meeting agenda...tcbc agenda june 23, 2020 page two iii. fy 2020-21 budget (continued) 6. new...

MEETING AGENDA

9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., Eastern Time

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar

By Friday, June 19st, materials will be available at:

http://www.flcourts.org/administration-funding/court-funding-

budget/trial-court-budget-commission/

Welcome and Roll Call

I. Approval of Prior Meeting Minutes

II. FY 2019-20 Budget

A. Salary Budgets

B. Positions Vacant More than 180 Days

C. Operating Budgets

D. Trust Fund Cash Balances

E. Year-End Spending Plan

III. FY 2020-21 Budget

A. Start-Up Salary Budget

B. Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum

C. Allocations

1. Continuation Base Budget Allocations

2. Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officers and General Magistrates

3. Statewide Allocations

4. Problem-Solving Courts Appropriation

5. Allocations for Other Special Appropriations

of 143

http://www.flcourts.org/administration-funding/court-funding-budget/trial-court-budget-commission/

http://www.flcourts.org/administration-funding/court-funding-budget/trial-court-budget-commission/

bosleys

Text Box

TCBC Agenda

June 23, 2020

Page Two

III. FY 2020-21 Budget (Continued)

6. New Resources

a) Timely Resolution of Cases

b) Court Interpreting Services

c) Digital Court Reporting Equipment

d) Courthouse Furnishings

IV. FY 2021-22 Legislative Budget Request (LBR)

A. LBR Timeline

B. Issues for Consideration at August TCBC Meeting

V. Report from Chief Justice Designee to Florida Clerks of Court Operations

Corporation Executive Council

VI. Report from Clerks of Court Representative

VII. Coronavirus 2019

A. Tracking COVID-19 Expenditures and Federal CARES Act Funding

B. Workgroup on the Continuity of Court Operations and Proceedings During

and After COVID-19

C. COVID-19 Backlog Impact Plan

VIII. Other Business

Next Meeting:

August 6, 2020 (Zoom) 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. (ET)

of 143

Agenda Item I.: Approval of Prior Meeting

Minutes

of 143

DRAFT

Trial Court Budget Commission Meeting Minutes

November 13, 2019 Conference Call

Attendance – Members Present The Honorable Margaret Steinbeck, Chair The Honorable Diana Moreland The Honorable Mark Mahon, Vice Chair The Honorable Debra Nelson The Honorable Monica Brasington The Honorable Greg Parker The Honorable Angela Cowden Ms. Kathleen Pugh Ms. Holly Elomina The Honorable Kathleen Roberts The Honorable Ronald Ficarrotta The Honorable Anthony Rondolino The Honorable Robert Hillard Mr. Grant Slayden The Honorable Stephen Jewett The Honorable Elijah Smiley Ms. Gina Justice Mr. Walt Smith The Honorable Glen Kelley The Honorable Bertilla Soto Mr. Jonathan Lin The Honorable John Stargel The Honorable Donald Myers Mr. Mark Weinberg

Attendance – Members Absent

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 12:00 p.m. and reminded members the meeting was being recorded for administrative accuracy. The roll was taken with a quorum present. Chair Steinbeck invited guests to introduce themselves.

Agenda Item I: Opening Remarks by Chair Chair Steinbeck acknowledged the Commission has an ambitious agenda and thanked OSCA staff for composing the materials for today’s conference call.

Agenda Item II: FY 2019-20 Budget A. Problem-Solving Court Allocations

Jennifer Grandal presented an overview of the additional funding appropriated by the Legislature in support of problem-solving courts, including an additional $2.3 million with $452,313 of the additional funds appropriated as non-recurring. She further noted the Legislature re-appropriated

of 143

Trial Court Budget Commission Minutes November 13, 2019

Conference Call

Page 2 of 3

any unspent FY 2018-19 funding on a non-recurring basis for use in FY 2019-20. Ms. Grandal further reviewed the funding allocations approved at the August 28, 2019, TCBC meeting for FY 2019-20 based on applications submitted by the circuits. Ms. Grandal stated there is approximately $1.5 million in re-appropriated FY 2018-19 funds. She noted this amount, in addition to the $452,313, leaves just under $2.0 million available for allocating to the circuits. Ms. Grandal further noted the Problem-Solving Court Advisory Group (Advisory Group) met on October 31, 2019, to discuss proposals for allocating the non-recurring funds. Based on their discussions, the Advisory Group directed OSCA staff to ask the circuits for specific needs based on guidance provided by the Advisory Group including the need for continuing education and training for problem-solving court team members regarding best practices. Ms. Grandal stated a recommendation from the Advisory Group regarding allocations will be available for TCBC approval in mid-December. Ms. Grandal asked if the TCBC would like to provide the Advisory Group with any further guidance regarding allocation of non-recurring funds. Questions arose as to the application of the match requirement for the non-recurring funds. Judge Steinbeck noted the match requirement is set in proviso language and must be observed by the trial courts. Eric Maclure noted there are exceptions to the match requirements that would apply to the non-recurring funds.

B. Salary Management

Sharon Bosley provided an overview of the trial court salary budget as of October 31, 2019. She noted the current salary deficit is approximately $4.4 million over appropriation. Ms. Bosley further reviewed the average lapse generated year to date and projected lapse for the remaining year based on various scenarios. The different scenarios were then used to project when the salary budget will no longer be in a deficit posture. Ms. Bosley and Chair Steinbeck described various factors impacting the salary budget for the TCBC’s consideration. Chair Steinbeck provided an overview of the Budget Management Committee (BMC) conference call, specifically regarding a discussion of the 600,000 in chief judge discretionary funds previously approved by the Commission at its August 28, 2020 meeting, and the potential negative impacts on the salary budget. Judge Ficarrotta moved approval of the BMC recommendation to request to the Chief Justice a chief judge discretionary rate distribution of 300,000 and address the remaining 300,000 in discretionary funds at a later date. Grant Slayden seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously.

Agenda Item III: Joint Due Process Workgroup Charge Judge Stargel provided an historical overview of the Joint Due Process Workgroup (Workgroup) and the scope of the Workgroup’s activities. He noted the Workgroup began reviewing factors contributing to the increase in court-appointed counsel expenditures. During the review of court-appointed counsel related issues, it was determined court-appointed attorney fees did not fall within the scope of the Workgroup’s current charge. Judge Stargel requested the Workgroup’s charge be revised to include

of 143

Trial Court Budget Commission Minutes November 13, 2019

Conference Call

Page 3 of 3

court-appointed counsel and other due process related issues. Judge Parker moved approval of the request and Judge Myers seconded. The motion passed unanimously.

Agenda Item IV: Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officer Re-Allocation Judge Smiley stated the Funding Methodology Committee (FMC) is in the process of reviewing the funding methodology for child support enforcement hearing officers. He noted the FMC should have recommendations for potentially revising the methodology by the February 2020 in-person meeting. In the meantime, the FMC recommends a moratorium be placed on the re-allocation of vacant child support enforcement hearing officers and support staff until the issues surrounding the methodology can be resolved. Kris Slayden provided an overview of trends observed in the filing data and reach out efforts to obtain information from the circuits. She further reviewed four options for the Commission’s consideration. Ms. Slayden noted the TCBC Executive Committee is recommending Option 1. Judge Ficarrotta moved approval of Option 1. Judge Parker seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

Agenda Item V: 2020 Legislative Session Eric Maclure provided an update on the legislative budget process, particularly regarding the trial courts’ portion of the budget. He noted the trial courts had three issues included in the State Courts System budget request including funding for civil dispute resolution, court interpreting resources, and new courthouse furnishings. Mr. Maclure stated the budget requests have been presented to the House Justice Appropriation Subcommittee and the Senate Appropriation Subcommittee on Civil and Criminal Justice. He further noted one-on-one meetings with appropriation committee members and budget related staff have been scheduled. This item is presented for informational purposes only.

Agenda Item VI: Other Business Chair Steinbeck recognized Walt Smith and his receipt of the Kenneth R. Palmer Award for Distinguished Excellence in Judicial Administration.

Adjournment With no other business before the commission, the meeting adjourned at 1:06 p.m.

of 143

DRAFT

Trial Court Budget Commission Meeting Minutes

December 18, 2019 Conference Call

Attendance – Members Present The Honorable Margaret Steinbeck, Chair The Honorable Diana Moreland The Honorable Mark Mahon, Vice Chair The Honorable Debra Nelson The Honorable Monica Brasington Ms. Kathleen Pugh The Honorable Angela Cowden The Honorable Kathleen Roberts Ms. Holly Elomina The Honorable Anthony Rondolino The Honorable Ronald Ficarrotta Mr. Grant Slayden The Honorable Robert Hillard The Honorable Elijah Smiley The Honorable Stephen Jewett The Honorable Bertilla Soto Ms. Gina Justice The Honorable John Stargel The Honorable Glen Kelley Mr. Mark Weinberg Mr. Jonathan Lin The Honorable Donald Myers

Attendance – Members Absent The Honorable Greg Parker


Agenda Item I: Opening Remarks by Chair Chair Steinbeck thanked Justice Lawson for his service as Supreme Court liaison to the Commission. She further thanked Judge Liefman for his work as chair of the Problem-Solving Court Advisory Workgroup (Advisory Workgroup).

Agenda Item II: FY 2019-20 Budget A. Problem-Solving Court Allocations

Judge Steven Liefman stated there is approximately $1.99 million in non-recurring funds available for allocating to the circuits to support problem-solving courts. Judge Liefman provide an overview

of 143

Trial Court Budget Commission Minutes December 18, 2019

Conference Call

Page 2 of 3

of the requests for additional non-recurring funds submitted by the circuits. He noted a final requested amount of approximately $1,268,000, including adjustments for unallowable expenditures, corrected circuit requests, and an additional request from the 15th circuit. Within the requests, Judge Liefman noted 8 circuits requested desktops and multi-use printers and expressed concerns about whether these items are allowable under proviso language for problem-solving courts or if the items are the responsibility of the counties. Judge Liefman asked the Commission to approve the Advisory Group’s recommendation for allocating non-recurring funds with the condition that the Advisory Group review and approve the 15th circuit’s request. He also requested the Commission to delegate authority to the TCBC Executive Committee to determine if desktops and multi-use printers are an allowable expense. In addition, Judge Liefman stated there is about $800,000 in remaining non-recurring funds. He asked that the Commission approve a second round of circuit requests. Chair Steinbeck stated the Executive Committee is supportive of the Advisory Group’s recommendations and asked permission from the Commission to allow the Executive Committee to determine if desktops and multi-use printers are an allowable expense. Judge Ficarrotta moved approval of the Advisory Group’s recommendation including the 15th circuit’s request. Judge Nelson seconded, and the motion was approved unanimously.

