapter 28 CLERKS OF TH E CIRCUIT COURTS View Entire Chapter Budget procedure. There is established a budget procedure for preparing budget requests for funding for the court-related functions of the clerks of the court. (1) Each clerk of court shall prepare a budget request for the last quarter of the county fiscal year and the first three quarters of the next county fiscal year. The proposed budget shall be prepared, summarized, and submitted by the clerk in each county to the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation in the manner and form prescribed by the corporation to meet the requirements of law. Each clerk shall forward a copy of his or her budget request to the Supreme Court. The budget requests must be provided to the corporation by October 1 of each year. (2) Each clerk shall include in his or her budget request a projection of the amount of court-related fees, service charges, and any other court-related clerk fees which will be collected during the proposed budget period. If the corporation determines that the proposed budget is limited to the standard list of court-related functions in s (3)(a) and the projected court-related revenues are less than the proposed budget, the clerk shall increase all fees, service charges, and any other court-related clerk fees and charges to the maximum amounts specified by law or the amount necessary to resolve the deficit, whichever is less. (3) Each clerk shall include in his or her budget request the number of personnel and the proposed budget for each of the following core services: (a) Circuit criminal. (b) County criminal. (c) Juvenile delinquency. (d) Criminal traffic. (e) Circuit civil. (f) County civil. (g) Civil traffic. (h) Probate. (i) Family. (j) Juvenile dependency. Central administrative costs shall be allocated among the core-services categories. (4) The budget request must identify the service units to be provided within each core service. The service units shall be developed by the corporation, in consultation with the Supreme Court, the Chief Financial Officer, and the appropriations committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives. (5) The budget request must propose a unit cost for each service unit. The corporation shall provide a copy of each clerk s budget request to the Supreme Court. (6) The corporation shall review each individual clerk s prior-year expenditures, projected revenue, proposed unit costs, and the proposed budget for each of the core-services categories. The corporation shall compare each clerk s prioryear expenditures and unit costs for core services with a peer group of clerks offices having a population of a similar size Page 23

24 and a similar number of case filings. If the corporation finds that the expenditures, unit costs, or proposed budget of a clerk is significantly higher than those of clerks in that clerk s peer group, the corporation shall require the clerk to submit documentation justifying the difference in each core-services category. Justification for higher expenditures may include, but is not limited to, collective bargaining agreements, county civil service agreements, and the number and distribution of courthouses served by the clerk. If the expenditures and unit costs are not justified, the corporation shall recommend a reduction in the funding for that core-services category in the budget request to an amount similar to the peer group of clerks or to an amount that the corporation determines is justified. (7) The corporation shall complete its review and adjustments to the clerks budget requests and make its recommendations to the Legislature and the Supreme Court by December 1 each year. (8) The Chief Financial Officer shall review the proposed unit costs associated with each clerk of court s budget request and make recommendations to the Legislature. The Chief Financial Officer may conduct any audit of the corporation or a clerk of court as authorized by law. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court may request an audit of the corporation or any clerk of court by the Chief Financial Officer. (9) The Legislature shall appropriate the total amount for the budgets of the clerks in the General Appropriations Act. The Legislature may reject or modify any or all of the unit costs recommended by the corporation. If the Legislature does not specify the unit costs in the General Appropriations Act or other law, the unit costs recommended by the corporation shall be the official unit costs for that budget period. (10)(a) Beginning in the fiscal year, the corporation shall release appropriations to each clerk quarterly. If funds in the Clerks of Court Trust Fund are insufficient to provide a release in a quarter in a single release, the corporation may release partial amounts for that quarter so long as the total of those partial amounts does not exceed that quarter s release. If funds in the Clerks of Court Trust Fund are insufficient for the first quarter release, the corporation may make a request to the Governor for a trust fund loan pursuant to chapter 215. The amount of the first three releases shall be based on one quarter of the estimated budget for each clerk as identified in the General Appropriations Act. (b) The corporation shall estimate the fourth quarter s number of units to be performed by each clerk. The amount of the fourth-quarter release shall be based on the approved unit cost times the estimated number of units of the fourth quarter with the following adjustment: the fourth-quarter release shall be adjusted based on the first three quarter s actual number of service units provided as reported to the corporation by each clerk. If the clerk has performed fewer service units in the first three quarters of the year compared to three quarters of the estimated number of service units in the General Appropriations Act, the corporation shall decrease the fourth-quarter release. The amount of the decrease shall equal the amount of the difference between the estimated number of service units for the first three quarters and the actual number of service units provided in the first three quarters times the approved unit cost. (c) No adjustment for the fourth-quarter release shall be made if the clerk has performed more units than the estimate for the first three quarters. (d) If the clerk performs fewer units in the fourth quarter than estimated by the corporation, the corporation shall decrease the first-quarter release for the clerk in the next fiscal year by the amount of the difference between the estimated number of service units for the fourth quarter and the actual number of service units performed in that quarter times the approved unit cost. (e) The total of all releases to the clerks of court may not exceed the amount appropriated in the General Appropriations Act. If, during the year, the corporation determines that the projected releases of appropriations for service units will exceed the estimate used in the General Appropriations Act and result in statewide expenditures greater than the amount appropriated by law, the corporation shall reduce all service unit costs of all clerks by the amount necessary to ensure that service units are funded within the total amount appropriated to the clerks of court. If such action is necessary, the corporation shall notify the Legislative Budget Commission. If the Legislative Budget Commission objects to the adjustments, the Legislative Budget Commission shall adjust all service unit costs by the amount necessary Page 24