B. Salary Management

Sharon Bosley provided a summary of decisions from the August 2019, Executive Committee Workshop, including the recommendation for a chief discretionary rate distribution of 600,000 if available funds permitted. Ms. Bosley then noted the Budget Management Committee (BMC) and TCBC Executive Committee reviewed the status of the salary budget as of October 31, 2019. Based on that information, the TCBC approved a 300,000 rate distribution with the potential for another distribution at a later date should the salary budget support the additional costs. Ms. Bosley proceeded to provide an overview of the trial court salary budget as of November 30, 2019. She noted at the end of November, the projected salary deficit was $3.4 million. Ms. Bosley further reviewed additional liabilities, generated lapse to date, projected lapse for remaining months, and the current number of vacancies in the trial courts. Based on the current deficit and the projected lapse, the BMC does not recommend an additional rate distribution at this time. Ms. Bosley noted the Committee will review the salary data again in January. Chair Steinbeck stated the reduced lapse in payroll costs confirms the effectiveness of the retention efforts of the implemented pay plan. She noted the reduced lapse generated in October and November may be an anomaly and more savings may be generated in future months. She emphasized the BMC will continue to monitor the salary budget and the TCBC will re-visit the issue of an additional rate distribution at the February in-person meeting. Grant Slayden moved to defer the release of additional chief judge discretionary rate. Judge Hilliard seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

of 143

Trial Court Budget Commission Minutes December 18, 2019

Conference Call

Page 3 of 3

Agenda Item III: 13th Circuit Request for Return of Distributed Rate and Consideration of a Policy Chair Steinbeck summarized a request from the 13th circuit to retain the rate initially distributed to an employee who departed shortly after receiving the increase. She referenced policies developed by the TCBC as part of the FY 2014-15 employee pay plan. It was noted the TCBC will discuss policies surrounding the use and return of discretionary rate at the February 2020 meeting. Chair Steinbeck noted if the rate is returned to the 13th Circuit for distribution to another employee, the salary budget will not benefit from the lapse generated by the vacant position. The Executive Committee unanimously recommended approving the 13th Circuit’s request and provide the rate back to the circuit for reallocation. It is also recommended to approve a policy for a circuit to redistribute the rate balance if an employee vacates a position within 60 days of receiving a rate distribution for the current rate distribution only. Chair Steinbeck stated after the Executive Committee, she had a series of conversations with OSCA staff to clarify the implementation of the proposed recommendation, particularly with regards to the cost associated with an increase in rate provided to a position as opposed to the authority given to a circuit as part of the rate distribution. Chair Steinbeck noted the return of rate to a circuit will not produce a negative impact to the salary budget; however, the trial courts will not realize any savings generated by the lapse from the vacant position. It was also stated the 60 days would be effective the date the position received the increase as opposed to 60 days after the approval of the rate distribution to the circuits on November 15, 2019. Judge Rondolino moved approval of Option 2 including the return of the full rate amount. Holly Elomina seconded, and the motion passed.

Agenda Item IV: Other Business Eric Maclure noted for the record, the 15th Circuit submitted their request for additional problem-solving court funding within the approved timeframe, but due to a scrivener’s error in the email address the request was not received by OSCA staff. The request was addressed in Agenda Item II.


of 143

DRAFT

Trial Court Budget Commission Meeting Minutes January 31, 2020 Conference Call

Attendance – Members Present The Honorable Margaret Steinbeck, Chair Mr. Jonathan Lin The Honorable Mark Mahon, Vice Chair The Honorable Diana Moreland The Honorable Kimberly Bonner The Honorable Debra Nelson The Honorable Monica Brasington The Honorable Greg Parker The Honorable Angela Cowden The Honorable Kathleen Roberts Ms. Holly Elomina The Honorable Anthony Rondolino The Honorable Ronald Ficarrotta Mr. Grant Slayden The Honorable Robert Hillard The Honorable Elijah Smiley The Honorable Stephen Jewett The Honorable Bertilla Soto Ms. Gina Justice The Honorable John Stargel The Honorable Glenn Kelley Mr. Mark Weinberg

Attendance – Members Absent The Honorable Donald Myers Ms. Kathleen Pugh


Agenda Item I: Opening Remarks by Chair Chair Steinbeck stated this conference call is to address time sensitive issues related to problem-solving courts. She then welcomed Chief Judge Bonner to the TCBC.

Agenda Item II: FY 2019-20 Budget A. Problem-Solving Court Non-Recurring Allocations

Judge Liefman reviewed the additional requests for non-recurring problem-solving courts funding. He noted there is approximately $700,00 in remaining non-recurring funds available for allocation.

of 143

Trial Court Budget Commission Minutes January 31, 2020 Conference Call

Page 2 of 2

This is the second set of requests received from the circuits after approximately $1.2 million was previously approved by the TCBC at the December 18, 2019, conference call. During this exercise the Problem-Solving Advisory Workgroup (Advisory Workgroup) emphasized the focus on training and education for the entire multi-disciplinary staff. Judge Liefman noted $908,341 in requests were received which is approximately $176,736 over the available funds. He stated the Advisory Workgroup recommends approving funding for each circuit’s first and second priority requests with adjustments for items not recommended for the use of state funds. He further stated the Advisory Workgroup recommends partially funding each circuit’s third priority requests with adjustments based on parity. Judge Mahon moved approval of the Advisory Workgroup’s recommendations. Judge Ficarrotta seconded the motion, and the motion passed. Chair Steinbeck asked if any re-allocation of funds is needed, that the TCBC Executive Committee have permission, working in conjunction with the Advisory Workgroup, to authorize those re-allocations. Judge Roberts moved approval. Judge Parker seconded the motion. The motion was approved.

B. Year-End Spending Sharon Bosley provided an historical overview of the implementation practices used during previous year-end spending plans including an unobligated funds exercise and re-allocation of pooled funds based on spending plan requests submitted and approved by the TCBC. She noted, this year, funds may be needed to cover a potential deficit in the due process contractual services category. Ms. Bosley reviewed the current due process contractual services allocations, forecasted annual expenditures, and estimated remaining balances for FY 2019-20. Judge Stargel moved approval of Option 1 directing OSCA staff to initiate the steps for a year-end spending plan. Judge Soto seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. Chair Steinbeck discussed the option to incorporate the year-end spending plan as part of the trial courts regular operating procedures. Kris Slayden noted this issue may be included in the agenda for the February in-person TCBC meeting.

Agenda Item III: Other Business Sharon Bosley provided an overview of the House Justice Appropriations Subcommittee Chair’s proposed FY 2020-21 legislative budget and the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Criminal and Civil Justice Chair’s proposal in comparison to the Judicial Branch legislative budget request.


of 143

DRAFT

Trial Court Budget Commission Meeting Minutes February 17, 2020

Tallahassee, Florida

Attendance – Members Present The Honorable Margaret Steinbeck, Chair Mr. Jonathan Lin The Honorable Mark Mahon, Vice Chair The Honorable Donald Myers The Honorable Kimberly Bonner The Honorable Greg Parker The Honorable Monica Brasington Ms. Kathleen Pugh The Honorable Angela Cowden The Honorable Kathleen Roberts Ms. Holly Elomina The Honorable Anthony Rondolino The Honorable Ronald Ficarrotta Mr. Grant Slayden The Honorable Robert Hillard The Honorable Elijah Smiley The Honorable Stephen Jewett The Honorable John Stargel Ms. Gina Justice Mr. Mark Weinberg The Honorable Glenn Kelley

Attendance – Members Absent

The Honorable Kelly McKibben The Honorable Bertilla Soto

The Honorable Diana Moreland

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 1:00 p.m. and reminded members that the meeting was being recorded for administrative accuracy. The roll was taken with a quorum present. Chair Steinbeck invited guests to introduce themselves.

Agenda Item I: Opening Remarks by Chair Chair Steinbeck welcomed the members to the meeting and thanked everyone for traveling to Tallahassee in order to meet in conjunction with legislative session and the upcoming chief judges’ meeting. Chair Steinbeck specifically thanked Justice Lawson for attending the meeting and welcomed new members Judge Bonner and Judge McKibben to the TCBC. Chair Steinbeck noted there are complex issues that will be discussed as part of the agenda. She emphasized the importance of communicating those discussions and the explanations for the TCBC’s decisions to the circuits.

of 143

Trial Court Budget Commission Minutes February 17, 2020

Tallahassee, FL

Page 2 of 6

Agenda Item II: Approval of Prior Meeting Minutes Chair Steinbeck presented the draft June 25, 2019 and August 28, 2019, TCBC meeting minutes. Judge Mahon moved approval and Judge Ficarrotta seconded the motion. The motion was approved.

Agenda Item III: FY 2019-20 Budget A. Salary Budget

Sharon Bosley provided an overview of the FY 2019-20 General Revenue and State Courts Revenue Trust Fund (SCRTF) trial court salary budget, current lapse and vacancy trends, and prior TCBC decisions regarding salary management. Judge Stargel noted the Budget Management Committee (BMC) met by conference call on February 12, 2020, to review the budget status as of January 31, 2020. He stated, based on the current deficit and lapse projections, the BMC is recommending an additional 150,000 rate distribution to be submitted to the Chief Justice for approval. Kathy Pugh moved approval of the BMC recommendation. Holly Elomina seconded the motion, and the motion passed unanimously. Sharon Bosley continued to review the Administrative Trust Fund (ATF) and Federal Grants Trust Fund (FGTF) salary budgets. Ms. Bosley noted the FGTF salary budget is currently $163,772 over the salary appropriation due to pending revisions to the contract with the Department of Revenue (DOR). She noted, once the contract is approved, it is anticipated the salary budget will be approximately $200,000 under appropriation.

B. Positions Vacant More Than 180 Days Dorothy Willard presented the report on the number of positions vacant more than 180 days. Ms. Willard noted all but two positions are currently being advertised. She stated of the two positions not being advertised, one position will be reclassified, and the other position will be advertised soon.

C. Operating Budgets Sharon Bosley reviewed the operating budgets as of January 31, 2020. Ms. Bosley noted comparisons between this fiscal year expenditures and prior year expenditures for the same time period. Ms. Bosley provided an update on projected due process expenditures. She noted multiple methodologies produced a low, middle, and high estimate for expenditures. With each methodology, a remaining balance in due process expenditures is expected.

D. Trust Fund Cash Balance Sharon Bosley presented the SCRTF cash balance as of December 2019.

of 143


Tallahassee, FL

Page 3 of 6

E. Court Interpreting Virtual Remote Interpreting Update

Lindsay Hafford provided a status update of the virtual remote interpreting (VRI) allocation. She presented an overview of the funding provided in support of VRI including annual allocations to support the statewide needs, circuit funding, and funds received as part of the year-end spending plans. Ms. Hafford reviewed the projected expenditures for FY 2019-20 and noted it is anticipated there will be $38,474 in remaining funds. Ms. Hafford explained the 3rd and 9th circuits have been experiencing technical difficulties with their VRI programs and are requesting funds to purchase and install equipment in order to allow them to return to a resource sharing model. Judge Mahon moved approval of providing $33,285 in non-recurring funds to the 3rd and 9th circuits. Judge Myers seconded the motion, and the motion was approved.

F. Online Dispute Resolution Pilot Project Update

Lindsay Hafford provided a status report on the Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) Pilot Project currently underway in six circuits. Ms. Hafford presented an overview of the pilot project and the funding approved in support of the pilot. She noted the anticipated expenditures for the pilot have been refined based on contract implementation and new projections. After funds were distributed to the six circuits, $37,470 was placed in a statewide reserve. Ms. Hafford stated, based on updated costs, an additional $1,050 is needed in the 10th circuit. Holly Elomina moved to approve the transfer of $1,050 from the reserve to the 10th circuit. Jonathan Lin seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. Chair Steinbeck noted that some of the funds remaining in reserve may be available to support the trial court year-end spending plan. Kris Slayden stated a request for additional funds in support of Online Dispute Resolution was included in the State Courts System legislative budget request. She noted the request has been included in the Senate proposed budget; however, if new funding is not received, this issue may return to the TCBC for further discussion.

Agenda Item IV: Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officer Allocation Methodology Judge Smiley acknowledged the Funding Methodology Committee (FMC) members and the assignment given to the Committee to examine the current funding methodology for allocating child support enforcement hearing officer resources. He stated as part of the assignment, the FMC was to examine current trends in child support filings, the impact to the funding methodology, and recommendations for any adjustments as appropriate. Judge Smiley further noted, in the FMC’s review of the methodology, the need for resources based on workload does not represent the actual need as reported by the circuits.

of 143


Tallahassee, FL

Page 4 of 6

Kris Slayden reviewed the current moratorium placed on the re-allocation of vacant resources. She also provided an overview of research considered by the FMC including circuit information, reviewing the child support hearing officer case weights, and reviewing filing information. Ms. Slayden stated it is the recommendation of the FMC to temporarily apply modifications to the funding methodology, lift the moratorium on re-allocating vacant positions, and recommend the official judicial workload study consider modifying the case weights as part of the 5-year cycle update process. Judge Smiley moved approval of the FMC’s recommendation. Grant Slayden seconded, and the motion was passed unanimously.

Agenda Item V: Senior Judge Days – 14th Circuit 3rd Quarter Analysis Kelsey Harper reviewed the 2019 General Appropriation Act proviso language appropriating special funds to the 14th circuit to provide additional full-time senior judicial services. She stated the 14th circuit has indicated approximately 120 days of the special appropriation are available for re-allocation to other circuits. Ms. Harper reviewed three options for re-allocating the available resources. Chair Steinbeck noted the unobligated funds from the 14th circuit cannot be used for functions other than providing senior judge services due to the limitations of the proviso language. She also noted, the Executive Committee recommended approval of Option 2 and to consider the funds in conjunction with the year-end spending plan. Following discussions about implementing and tracking the re-allocated days, Judge Ficarrotta moved to approve Option 1. Judge Mahon seconded, and the motion passed.

Agenda Item VI: 2020 Legislative Session Update Sharon Bosley reviewed a summary of the House and Senate proposed budgets for the trial courts. Chair Steinbeck reviewed Senate proposed proviso language requiring the development and utilization of risk assessment instruments in the trial courts. She expressed concerns that the proposed proviso language does not providing supporting funds for implementing the requirements. It was noted this item is presented for informational purposes only.

Agenda Item VII: Commission Administrative Issues Chair Steinbeck welcomed Jon Lin as the new chair of the TCBC Personnel Committee. Dorothy Willard proceeded to update the members on the implementation of the FY 2019-20 employee pay plan. Ms. Willard stated the new salary schedule has been released and noted the OSCA Office of Human Resources will be working with the Department of Management Services for implementing the new base rates in People First. The next phase in the implementation process will include reviewing the classification system. Finally, Ms. Willard noted staff will begin collecting and reviewing data, such as turnover rates, in reviewing the need for CADs.

of 143


Tallahassee, FL

Page 5 of 6

Eric Maclure provided an overview of the recommended changes to the TCBC Operational Procedures. He noted the recommendations were approved by the Supreme Court and have been posted to the TCBC website. Kris Slayden stated there is currently no system for identifying and grouping historical TCBC decisions. She noted a tracking system will be developed that will document all TCBC decisions. Eric Maclure provided an update of the trial court legal services fund. He noted the court system continues to address issues related to the classification of workers as either FTE or contractors, particularly those who have received both a W-2 and a 1099 form. Mr. Maclure stated staff continue to work with the trial court administrators in resolving remaining issues. Mr. Maclure also stated the Department of Financial Services settlement agreement that was executed on behalf of the State of Florida is being reviewed. He noted questions have arose regarding the scope of the settlement agreement and indicated a legal opinion has been received from a law firm that will be used to provide guidance in terms of the use of contracts.

Agenda Item VIII: Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum Issues Kris Slayden stated every year the Commission provides input for changes and/or clarification of policies for consideration by the Chief Justice. Ms. Slayden noted two issues the Commission may wish to consider in drafting of the FY 2020-21 memo. Those items include further defining allowable and unallowable expenses, and implementation of the trial court year-end spending plan through administrative means rather than a TCBC decision.

Agenda Item IX: Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability Due Process Services Report Kelsey Harper reviewed the findings of the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA) report on due process services and court-appointed counsel cost containment approaches. She highlighted the report findings regarding the funding structures, established cost containment mechanisms, and the unpredictable nature of due process costs. Judge Stargel noted a potential cost savings includes looking at the Offices of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel (regional conflict counsel), the frequency in which they are conflicting off cases, and a proposed Senate pilot project that would set up additional offices across regions.

Agenda Item X: Report from Chief Justice Designee to Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation Executive Council Judge Ficarrotta provided an update on the activities of the Clerks of Court Operations Corporation Council (CCOC). He noted the CCOC annual report has been released and includes recommendations to

of 143


Tallahassee, FL

Page 6 of 6

the Legislature on fines, fees, and service charges to ensure reasonable and adequate funding of the clerks of court as well as an administrative change to establish the Clerks of Court Revenue Stabilization Fund. John Dew recognized the joint CCOC and OSCA e-notification project and thanked OSCA for its support.

Agenda XI. Other Business Chair Steinbeck asked to add an additional item to the agenda to discuss issues related to the problem-solving courts, specifically out-of-state travel related to the attendance at the National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) annual conference. She expressed concerns regarding the number of participants and associated funding previously approved by the Commission for attendance at the conference and would like to provide additional guidance to the Chief Justice for approval of travel requests. Judge Rondolino moved approval to add the item to the agenda. Judge Parker seconded, and the motion was passed. Chair Steinbeck noted the number of participants previously approved for travel funds far exceeded the guidelines established in the Trial Court Budget and Pay Memorandum for similar conferences. She further stated the Executive Committee reviewed the requests along with the guidelines and is recommending limiting requests to those already submitted, following the number of participants (per circuit) allowed per circuit size as stated in the memorandum for other conferences, and limiting participants to court employees only. These limits would allow for a total of 59 attendees to the conference. Judge Mahon moved approval of the Executive Committee’s recommendation. Judge Ficarrotta seconded the motion. The motion passed.


of 143

Agenda Item II.A.: FY 2019-20 Budget – Salary

Budgets

of 143

Agenda Item II.A.: Salary Budgets

1 Projected Full Employment Payroll Liability through June 30, 2020 311,588,079

2 Projected DROP Liability through June 30, 20201 26,444

3 Projected Law Clerk Below Minimum Pay Plan Liability through June 30, 2020 3,787

4 Projected Law Clerk Incentives Pay Plan Liability through June 30, 2020 4,747

5 Judicial Assistant Incentive Liability through June 30, 2020 2,768

6 Projected Overtime Liability through June 30, 2020 (Based on three year average) 14,992

7 Projected Court Interpreter Below Minimum Pay Plan Liability through June 30, 2020 3,726

8 Projected Court Interpreter Incentives Pay Plan Liability through June 30, 2020 5,322

9 Chief Judge Discretionary Funds (300,000) 3,789

10 Chief Judge Discretionary Funds (150,000) 25,144

11 Total Projected Payroll Liability through June 30, 2020 311,678,797

12 Salary Appropriation (307,377,764)

13 Projected Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment 4,301,033

14 Actual Payroll Adjustments through May 31, 2020 (4,345,724)

15 Adjusted Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment (44,691)

16 Projected Leave Payouts (Based on three year average) 157,084

17 Final - Adjusted Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment 112,393



20 Judicial Assistant Incentive Liability through June 30, 2020 126


22 Projected Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment 612,015




26 Final - Adjusted Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment (694,752)



29 Projected Law Clerk Below Minimum Pay Plan Liability through June 30, 2020 3,787

30 Projected Law Clerk Incentives Pay Plan Liability through June 30, 2020 4,747

31 Judicial Assistant Incentive Liability through June 30, 2020 2,893

32 Projected Overtime Liability through June 30, 2020 (Based on three year average) 14,992

33 Projected Court Interpreter Below Minimum Pay Plan Liability through June 30, 2020 3,726

34 Projected Court Interpreter Incentives Pay Plan Liability through June 30, 2020 5,322

35 Remaining Chief Judge Discretionary Funds (300,000) 3,789

36 Remaining Chief Judge Discretionary Funds (150,000) 25,144

37 Total Projected Payroll Liability through June 30, 20202 409,036,135


39 Projected Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment 4,913,048




43 Final - Adjusted Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment (582,359)

FY 2019-20 Trial Courts Salary BudgetGeneral Revenue and State Courts Revenue Trust Fund

MAY 2020

CIR

CU

ITC

OU

NTY

Tria

l Co

urt

Su

mm

ary

1Projected DROP liability for all participants was $1,844,937 ($1,129,117 Circuit and $715,820 County). The DROP

liability has been reduced by $1,020,527 ($630,309 Circuit and $390,218 County) due to participants that intend to

stay throughout the fiscal year. Please note the additional liability of $1,020,527 will be incurred in the fiscal year

that the participants who stayed exit the Judicial branch.2The chart does not reflect potential FY 2019-20 liability related to reclassification of contract/1099 payments as

wages and associated tax liability.

Prepared by the OSCA Office of Budget Services of 143


Salary Budget Report May 2020 May 2019

Deficit Remaining (582,359) (2,146,879)