25 to ensure that projected units of service are funded within the total amount appropriated to the clerks of court at its next scheduled meeting. (11) The corporation may submit proposed legislation to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives relating to the preparation of budget requests of the clerks of court. History. s. 37, ch ; s. 24, ch ; s. 3, ch ; s. 11, ch ; s. 10, ch ; s. 4, ch ; s. 14, ch ; s. 2, ch Copyright The Florida Legislature Privacy Statement Contact Us Page 25

26 SUMMARY OF CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ACTION Page 1 May 1, 2013 The Conference Committee Amendment for SB 1512, relating to clerks of court, provides for the following: Increases revenues to allow the clerks to be fully funded and out of the GAA. Similar to status prior to Requires the clerks to submit their proposed budgets to the Clerk of Court Operations Corporation by June 1 beginning in Requires the Corporation to review, certify, and approve the clerks budgets and requires the Corporation to submit the budgets to the Legislative Budget Commission (LBC) by August 1 beginning in Authorizes the LBC to review, approve, disapprove or amend and approve the clerks of court budgets by October 1 of each year beginning in Defines workload measures and workload performance standards. Requires the Corporation to contract with DFS for audits of court-related budgets of individual clerks. Requires the Corporation to base its revenue estimates on the official Revenue Estimating Conference estimate. Provides a specific amount of collected revenues for the clerks to spend for the period beginning July 1, 2013 and ending September 30, Page 26

27 Florida Senate Bill No. SB 1512 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT Ì363208%Î LEGISLATIVE ACTION Senate... Floor: AD/CR. 05/03/ :46 PM.. House The Conference Committee on SB 1512 recommended the following: Senate Conference Committee Amendment (with title amendment) Delete everything after the enacting clause and insert: Section 1. The Clerks of the Court Trust Fund within the Justice Administrative Commission, FLAIR number , is transferred together with all balances in the fund to the Department of Revenue. Section 2. Subsection (6) of section 11.90, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: Legislative Budget Commission. (6) The commission shall have the power and duty to: Page 1 of 34 5/1/2013 2:18:38 PM B-13 Page 27

28 Florida Senate Bill No. SB 1512 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT Ì363208%Î (a) Review and approve or disapprove budget amendments recommended by the Governor or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as provided in chapter 216. (b) Develop the long-range financial outlook described in s. 19, Art. III of the State Constitution. (c) Review and approve, disapprove, or amend and approve the budget of the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation. (d) Review and approve, disapprove, or amend and approve the total combined budgets of the clerks of the court or the budget of any individual clerk of the court for court-related functions. As part of this review the commission shall consider the workload and expense data submitted pursuant to s (e) In addition to the powers and duties specified in this subsection, the commission shall Exercise all other powers and perform any other duties prescribed by the Legislature. Section 3. Paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of section , Florida Statutes, is amended to read: Filing fees for trial and appellate proceedings. (1) Filing fees are due at the time a party files a pleading to initiate a proceeding or files a pleading for relief. Reopen fees are due at the time a party files a pleading to reopen a proceeding if at least 90 days have elapsed since the filing of a final order or final judgment with the clerk. If a fee is not paid upon the filing of the pleading as required under this section, the clerk shall pursue collection of the fee pursuant to s (a)1.a. Except as provided in sub-subparagraph b. and subparagraph 2., the party instituting any civil action, suit, Page 2 of 34 5/1/2013 2:18:38 PM B-13 Page 28