Trial Court Lapse FY 19-20 FY 18-19 FY 17-18 Annual Monthly

July 813,442 792,972 660,974 FY 2018-19 Lapse (2.23%) 8,783,831 731,000

August 731,951 952,510 714,233 FY 2017-18 Lapse (2.26%) 8,635,849 719,000

September 625,297 983,640 721,143 FY 2016-17 Lapse (1.85%) 6,641,326 553,000

October 460,854 840,548 778,925 FY 2015-16 Lapse (1.80%) 6,401,197 533,433

November 449,159 894,174 625,983 FY 2014-15 Lapse (1.91%) 6,681,062 556,755

December 649,811 761,194 718,918

January 582,546 711,706 788,356

February 617,760 506,408 778,782

March 640,780 506,020 699,954

April 682,857 540,073 699,522

May 570,511 665,587 715,221

June 628,999 733,838

Total 6,824,968 8,783,831 8,635,849

Adjusted Liability 409,036,135 394,297,847 382,612,393

Lapse % 1.67% 2.23% 2.26%

Vacancies as of month end

Judges Staff Judges Staff

July 14.00 101.00 11.00 117.75

August 7.00 56.50 16.00 120.25

September 8.00 66.25 19.00 117.25

October 10.00 66.50 15.00 88.75

November 10.00 88.50 18.00 119.25

December 12.00 82.00 12.00 105.75

January 8.00 89.00 3.00 96.25

February 8.00 91.25 5.00 93.50

March 9.00 77.50 5.00 84.50

April 9.00 79.00 8.00 88.50

May 9.00 81.00 9.00 93.50

June 10.00 98.50

monthly average 79.86 monthly average 101.98

FY 19-20 FY 18-19

Historical Lapse

of 143


Rate

DistributionRate Used

Balance

Rate

1 Balance

Salary

Rate

DistributionRate Used

Balance

Rate

1 Balance

Salary

1 11,890 11,889.84 0 0.19 5,945 5,933.04 12 13.89

2 8,551 8,550.92 0 0.09 4,276 4,276.00 0 0.00

3 4,920 4,920.00 0 0.00 2,460 2,460.00 0 0.00

4 16,576 16,575.24 1 0.88 8,288 0.00 8,288 9,624.03

5 13,588 13,588.00 0 0.00 6,794 6,791.72 2 2.65

6 23,135 22,330.44 805 934.26 11,568 11,400.00 168 195.08

7 12,827 12,799.92 27 31.45 6,414 6,309.12 105 121.79

8 7,966 7,950.24 16 18.30 3,983 3,981.84 1 1.35

9 23,253 23,253.00 0 0.00 11,626 11,625.84 0 0.19

10 12,944 12,943.76 0 0.28 6,472 6,472.00 0 0.00

11 37,602 37,602.00 0 0.00 18,800 18,703.44 97 112.13

12 11,246 11,245.92 0 0.09 5,623 5,622.96 0 0.05

13 20,383 20,382.96 0 0.05 10,191 10,191.00 0 0.00

14 6,326 6,325.80 0 0.23 3,163 0.00 3,163 3,672.88

15 20,353 20,353.00 0 0.00 10,177 10,176.80 0 0.23

16 3,749 3,749.00 0 0.00 1,874 1,850.92 23 26.80

17 28,231 28,230.60 0 0.46 14,116 14,114.64 1 1.58

18 12,446 12,445.92 0 0.09 6,223 6,222.96 0 0.05

19 9,020 9,019.96 0 0.05 4,510 4,509.92 0 0.09

20 14,994 14,988.48 6 6.41 7,497 7,496.28 1 0.84

TOTAL 300,000 299,145.00 855 992.83 150,000 138,138.48 11,862 13,773.60

1 Effective July 1, 2019 benefit cost changed to 16.12% (7.65% FICA + 8.47% Regular FRS Rate)

150,000

Trial Courts Chief Judge Discretionary Funds Distribution

as of June 15, 2020

FY 2019-20

300,000

CIRCUIT

of 143

1 Projected Full Employment Payroll Liability through June 30, 2020 275,298

2 Projected Overtime Liability through June 30, 2020 (Based on two year average) 655

3 Projected Drop Liability through June 30, 2020 0

4 Court Interpreter Certification Liability 1,452

5 Total Projected Payroll Liability through June 30, 2020 277,405

6 Estimated Salary Appropriation (286,019)

7 Projected Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment (8,614)

8 Actual Payroll Adjustments through May 31, 2020 (86,436)


10 Projected Leave Payouts (Based on two year average) 3,252



2 FY 2019-20 Current Contract Amount (Attachment A) (6,652,532)

3 Estimated DROP Liability 0


5 Actual Payroll Adjustments through May 31, 2020 (83,229)


7 Projected Leave Payouts (Based on two year average) 0


FY 2019-20 Trial Courts Salary Budget

MAY 2020

Administrative Trust Fund


Federal Grants Trust Fund

MAY 2020


Agenda Item II.B.: FY 2019-20 Budget –

Positions Vacant More Than 180 Days

of 143

Trial Court Budget Commission

June 18, 2020

Zoom Webinar

Agenda Item II.B.: Positions Vacant More than 180 Days (as of June 18, 2020)

CIRCUITCOST

CENTERPOS NUM CLASS TITLE POS FTE DAYS VACANT VACANT DATE BASE SALARY

11 122 010263 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT II 1.00 383 06/01/2019 $34,981.08

11 122 010277 COURT PROGRAM SPECIALIST II 1.00 414 05/01/2019 $36,115.32




11 131 010353 COURT INTERPRETER 1.00 230 11/01/2019 $60,000.00



11 210 001543 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER 1.00 353 07/01/2019 $61,906.08

11 210 010325 COURT OPERATIONS MANAGER 1.00 619 10/08/2018 $57,235.68





13 729 010513 COURT REPORTER II 1.00 899 01/01/2018 $52,917.60

13 729 010516 COURT REPORTER II 1.00 705 07/14/2018 $52,917.60


16 430 011450 MEDIATOR-CIRCUIT/FAMILY 1.00 1560 03/11/2016 $45,303.72


20 024 009890 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT I 1.00 353 07/01/2019 $32,092.80

20 024 011213 HEARING OFFICER 0.75 276 09/16/2019 $84,722.64

of 143

Agenda Item II.C.: FY 2019-20 Budget –

Operating Budgets

of 143

Category

Budget

Entity Appropriation

Expended/

Encumbered

Remaining

Balance

% Expended/

Encumbered

Circuit 1,082,311 797,739 284,572 73.71%

County 19,110 11,140 7,970 58.29%

Total 1,101,421 808,879 292,542 73.44%

Circuit 5,488,369 4,388,393 1,099,976 79.96%

County 2,403,711 2,176,568 227,143 90.55%

Total 7,892,080 6,564,961 1,327,119 83.18%

Circuit 492,766 379,928 112,838 77.10%

County 391,228 381,244 9,984 97.45%

Total 883,994 761,173 122,821 86.11%

Circuit 520,844 362,127 158,718 69.53%

County 367,008 275,636 91,372 75.10%

Total 887,852 637,762 250,090 71.83%

Circuit 39,300 34,220 5,080 87.07%

County 19,642 18,422 1,220 93.79%

Total 58,942 52,642 6,300 89.31%

Other Data

Processing

Services

Circuit 330,712 225,305 105,408 68.13%

75,000 69,329 5,671 92.44%

1,806,438 1,324,904 481,534 73.34%

2,844,100 2,409,894 434,206 84.73%

7,193,123 6,014,688 1,178,435 83.62%

7,130,396 6,187,860 942,536 86.78%

3,819,188 3,004,366 814,822 78.67%

18,142,707 15,206,914 2,935,793 83.82%

Operating

Capital

Outlay

Contracted

Services

Total Due Process

Due Process - Court Reporting

Due Process - Court Interpreting

Mediation Services

Civil Traffic Infraction

Hearing Officers

Lease/Lease

Purchase


June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar

Agenda Item II.C.: Operating Budgets

The data below represents the status of the FY 2019-20 operating budgets as of May 31, 2020.

Other

Personal

Services

Expenses

Additional Compensation to

County Judges

Due Process - Expert Witness

of 143


June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar



AppropriationExpended/

Encumbered

Remaining

Balance

% Expended/

Encumbered

316,000 244,413 71,587 77.35%

7,032,172 5,997,920 1,034,252 85.29%

5,000,000 4,039,326 960,674 80.79%

Circuit Problem Solving Court AppropriationExpended/

Encumbered

Remaining

Balance

% Expended/

Encumbered

Mental Health 18,355 9,025 9,330 49.17%

Veterans 386,232 261,145 125,087 67.61%

Post Adjudicatory Drug 848,439 548,620 299,819 64.66%

Total 1,253,026 818,789 434,237 65.34%

Veterans 219,901 218,078 1,823 99.17%

Felony Drug 227,674 107,245 120,429 47.10%

Total 447,575 325,323 122,252 72.69%

Mental Health 84,780 5,600 79,180 6.61%

Veterans 601,361 385,534 215,827 64.11%


Family Dependency Drug 184,284 9,882 174,402 5.36%

Total 1,095,347 425,915 669,432 38.88%

Early Childhood Court 69,480 29,192 40,288 42.02%

Veterans 379,755 171,455 208,300 45.15%

Misdemeanor Drug 51,630 10,732 40,898 20.79%


Adult Drug 18,195 0 18,195 0.00%

Juvenile Drug 28,795 3,573 25,222 12.41%

Family Dependency Drug 11,680 10,932 748 93.60%

Total 1,048,920 535,042 513,878 51.01%

Veterans 345,417 270,417 75,000 78.29%


Adult Drug 69,936 50,309 19,627 71.94%

Total 1,219,362 849,966 369,396 69.71%


Adult Drug 3,365 0 3,365 0.00%

Total 392,494 289,238 103,256 73.69%

Multi-PSC Case Mgmt 24,130 14,048 10,082 58.22%

Mental Health 4,121 1,821 2,300 44.18%

Veterans 150,000 64,026 85,974 42.68%

Total 178,251 79,895 98,356 44.82%

7

4

6

8

5

GPS Monitoring-18th Circuit

Medication Treatment-General

Medication Treatment-Naltrexone

Legislative Issue Funding

1

2

of 143


June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar




Encumbered

Remaining

Balance

% Expended/

Encumbered

Mental Health 73,370 26,888 46,482 36.65%


Veterans 211,672 156,694 54,978 74.03%


Adult Drug 138,980 30,906 108,074 22.24%

Total 1,220,531 673,074 547,457 55.15%

Multi-PSC Case Mgmt 75,000 0 75,000 0.00%

DUI Court 124,400 91,056 33,344 73.20%

Behavioral

Health/Veterans105,265 40,553 64,712 38.53%

Misdemeanor Drug 45,464 41,452 4,012 91.17%


Adult Drug 45,464 14,443 31,021 31.77%

Juvenile Drug 57,799 33,768 24,031 58.42%

Total 1,166,575 712,092 454,483 61.04%

Mental Health

Misdemeanor54,311 2,938 51,373 5.41%

Mental Health Felony 54,311 21,029 33,282 38.72%

Mental Health 25,621 0 25,621 0.00%

Veterans 293,543 226,950 66,593 77.31%

Post Adjudicatory Drug 6,700 0 6,700 0.00%

Adult Drug 100,360 36,227 64,133 36.10%

Juvenile Drug 134,438 93,669 40,769 69.67%

Domestic Violence Drug 117,369 100,112 17,257 85.30%

Family Dependency Drug 132,961 129,626 3,335 97.49%

Total 919,614 610,551 309,063 66.39%

Mental Health 30,947 5,779 25,168 18.67%

DUI Court 17,573 7,469 10,104 42.50%

Comprehensive Court 189,500 125,966 63,534 66.47%

Adult Drug 44,232 18,433 25,799 41.67%

Total 282,252 157,647 124,605 55.85%

Veterans 215,251 78,027 137,224 36.25%


Adult Drug 31,485 18,602 12,883 59.08%

Total 1,161,701 753,762 407,939 64.88%

Veterans 109,523 50,634 58,889 46.23%

Total 109,523 50,634 58,889 46.23%

10

12

9

14

11

13

of 143


June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar




Encumbered

Remaining

Balance

% Expended/

Encumbered


Dependency Therapeutic 33,025 4,735 28,290 14.34%

Adult Drug 6,250 6,250 0 100.00%

Juvenile Drug 22,688 399 22,289 1.76%

Family Dependency Drug 21,219 0 21,219 0.00%

Total 275,468 78,504 196,964 28.50%

Early Childhood 74,287 2,861 71,426 3.85%

Post Adjudicatory Drug 1,150,383 677,731 472,652 58.91%

Adult Drug 140,580 35,883 104,697 25.52%

Juvenile Drug 18,016 0 18,016 0.00%

Family Dependency Drug 32,050 499 31,551 1.56%

Total 1,415,316 716,973 698,343 50.66%

Mental Health 60,000 20,000 40,000 33.33%

Veterans 45,423 7,174 38,249 15.79%


Adult Drug 166,631 79,929 86,702 47.97%

Juvenile Drug 221,675 186,202 35,473 84.00%

Total 599,328 360,239 239,089 60.11%

Multi-PSC Case Mgmt 104,958 47,942 57,016 45.68%

Mental Health 1,917 1,917 0 99.98%

Misdemeanor Drug 4,014 350 3,664 8.71%

Felony Drug 119,947 38,557 81,389 32.15%

Adult Drug 21,950 270 21,680 1.23%

Juvenile Drug 13,884 7,482 6,402 53.89%

Total 266,670 96,517 170,153 36.19%

Mental Health 184,157 124,280 59,878 67.49%

Veterans 102,759 61,971 40,788 60.31%

Felony Drug 18,800 4,471 14,329 23.78%

Adult Drug 84,660 43,269 41,391 51.11%

Total 390,376 233,991 156,385 59.94%

13,442,329 7,768,153 5,674,176 57.79%

18

19

17

15

Total Problem Solving Courts

20

of 143

Circuit Allotted Days

Days

Transferred

Days

Served

Remaining

Allotted Days

Percent

Remaining

1st 216 (40) 86 90 41.67%

2nd 144 (27) 106 11 7.65%

3rd 79 (42) 21 16 20.25%

4th 316 20 319 17 5.38%

5th 251 (91) 91 69 27.49%

6th 390 (210) 116 64 16.41%

7th 250 (143) 98 9 3.60%

8th 124 (50) 60 14 11.29%

9th 413 (141) 257 15 3.63%

10th 226 (81) 139 6 2.65%

11th 688 (105) 473 110 15.99%

12th 175 (54) 108 13 7.43%

13th 346 0 283 63 18.21%

14th 267 (35) 175 57 21.30%

15th 335 (194) 129 12 3.58%

16th 41 (36) 4 1 2.44%

17th 532 (25) 256 251 47.18%

18th 259 45 179 125 48.26%

19th 164 (113) 41 10 6.10%

20th 293 (75) 167 51 17.41%

Reserve 51 1,397 0 10 19.61%

TOTAL 5,560 0 3,108 1,014 18.24%


June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar


The data below represents the status of the FY 2019-20 operating budgets as of June 19, 2020.

Senior Judge Activity Summary

Regular Senior Judge Allocation

of 143

Agenda Item II.D.: FY 2019-20 Budget – Trust

Fund Cash Balances

of 143

Source

FY 2019-20

Projected

Revenues

Percent of

Total

Revenue

Adjusted

FY 2019-20

Projected

Revenues Including

COVID-19 Impact4

Difference Between

FY 2019-20

Projected and

Adjusted Revenues

$5 Civil Traffic Assessment $8.8 10.3% $7.9 -$0.9

$25 Speeding Fine Increase $5.1 6.0% $4.6 -$0.5

9% Driving School Reduction1 $1.2 1.4% $1.3 $0.1

Subtotal of Civil Traffic Fines $15.1 17.7% $13.8 -$1.3

Real Property/Foreclosure Revenue: $770

Portion of the Total $1,900 Filing Fee$6.4 7.5% $5.1 -$1.3

$50 Administrative Fee for Timeshare Foreclosure

Procedures$0.2 0.2% $0.3 $0.1

$115 Increase in Probate $7.8 9.2% $7.3 -$0.5

$195 Redirect/Increase in Circuit Civil

(Excluding Foreclosures)$34.5 40.4% $31.8 -$2.7

$95 Redirect in Family $7.4 8.7% $5.7 -$1.7

Appellate $50 Filing Fee $0.3 0.4% $0.3 $0.0

$195 for Non-Foreclosure between $15,001 - $30,0002 $1.6 1.9% $2.0 $0.4

$10 County Civil Claims (Evictions) $1.3 1.5% $1.0 -$0.3

$15 County Civil Claims $3.3 3.9% $2.9 -$0.4

$1 Circuit and County Proceedings $1.0 1.2% $1.0 -$0.1

Subtotal of Civil, Probate, and Family Filing Fees $63.9 74.9% $57.4 -$6.6

$25 Application for Marriage License1 $2.7 3.2% $1.7 -$1.0

$100 for Attorneys appearing pro hac vice in Circuit Court1 $0.1 0.2% $0.1 $0.0

Court Ordered Mediation Services3 $3.4 4.0% $2.8 -$0.6

Subtotal of Service Charges $6.3 7.3% $4.7 -$1.6

Total5 $85.3 100.0% $75.9 -$9.4

FY 2019-20

Projected

Revenues

Percent of

Total

Revenue

Adjusted

FY 2019-20

Projected

Revenues Including

COVID-19 Impact4

Difference Between

FY 2019-20

Projected and

Adjusted Revenues

$3.50 Probate Claims $0.20 5.7% $0.19 -$0.01

$3.50 Circuit Civil Claims $1.13 32.2% $1.12 $0.00

$3.50 County Civil Claims $2.17 62.1% $2.18 $0.00

Total5 $3.50 100.0% $3.49 -$0.01

5Totals may not be exact due to rounding.

State Courts Revenue Trust Fund and Court Education Trust Fund

Revenue Projections Based on December 19, 2019, Article V Revenue Estimating Conference

FY 2019-20

State Courts Revenue Trust Fund (in Millions)

Civil Traffic Fines

Civil, Probate, and Family Filing Fees

Service Charges

Note: Projections from the December 19, 2019, Article V Revenue Estimating Conference. Methodology considers the one-month lag receipt of revenues, based on

estimates from the Clerk of Court Operations Corporation's interim revenue reports through May 15, 2020.

1 2019 Post-Session revenue impacts depicted in 9% Driving School Reduction, $25 Application for Marriage License, and $100 for Attorneys appearing pro hac vice

in Circuit Court. 9% Driving School Reduction category no longer remitted to the SCRTF after January 1, 2020.

2 Source revenue effective January 1, 2020. New forecasted item that was projected too low during Article V Revenue Estimating Conference.

3 Court Ordered Mediation Services includes the fee charged for Mediation Certification Licenses.

4 Includes pre COVID-19 adjustments.

Court Education Trust Fund (in Millions)

Agenda Item II.D.: State Courts Revenue Trust Fund and Court Education Trust Fund Estimated Impact

of 143

Agenda Item II.D.: Trust Fund Cash Balances

1 Ending Cash Balance June 30, 2019 22,283,315

2 Beginning Balance July 1, 2019 22,283,315

3 Add: FY 2019-20 Revenues1 75,904,539

4 Add: Cost Sharing 3,695,347

5 Less: Expenditures2 (79,046,178)

6 Less: GR Service Charge³ (6,841,774)

7 Estimated Ending Cash Balance June 30, 2020 15,995,248

8 Beginning Balance July 1, 2020 15,995,248

9 Add: FY 2020-21 Projected Revenues1 85,800,000

10 Add: Cost Sharing 3,695,347

11 Less: Estimated Expenditures⁴ (77,671,524)

12 Less: Estimated GR Service Charge³ (6,273,685)

13 Less: Estimated 5% Reserve⁵ (3,976,316)

14 Estimated Ending Cash Balance June 30, 2021 17,569,069

Estimated Cash Balances

As of May 31, 2020

¹ Based on actual revenues and refunds received through May 31, 2020 and December 19, 2019, Article V

Revenue Estimating Conference, and adjusted for estimated revenue loss related to the COVID-19 pandemic in FY

19-20. FY 20-21 projected revenue is based on the December 2019 REC and does not include estimated revenue

loss.

STATE COURTS REVENUE TRUST FUND

⁵ The estimated 5% reserve is calculated on the December 19, 2019 Revenue Estimating Conference projection for

FY 20-21 less the 8% GR service charge.

3 The GR service charge is based on revenues collected/projected for the last three months of the prior fiscal year

and the first, second, and third quarters of the current year.

⁴ Represents estimated FY 2020-21 base budget authority for staff salary expenditures and estimated refunds.

The total budget authority is $77,671,524 ($77,636,524 staff salary expenditures and $35,000 refund of state

revenues). Estimates do not include any supplemental appropriations that may be approved in 2020 Legislative

Session such as employee benefit changes.

FY 2019-20 and FY 2020-21

FY 2019 - 20

FY 2020 - 21

2 Total estimated budget authority is $79,035,714 ($77,320,948 staff salary expenditures, $1,679,766 operating

categories, plus $35,000 refund of state revenues). Expenditures include $10,464 in prior year certified forwards

for a total of $79,046,178 in expenditures.

Note: The FY 2020-21 Projected Revenues do not include estimates for potential revenue loss

due to COVID-19. Estimated Expenditures are based on base budget authority and do not

reflect additional authority provided in the unsigned FY 2020-21 General Appropriations Act for

funding approved during the 2020 Legislative Session. Any change in revenues or expenditures

could significantly impact the ending cash balance for FY 2020-21.