29 Florida Senate Bill No. SB 1512 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT Ì363208%Î or proceeding in the circuit court shall pay to the clerk of that court a filing fee of up to $395 in all cases in which there are not more than five defendants and an additional filing fee of up to $2.50 for each defendant in excess of five. Of the first $200 $280 in filing fees, $80 must be remitted by the clerk to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the General Revenue Fund, $195 must be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund, $4 $3.50 must be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the Administrative Clerks of the Court Trust Fund within the Department of Financial Services Justice Administrative Commission and used to fund the contract with the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation created in s , and $1 $1.50 must be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the Administrative Trust Fund within the Department of Financial Services to fund audits of individual clerks courtrelated expenditures clerk budget reviews conducted by the Department of Financial Services. By the 10th of each month, the clerk shall submit that portion of the filing fees collected in the previous month which is in excess of one-twelfth of the clerk s total budget One third of any filing fees collected by the clerk of the circuit court in excess of $100 must be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the Clerks of the Court Trust Fund within the Justice Administrative Commission. b. The party instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in the circuit court under chapter 39, chapter 61, chapter 741, chapter 742, chapter 747, chapter 752, or chapter 753 shall pay to the clerk of that court a filing fee of up to Page 3 of 34 5/1/2013 2:18:38 PM B-13 Page 29

30 Florida Senate Bill No. SB 1512 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT Ì363208%Î $295 in all cases in which there are not more than five defendants and an additional filing fee of up to $2.50 for each defendant in excess of five. Of the first $100 $180 in filing fees, $80 must be remitted by the clerk to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the General Revenue Fund, $95 must be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund, $4 $3.50 must be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the Administrative Clerks of the Court Trust Fund within the Department of Financial Services Justice Administrative Commission and used to fund the contract with the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation created in s , and $1 $1.50 must be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the Administrative Trust Fund within the Department of Financial Services to fund audits of individual clerks court-related expenditures clerk budget reviews conducted by the Department of Financial Services. c. An additional filing fee of $4 shall be paid to the clerk. The clerk shall remit $3.50 to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the Court Education Trust Fund and shall remit 50 cents to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the Administrative Clerks of the Court Trust Fund within the Department of Financial Services Justice Administrative Commission to fund clerk education provided by the Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation. An additional filing fee of up to $18 shall be paid by the party seeking each severance that is granted. The clerk may impose an additional filing fee of up to $85 for all proceedings of garnishment, attachment, replevin, and distress. Postal charges incurred by the clerk of the circuit court in making service by certified or registered Page 4 of 34 5/1/2013 2:18:38 PM B-13 Page 30

31 Florida Senate Bill No. SB 1512 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT Ì363208%Î mail on defendants or other parties shall be paid by the party at whose instance service is made. Additional fees, charges, or costs may not be added to the filing fees imposed under this section, except as authorized in this section or by general law. 2.a. Notwithstanding the fees prescribed in subparagraph 1., a party instituting a civil action in circuit court relating to real property or mortgage foreclosure shall pay a graduated filing fee based on the value of the claim. b. A party shall estimate in writing the amount in controversy of the claim upon filing the action. For purposes of this subparagraph, the value of a mortgage foreclosure action is based upon the principal due on the note secured by the mortgage, plus interest owed on the note and any moneys advanced by the lender for property taxes, insurance, and other advances secured by the mortgage, at the time of filing the foreclosure. The value shall also include the value of any tax certificates related to the property. In stating the value of a mortgage foreclosure claim, a party shall declare in writing the total value of the claim, as well as the individual elements of the value as prescribed in this sub-subparagraph. c. In its order providing for the final disposition of the matter, the court shall identify the actual value of the claim. The clerk shall adjust the filing fee if there is a difference between the estimated amount in controversy and the actual value of the claim and collect any additional filing fee owed or provide a refund of excess filing fee paid. d. The party shall pay a filing fee of: (I) Three hundred and ninety-five dollars in all cases in which the value of the claim is $50,000 or less and in which Page 5 of 34 5/1/2013 2:18:38 PM B-13 Page 31