Prepared by Office of Budget Services

of 143

Agenda Item II.E.: FY 2019-20 Budget – Year-

End Spending Plan

of 143

Circuit Category

Budget

Entity Appropriation

Expended/

Encumbered

Remaining

Balance

% Expended/

Encumbered

Expense 56,778 55,057 1,721 97%

Other Capital Outlay 1 0 1 0%

56,779 55,057 1,722 97%

Expense 72,306 61,459 10,847 85%

Other Capital Outlay 15,853 15,852 1 100%

Contractual Services 6,351 6,351 0 100%

94,510 83,662 10,848 89%

Expense 22,482 8,481 14,001 38%

Other Capital Outlay 58,487 30,487 28,000 52%


Due Process Contractual 50,000 0 50,000 0%

ODPS 29,000 0 29,000 0%

Other Capital Outlay County 27,584 27,583 1 100%

201,001 79,999 121,002 40%

Expense 28,347 25,286 3,061 89%



72,366 69,205 3,161 96%

OPS 35,714 25,806 9,907 72%

Expense 35,005 27,359 7,646 78%

Other Capital Outlay 13,000 0 13,000 0%

Due Process Contractual 70,000 11,034 58,967 16%


156,286 66,766 89,519 43%

Expense 86,282 69,900 16,382 81%


ODPS 7,736 0 7,736 0%

240,459 114,632 125,827 48%

Expense 162,882 149,161 13,721 92%


208,616 192,072 16,544 92%

Expense 34,007 26,572 7,435 78%



Due Process Contractual 37,165 37,022 143 100%


FY19/20 Combined Year End Spending Plan and Covid-19 Funds Status

Agenda Item II.E.: Year-End Spending Plan Status


June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar

Statewide

Statewide Totals

1st Circuit Totals

2nd Circuit Totals

3rd Circuit Totals

4th Circuit Totals

5th Circuit Totals

6th Circuit Totals

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

5th

6th

7th

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

As of 06/12/2020

of 143




June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar

As of 06/12/2020

145,488 137,909 7,579 95%

Expense 55,285 26,946 28,339 49%



Other Capital Outlay County 56,643 55,083 1,560 97%

198,722 168,418 30,305 85%

Expense 30,000 25,290 4,710 84%



151,793 144,781 7,012 95%

Expense 69,684 41,314 28,370 59%




Expense 25,398 22,940 2,458 90%


187,158 151,319 35,839 81%

Expense 111,187 32,638 78,549 29%




412,500 141,317 271,183 34%

Expense 106,000 70,377 35,623 66%


147,696 112,073 35,623 76%

Expense 9,525 6,360 3,165 67%



73,753 69,414 4,339 94%

Expense 42,781 42,621 160 100%

Contractual Services 549 548 1 100%



130,115 129,112 1,003 99%

Expense 145,972 74,454 71,518 51%

Contractual Services 23,970 0 23,970 0%

Expense County 1,870 0 1,870 0%

171,812 74,454 97,358 43%

13th

7th Circuit Totals

8th

9th

14th Circuit Totals

15th Circuit Totals

14th

15thCircuit

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

Circuit

County

8th Circuit Totals

9th Circuit Totals

10th Circuit Totals

11th Circuit Totals

12th Circuit Totals

13th Circuit Totals

10th

11th

12th

Circuit

Circuit

of 143




June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar

As of 06/12/2020

Expense 4,238 4,237 1 100%



102,388 102,372 16 100%

Expense 194,616 37,873 156,743 19%


Contractual Services 176,500 141,771 34,729 80%


Expense County 55,384 0 55,384 0%

521,820 240,921 280,899 46%

Expense 25,278 24,581 697 97%



Expense 11,487 10,586 901 92%


205,097 191,548 13,549 93%

Expense 22,098 10,179 11,919 46%


Contractual Services 8,724 7,008 1,716 80%


99,697 73,474 26,223 74%

Expense 8,000 7,906 94 99%


Contractual Services 81,788 0 81,788 0%

Due Process Contractual 192,348 0 192,348 0%

Expense 37,553 0 37,553 0%


401,689 79,906 321,783 20%

Circuit 3,390,042 1,997,933 1,392,109 59%

County 589,703 480,475 109,228 81%

3,979,745 2,478,408 1,501,337 62%

SUB-TOTALS

GRAND TOTAL

20th Circuit Totals

16th Circuit Totals

17th Circuit Totals

18th Circuit Totals

19th Circuit Totals

Circuit

16th

17th

18th

Circuit

Circuit

20th

County

Circuit

Circuit

County

19th

of 143

Agenda Item III.A.: FY 2020-21 Budget – Start-

Up Salary Budget

of 143

Agenda Item II.A.: Start-Up Salary Budget

1 Projected Full Employment Payroll Liability through June 30, 2021 273,265

2 Projected Overtime Liability through June 30, 2021 (Based on three year average) 767

3 Court Interpreter Certification Liability 1,452

4 Total Projected Payroll Liability through June 30, 2021 275,484

5 Estimated Salary Appropriation (286,019)


7 Projected Leave Payouts (Based on two year average) 4,196



Start-Up 2020

Administrative Trust Fund

06.01.20


Agenda Item III.A. Start-Up Salary Budget


2 FY 2019-20 Current Contract Amount (Attachment A) (6,652,532)

3 Estimated DROP Liability 0

4 Projected Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment 2,194


6 Adjusted Liability OVER/(UNDER) Salary Appropriation @ Full Employment 63,821


Start-Up 2020

Federal Grants Trust Fund

06.01.20


Agenda Item III.B.: FY 2020-21 Budget –

Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum

of 143


June 23, 2020

Video Conference

Agenda Item III.B.: FY 2020-21 Budget – Budget and Pay Administration

Memorandum

Background

Annually the chief justice issues budget and pay administration memoranda for the trial courts and the

district courts of appeal. The memoranda prescribe salary and other budget-management policies and

procedures for the given fiscal year. The memoranda have served as a tool to help manage the trial

court and district court budgets based on known or anticipated conditions in that particular fiscal year.

For example, based on the health of the salary budget, a budget and pay memorandum may require

positions to be held vacant for a specified period in order to generate salary lapse and thereby help

manage an anticipated deficit. The memoranda sometimes prescribe salary or other personnel-action

policies that are more restrictive than those authorized in the State Courts System’s Personnel

Regulations Manual. For example, although the Personnel Regulations Manual establishes conditions

under which employees may be hired above the minimum pay for the position, a budget and pay

memorandum may specify that positions shall be filled at the minimum absent extraordinary

circumstances.

The budget commissions make recommendations to the chief justice regarding the content of the

memoranda. The issued memorandum typically is coded in legislative format with deletions from the

prior year shown as stricken and additions underlined.

Issue

Attached is a draft budget and pay administration memorandum for the trial courts for fiscal year

2020-21. Deletions and additions from the fiscal year 2019-20 memorandum have been incorporated

to create the base document. In addition, staff of the Office of the State Courts Administrator (OSCA)

have coded technical revisions, such as updating fiscal year references. Further, based on discussions

at the February 17, 2020, meeting of the Trial Court Budget Commission (TCBC), the draft

memorandum includes new language providing for TCBC staff to initiate the annual year-end

spending process by contacting circuits about unobligated funds and outstanding needs. This authority

will eliminate the step of the TCBC directing staff to conduct the outreach. See Attachment A.

Trial court administrators (TCAs) reviewed the fiscal year 2019-20 memorandum and submitted

proposed revisions to OSCA staff. OSCA staff incorporated a number of the technical revisions

identified by the TCAs into the attached draft memorandum. Further, OSCA staff summarized and

compiled the substantive or policy changes proposed by the TCAs, which are attached for discussion

and consideration by the Trial Court Budget Commission as part of its annual review of the

memorandum. See Attachment B.

Decision Needed

Approve any recommendations for the fiscal year 2020-21 budget and pay administration

memorandum for submission to the chief justice.

of 143

Supreme Court of Florida 500 South Duval Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1925 CHARLES T. CANADY

CHIEF JUSTICE

RICKY POLSTON JORGE LABARGA

C. ALAN LAWSON

CARLOS G. MUÑIZ JOHN D. COURIEL

JUSTICES

MEMORANDUM

JOHN A. TOMASINO

CLERK OF COURT

SILVESTER DAWSON

MARSHAL

THOMAS D. HALL

CLERK OF COURT

TO: Chief Judges of the Trial Courts

Trial Court Administrators

FROM: Chief Justice Charles T. Canady

DATE: June XX, 2020

SUBJECT: Budget and Pay Administration for Fiscal Year 2020-21

I have established the following budget and pay administration policies for the

current fiscal year, consistent with the recommendations of the Trial Court Budget

Commission (TCBC) and also addressing other issues. Deletions from the prior year’s

policy are stricken, and additions to the prior year’s policy are underlined.

A. Personnel Actions

1. Judicial Salaries

Effective July 1, 2020 2019, a trial court judge shall be paid at an annual rate

of:

Circuit Court: $160,688

County Court: $151,822

of 143

bosleys

Text Box

Agenda Item III.B. Attachment A

Budget and Pay Administration

June XX, 2020

Page 2

2. Trial Court Salary Budget Management

a. It does not appear to be necessary to hold positions vacant in the trial courts at

this time. However, an included employee under the Fair Labor Standards

Act should not work overtime without advance approval from his or her

supervisor. The Budget Management Committee shall continue to monitor

the salary budget and make recommendations to the TCBC regarding

proposed changes to the Salary Management Schedule as necessary, in order

to cover payroll costs through the end of the fiscal year.

b. Subject to available rate and salary appropriation, as confirmed by the Chief

Justice, a rate distribution may be made during FY 2020-21 2019-20.

i. A rate distribution plan shall be submitted by the TCBC to the Chief

Justice for approval prior to the implementation of a rate distribution.

ii. Distribution to the circuit courts will be based on the total number of

eligible FTE in each circuit district (less judges) unless otherwise

directed by the TCBC.

iii. Individual salary increases may not exceed 10 percent.

iv. The effective date of actions may begin the first day of the month

following the Chief Justice’s confirmation of available rate and salary

appropriation and approval of a rate distribution plan. A Personnel

Action Request (PAR) for all rate distribution actions must be

submitted to the OSCA Office of Human Resources for processing on

the next available monthly payroll. No retroactive salary increases are

permitted.

v. When it is anticipated that rate distribution plan allocations for a circuit

court will not be used by June 30, 2021 2020, the TCBC will assess the

health of the salary budget and determine whether to re-purpose or

carry forward the funds or let the funds revert for statewide budget

management.

vi. Outside of any rate distribution plan, no special pay increases are

permitted.

3. Other Personnel Actions

a. All appointment rates, including re-employed retirees, must be at the

minimum of the pay range. The chief judge may request an exception by

the TCBC Executive Committee. Any exception requests must include

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 3

documentation of the affected position being advertised no less than two

times, with indication that no applicant met the qualifications, or that no

qualified applicant would accept the position at the minimum salary.

These requests should be sent to the Chair of the TCBC with copies to the

State Courts Administrator. However, the circuit must first use any

available chief discretionary funds in this event.

b. Upon promotion, an employee’s salary shall be increased to the minimum

of the class to which the employee is being promoted. However, if that

amount is less than five percent (5%), the chief judge may approve a

promotional increase for an employee of up to five percent (5%) of the

employee’s salary prior to promotion, provided such an increase will not

place the employee’s salary above the maximum for the new range.

c. Retention or reduction of current salary for employees who are reassigned,

transferred between circuits or demoted to a position in a class with a

lower pay grade, including judicial assistants moving from circuit court to

county court, may be approved by the chief judge. The basis for such pay

decisions are to include level of education and experience, longevity,

ability relative to other employees in the newly assigned class, and salaries

of other employees in the class. However, retention of current salary shall

not be allowed when a demotion is the result of a performance problem.

d. If a position is approved for designation as a lead worker in accordance

with Section 6.06 of the State Courts System Personnel Regulations, the

chief judge may approve a temporary salary additive up to five percent

(5%) of the employee’s current salary. Should the duties be taken away or

the incumbent vacate the position, the additive will also cease. These

actions must be submitted for review by the Office of Human Resources

and approval by the State Courts Administrator.

e. The starting salaries for the Trial Court Administrator are $120,500,

$125,500, or $130,500 $115,000, $120,000, or $125,000, for small,

medium, and large circuits, respectively; or $135,500 $130,000 for very

large circuits, which include the Eleventh and Seventeenth Judicial

Circuits. All appointment rates for Trial Court Administrators must be at

these starting salaries.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 4

f. Upward reclassification of positions is prohibited until further notice for

FY 2020-21 2019-20.

g. An employee who is selected for an acting appointment in a managerial

position may receive a pay increase necessary to move the employee’s pay

to the minimum of the higher class for the period of time they are in an

acting capacity.

h. Following an analysis of the salary budget in May 2021 2020, a

distribution to address merit1 may be made by the TCBC in June 2021

2020. If such a distribution occurs, adjustments will be limited to no more

than 5% and will require the approval of the chief judge along with

documented exemplary performance during the period June 2020 2019

through May 2021 2020.

i. Any exception requests to these pay policies should be sent to the Chair of

the TCBC with copies to the State Courts Administrator. The TCBC

Executive Committee is authorized to consider and grant exceptions.

j. Other than regulations limited by these “Other Personnel Action” policies

and procedures, all regulations provided in the State Courts System

Personnel Manual remain in effect.

(https://intranet.flcourts.org/osca/personnel/bin/personnel_regulationsmanu

al.pdf)

4. Overlap of a Position

No overlaps of positions are permitted except as follows:

a. The TCBC Executive Committee may consider an overlap of a judicial

assistant position if the incumbent judicial assistant is placed on an extended

leave of absence without pay for medical reasons.

1 The 2020-21 2019-20 General Appropriations Act (GAA) authorizes granting of merit pay increases based on the

employee’s exemplary performance as evidenced by a performance evaluation conducted pursuant to chapter 60L-35,

Florida Administrative Code, or a similar performance evaluation applicable to other pay plans. The Chief Justice may

exempt judicial branch employees from the performance evaluation requirements of this paragraph. Further, section

216.251(3), F.S., prohibits giving a cohort of employees (same class or occupation) across the board increases. Providing

across the board increases is a process that may only be accomplished as part of the General Appropriations Act, as

authorized by the Florida Legislature.

of 143

https://intranet.flcourts.org/osca/personnel/bin/personnel_regulationsmanual.pdf

https://intranet.flcourts.org/osca/personnel/bin/personnel_regulationsmanual.pdf


June XX, 2020

Page 5

b. The TCBC Executive Committee may consider an overlap of a trial court

administrator, a general counsel, or a trial court technology officer position

upon written request from and demonstration by the chief judge that the

overlap is necessary to avoid disruption in efficient operation of the circuit.

Absent special circumstances, an exception granted under this paragraph may

not exceed 30 days.

c. A position may be overlapped if the incumbent is called to or volunteers for

active duty in the armed services of the United States. The position may

be overlapped for the duration of the military leave and must be subsequent

to (30) days after the effective date of active duty for the incumbent.

5. Other Personal Services (OPS) Employees

OPS funds are authorized this year for the Child Support Enforcement Program

and positions needed to meet temporary employment needs in other elements.

a. If it is determined that you need adjustments to your OPS category via

transfer from another operating category, please complete the budget

amendment form outlined in Section B.4. below.

b. OPS funds for child support enforcement hearing officer coverage have been

budgeted in a “central pool” for absences of more than three consecutive

days, to be used for training, illness, injury, disability or other reasons at the

discretion of the chief judge. Requests to access these funds should be

directed to Sharon Bosley, Acting Chief of Budget Services, according to the

procedures listed in Section B.4. below.

c. Circuits requesting hourly rates above the minimum must provide adequate

justification to the OSCA Chief of Human Resources, who may authorize the

adjusted hourly rate.

6. Each circuit shall submit a PAR (Personnel Action Request) and the OPS

Employment Authorization and Renewal Form at least five (5) business days

before the action takes effect. This timeframe does not apply to the New

Employment Authorization form. However, the New Employment Authorization

form must be submitted in ample time for processing prior to the established

payroll deadline.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 6

7. Incentive Plans

a. Incentive adjustments for law clerks are to be made in accordance with the

policies and procedures outlined in the Trial Court Law Clerk Incentive Plan,

which is found at Attachment I.

b. Incentive adjustments for judicial assistants are to be made in accordance

with the policies and procedures outlined in the Trial Court Judicial Assistant

Incentive Plan, which is found at Attachment II.

c. Incentive adjustments for certified court interpreters are to be made in

accordance with the policies and procedures outlined in the Certified Court

Interpreter Incentive Plan, which is found at Attachment III.

B. Budget Administration

1. Expense Budget Management

Budget allotments for the trial courts are summarized by cost center in

Attachment IV. The chief judge of each circuit, or his/her designee, is

responsible for determining, according to circuit priorities, how allotted funds

will be spent, including certain travel as outlined in Section C. below. See

Attachment V for a summary of allowable/unallowable state expenditures.

2. Due Process Services Budget Management

Expenditures from the Special Category 105420, as budgeted in Expert Witness

(Cost Center 127), Court Reporting (Cost Center 129), and Court Interpreting

(Cost Center 131), are limited to the procurement of contract services, including

court reporting and court interpreting equipment maintenance, and temporary

employment needs. Expenditures of any other type (equipment, supplies,

furniture, etc.) are unallowable.

This limitation for Special Category 105420 expenditures does not extend to the

State Funded Services/Cost Recovery (Cost Center 267). Expenditures of any

other type (equipment, supplies, furniture, etc.) are unallowable. Expenditures

from the Special Category 105420 as budgeted in Cost Center 267 may be of any

type of allowable State expenditure but only in support of due process elements.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 7

3. TCA Certification of Expenditures

Section 939.08, Florida Statutes, requires certification of all expenditures by the

Trial Court Administrator, or designee. Please include this certification on all

invoices, travel reimbursement vouchers, and contracts that are submitted for

payment from circuit cost centers. Any actions submitted for payment processing

without this certification will be returned. The Office of the State Courts

Administrator (OSCA) has provided each Trial Court Administrator with a stamp

that contains the certification language. For purchasing card transactions, the

trial court administrator must certify the invoice pursuant to s. 939.08, F.S., prior

to final approval occurring in the purchasing card system. In no case should the

date of the trial court administrator’s stamp be later than the date of final

approval in the purchasing card system.

4. Budget Category Adjustments

Section 216.181, Florida Statutes, requires that all budget amendments from the

judicial branch must be requested only through the Chief Justice and must be

approved by the Chief Justice and the Legislative Budget Commission. If it is

determined, after reviewing your operating budgets that you need adjustments

from one operating budget category to another (including OPS), please complete

the budget amendment form (in hard-copy or by e-mail) and send it to Sharon

Bosley, Acting Chief of Budget Services, so that appropriate documents can be

processed. All requests for adjustments to operating budgets must be approved

by the Chief Judge or his/her designee. Attachment VI provides instructions

and the form for this purpose.

Trial court administration staff should review FLAIR reports on a monthly basis

to monitor the status of available balances. Circuits may not exceed the operating

allotments in Attachment IV. Invoices for payment that exceed the allocation in

any cost center will be returned.

5. Due Process Deficits

In the event of a statewide due process services category deficit, the Budget

Management Committee (BMC), a subcommittee of the TCBC, shall review all

statewide trial court reserves for available funds, and, if necessary, reach out to

circuits to determine if any additional unobligated funds are available from other

operating categories, and make recommendations to the TCBC to alleviate the

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 8

deficit. The TCBC shall review the recommendation of the BMC and may make

final recommendations to alleviate the deficit.

6. Annual Statewide Year-End Spending Plan

If funds are available, the TCBC may approve an annual statewide year-end

spending plan to address critical needs within the trial courts. Annually, staff to

the TCBC shall initiate the process administratively by contacting circuits to

determine if unobligated funds are remaining that could be pooled and to solicit

and compile funding requests for the TCBC’s consideration.

C. Authorized Travel

Note: During the COVID-19 pandemic, all non-essential in-state and out-of-state

business travel should be discontinued. Essential intra-circuit travel shall be

determined by each chief judge or designee, depending upon that court's unique

operations and needs. All new non-essential travel requests should continue to be

held in abeyance. See memorandum of May 14, 2020, from State Courts

Administrator Lisa Kiel, written in consultation with the Chief Justice and as

directed in In re: Response of the Florida State Courts System to Coronavirus

Disease 2019 (COVID-19), Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC20-12 (March 11, 2020).

The following travel provisions in this budget and pay administration memorandum

apply solely to the extent they are not inconsistent with the court system’s COVID-

19 pandemic travel guidance or any subsequent supplements or revisions to that

guidance.

1. Mission Critical Determination; Approval Authority and Requirements

a. Section 103, HB 5003 111, SB 2502, Chapter 2020-XXX 2019-116, Laws of

Florida, provides that “the funds appropriated to each state agency which may

be used for travel by state employees are limited during the 2020-2021 2019-

2020 fiscal year to travel for activities that are critical to each state agency’s

mission.” This budget and pay administration memorandum sets forth my

initial determination of the types of activities that I deem mission critical for

the State Courts System and that may, consistent with this memorandum,

necessitate travel by state employees:

i. Activities related to the adjudication of cases.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 9

ii. Business meetings and other activities related to the administrative

operations and responsibilities of the Supreme Court, the district courts

of appeal, the circuit courts, the county courts, and the Office of the

State Courts Administrator.

iii. Meetings and operational activities of commissions, committees,

workgroups, and similar bodies created by the Supreme Court.

iv. Meetings and operational activities of the judicial conferences.

v. Meetings and operational activities of The Florida Bar and of

commissions, committees, workgroups, and similar bodies created by

The Florida Bar.

vi. Meetings of local, state, national, or international organizations the

agenda of which includes subjects related or beneficial to the operation

of courts.

vii. Educational, training, or similar conference, conventions, meetings, or

events that benefit justices, judges, and court system staff through the

provision or exchange of information on court-related matters or

matters affecting the courts, including but not limited to education

programs organized or sponsored under the oversight of the Florida

Courts Education Council.

b. In approving travel as authorized and prescribed in this memorandum, the

chief judge or designee must approve the travel in advance and in writing,

state how the specific travel activity is critical to the court’s mission consistent

with the initial determination in paragraph a., and state that consideration was

given to the use of teleconferencing or other forms of electronic

communication as an alternative to the travel. The chief judge may prescribe

in writing “blanket” approval for ordinary travel between courthouses within

the circuit. If the chief judge delegates travel approval to a designee, the chief

judge should prescribe the delegation in writing and retain a copy in the

court’s file. In addition, the circuit should retain the documentation approving

the travel required by this paragraph.

c. Each voucher seeking reimbursement for travel expenses must include a

statement describing how the travel was critical to the mission of the court

system. The statement can reference that the travel was for one or more of the

types of activities determined to be mission critical in paragraph a. Examples

of mission-critical statements include:

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 10

• “Travel to attend a meeting of a Supreme Court committee, as determined

to be mission critical pursuant to the Chief Justice’s budget and pay

administration memorandum.”

• “Attendance at the Florida Court Personnel Institute was for a training

activity benefiting court system staff, which is recognized as mission

critical pursuant to the Chief Justice’s budget and pay administration

memorandum.”

• “Travel to attend a meeting of the Civil Procedures Rules Committee of

The Florida Bar, as determined to be mission critical pursuant to the Chief

Justice’s budget and pay administration memorandum.”

• “Traveler was asked to testify before a legislative committee on issues

affecting dependency cases, which is mission-critical travel related to the

adjudication of cases and the administrative operation of the circuit under

the Chief Justice’s budget and pay administration memorandum.

In addition to a mission-critical statement, when a traveler is seeking

reimbursement for attendance at a conference or convention, he or she must

include on the reimbursement voucher a statement of the benefits accruing to the

State of Florida by virtue of attendance and must attach an approved Travel

Authorization Request form.

2. Travel Out of the United States

The Chief Justice must approve in advance and in writing travel out of the United

States, regardless of the source of funds for payment of the travel.

3. Out-of-State Travel

a. The Chief Justice must approve in advance and in writing all out-of-state

travel paid in whole or in part with state funds.

b. In order to implement funds appropriated in the 2019-20 General

Appropriations Act for state employee travel, The chief judge of each circuit

may authorize mission critical out-of-state travel to attend meetings,

conferences, seminars, training classes, and travel for events other than those

covered in sections 6, 7, and 9 below, provided that all travel expenses are

paid with a source of funding other than state funds.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 11

c. Notwithstanding subsections a. and b. above, travel to attend the following

national education programs when they are held out of state is determined

herein to be mission critical, and travel expenses may be paid with state funds:

• National Association for Court Management Annual Conference.

• Court Technology Conference (CTC) (sponsored by the National Center

for State Courts). This program does not include the e-Courts

conference.

• Conference of Court Public Information Officers Annual Conference

(Sponsored by the National Center for State Courts).

• National Association for Presiding Judges and Court Executive Officers

(formerly National Conference of Metropolitan Courts) Annual

Conference.

• National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators Annual

Conference.

Small circuits may send up to 2 attendees, medium circuits may send up to 4

attendees, large circuits may send up to 6 attendees, and extra-large circuits

may send up to 8 attendees to each of the above programs. Travel expenses

will be paid from local circuit budgets. The travel requires prior approval

from the chief judge or designee, and the traveler must submit with the

reimbursement voucher a Travel Authorization Request (TAR) form that was

signed in advance of the travel by the chief judge or designee.

4. Intra-Circuit Travel

Routine intra-circuit travel as a result of case-related or administrative

matters may be approved by the chief judge or designee, provided such

travel is in support of the administration of justice consistent with the Rules

of Judicial Administration.

5. Intra-State Travel

Intra-state travel necessary as a result of case-related activities or

administrative matters may be approved by the chief judge or designee,

provided such travel is in support of the administration of justice consistent

with the Rules of Judicial Administration.

a. Statewide Education Programs

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 12

The provisions of this paragraph do not apply to education programs

organized or sponsored under the oversight of the Florida Courts

Education Council.

The following education programs are determined herein to be mission

critical, and travel expenses may be paid with state funds:

• Judicial Assistants Summer Educational Conference

• Florida Trial Court Staff Attorneys Annual Conference

• Annual Dependency Summit (Sponsored by the Florida Department

of Children & Families)

• Marital & Family Law Certification Review (Sponsored by The

Florida Bar)

• Annual Conference and Justice Institute (Sponsored by Florida

Partners in Crisis) or comparable statewide education and training on

co-occurring disorders.

Circuits may send a minimum of up to 2 judicial assistant attendees, and

a maximum of up to 15% of total circuit and county judicial assistant

FTEs, to the Judicial Assistants Summer Educational Conference subject

to available local funds. For all other statewide education programs

listed in this paragraph, small circuits may send up to 2 attendees,

medium circuits may send up to 4 attendees, large circuits may send up to

6 attendees, and extra-large circuits may send up to 8 attendees. This

authorization is in addition to any participants whose attendance may be

authorized and funded by the Florida Court Education Council or other

State Courts System entity. Travel expenses will be paid from local

circuit budgets. The travel requires prior approval from the chief judge or

designee, and the traveler must submit with the reimbursement voucher a

Travel Authorization Request (TAR) form signed in advance of the travel

by the chief judge or designee. Attendance is subject to registration

requirements and participant limitations of the sponsoring entity.

b. National Education Programs

The following national education programs are determined herein to be

mission critical, and travel expenses may be paid with state funds when

they are held in-state:

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 13

• National Association for Court Management Annual Conference.

• Court Technology Conference (CTC) (sponsored by the National

Center for State Courts). This program does not include the e-Courts

conference.

• Conference of Court Public Information Officers Annual Conference

(Sponsored by the National Center for State Courts).

• National Association for Presiding Judges and Court Executive

Officers (formerly National Conference of Metropolitan Courts)

Annual Conference.

• National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators Annual

Conference.

Small circuits may send up to 2 attendees, medium circuits may send up

to 4 attendees, large circuits may send up to 6 attendees, and extra-large

circuits may send up to 8 attendees. Travel expenses will be paid from

local circuit budgets. The travel requires prior approval from the chief

judge or designee, and the traveler must submit with the travel

reimbursement voucher a Travel Authorization Request (TAR) form

signed in advance of the travel by the chief judge or designee.

6. Travel Expenses-Florida Bar Meetings

The annual and midyear meetings of The Florida Bar and meetings of

committees and sections of The Florida Bar are not organized or sponsored in

whole or in part by the judicial branch.

a. Annual and Midyear Meetings

Chief judges and the chair and chair-elect of the Florida Conference of

Circuit Judges will be reimbursed for reasonable travel expenses for their

attendance at the mid-year and annual meetings of The Florida Bar. So,

too, will the president and president-elect of the Florida Conference of

County Court Judges. These expenses will be charged against your local

circuit budget.

b. Supreme Court-Appointed Committees

Members of Supreme Court-appointed committees staffed by The Florida

Bar may be reimbursed for reasonable travel expenses associated with the

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 14

meetings of those groups with prior approval from the chief judge or

designee. These expenses will be charged against your local circuit

budget. The committees to which this section applies are:

• Standard Jury Instructions Committee – Civil

• Standard Jury Instructions Committee – Contract & Business Cases

• Commission on Professionalism

c. Selected Committees

Circuit court judges, county court judges, and other court staff who are

serving as members of selected committees and sections of The Florida

Bar may be reimbursed for reasonable travel expenses associated with the

meetings of those groups with prior approval from the chief judge or

designee. These expenses will be charged against your local circuit

budget. The committees and sections to which this policy applies are:

• Alternative Dispute Resolution Section Executive Council

• Appellate Court Rules Committee

• Appellate Practice Section Executive Council

• Civil Procedure Rules Committee

• Code and Rules of Evidence Committee

• Constitutional Judiciary Committee

• Continuing Legal Education Committee

• Criminal Law Section Executive Council

• Criminal Procedure Rules Committee

• Family Law Rules Committee

• Family Law Section Executive Council

• Judicial Administration & Evaluation Committee

• Judicial Nominating Procedures Committee

• Juvenile Court Rules Committee

• Law Related Education Committee

• Legal Needs of Children Committee

• Mental Health and Wellness of Florida Lawyers Committee

• Probate Rules Committee

• Pro Bono Legal Services Committee

• Professional Ethics Committee

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 15

• Professionalism Committee

• Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section Executive Council

• Rules of Judicial Administration Committee

• Small Claims Rules Committee

• Traffic Court Rules Committee

• Trial Lawyers Section Executive Council

The following specific guidelines apply to all Florida Bar committee- and

section-related travel:

d. Room charges that exceed the established conference rate will be

reimbursed only up to that rate. Attendees Judges are encouraged to make

alternative arrangements, at lower rates, when at all possible. Room

charges in excess of $175 $150 per night (room rate only) should be

avoided, but when that is not possible, excess charges must be justified on

travel vouchers submitted for reimbursement.

e. For approved committee and section meetings, same day travel must be

utilized whenever possible. Necessary overnight travel will be reimbursed

for the night immediately before or after the date of the committee meeting

only if same day travel cannot be accomplished or presents an undue

hardship.

f. Travel by circuit court judges, county court judges, or court staff who

attend meetings of committees and sections other than the members of

those committees on the approved list must be at the traveler’s own

expense or reimbursement must be sought from a source other than state

funding.

g. No reimbursement for attendance at Supreme Court oral argument

representing a section or committee will be paid.

h. No reimbursement for attendance at Bar committee or section seminars,

symposiums, retreats, etc., will be paid unless the travel is approved in

advance by the Chief Justice upon a determination that the travel is in

support of the administration of justice.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 16

I am asking that you take the necessary steps to communicate this policy to

judges in your circuit, particularly those who are new to the bench, in order to

eliminate confusion about the requirements for reimbursement. We want to

minimize problems with judges submitting travel vouchers for participation in

committees not on the approved list, for which advance approval was not

obtained, or where the length of stay was beyond that necessary for committee

meeting attendance. Please also communicate this information to appropriate

staff.

7. Travel Expenses for Participation in State Courts System Committees or

Commissions

Reasonable travel expenses necessary for participation in State Courts System

committees or commissions (e.g., Trial Court Budget Commission, Criminal

Court Steering Committee, Standard Jury Instructions Committee - Criminal)

will be paid without separate prior authorization, from the budgets of and in

accordance with the travel guidelines established for each committee.

Trial Court Budget Commission meetings may be attended by up to 2 non-

TCBC member trial court judges or employees with the approval of the chief

judge or designee. Non-TCBC member travel expenses will be charged

against your local circuit budget.

Reimbursement for attendance at Supreme Court oral argument to represent a

court committee or commission must be approved in advance by the Chief

Justice.

8. Travel Expenses for Legislative Hearings

Generally, the OSCA will coordinate travel by judges participating in

legislative hearings. Expenses associated with such travel will be paid from

your circuit budget with prior approval of the chief judge or designee, or if

such participation is associated with membership on a Supreme Court-

appointed committee, expenses will be reimbursed from that committee’s

budget. When judges receive personal invitations to appear and testify before

a legislative committee, expenses for associated travel will be paid from the

circuit budget with prior approval from the chief judge or designee.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 17

9. Education Travel

This memorandum constitutes advance written approval for in-state

educational travel funded through the Court Education Trust Fund. Such

travel is deemed critical to the mission of the State Courts System to promote

public trust and confidence by maintaining high standards of professionalism

and ethical behavior. Consideration was given to the use of teleconferencing

or other forms of electronic communication as an alternative to the travel.

Written approval from the Chief Justice distinct from this memorandum for

each specific event is not required. However, such travel is subject to

approval by the Florida Court Education Council in accordance with its

established guidelines. In addition, a Travel Authorization Request (TAR)

form still is required if the event meets the definition of a conference or

convention.

Out-of-state educational travel funded through the Court Education Trust

Fund will continue to be approved by the Florida Court Education Council in

accordance with its established guidelines.

D. General Travel Guidelines

1. Rules Governing Per Diem and Lodging for Overnight Travel

According to State Chief Financial Officer policy, a traveler may not claim per

diem or lodging reimbursement for overnight travel within fifty (50) miles (one-

way) of his or her headquarters or residence (city to city, calculated in accordance

with the Department of Transportation Official Map Miles), whichever is less,

unless the circumstances necessitating the overnight stay are fully explained by

the traveler and approved by the Agency Head in advance of the travel. I am

delegating this approval authority to chief judges; however, this delegation does

not apply to travel funded through the Court Education Trust Fund, travel

associated with the circuit and county conferences’ business programs, and travel

funded by state budgetary sources other than individual circuit budgets (e.g.,

travel funded through a court committee’s budget). Official written approval

from the chief justice or designee or chief judge must be attached to the

reimbursement voucher when submitted for payment. Vouchers without this

approval will be returned. A reduction in this requirement to less than 35 miles

may only be approved by the chief justice or designee under unusual

circumstances that are justified consistent with the criteria in Rule 69I-42.006,

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 18

Fla. Admin. Code (e.g., late night or early morning job responsibilities and

excessive travel time because of traffic conditions).

2. Lodging Room Rate Limits

Pursuant to Section 104, HB 5003 112, SB 2502, Chapter 2020-XXX 2019-116,

Laws of Florida, “costs for lodging associated with a meeting, conference, or

convention organized or sponsored in whole or in part by a state agency or the

judicial branch may not exceed $175 $150 per day. An employee may expend

his or her own funds for any lodging expenses in excess of $175 $150 per day.

For purposes of this section, a meeting does not include travel activities for

conducting an audit, examination, inspection, or investigation or travel activities

related to a litigation or emergency response.”

When this limitation does not apply, hotel room charges that exceed $175 $150

per night (room rate only), still should be avoided, and less costly alternatives

secured when possible. Charges in excess of $175 $150 (room rate only), must

be justified on travel vouchers submitted for reimbursement.

Lodging rates for travel sponsored by the Court Education Trust Fund, or travel

funded by state budgetary sources other than individual circuit budgets, are

subject to further limitations set by the paying entity.

3. Prohibition of Class C Meal Reimbursement

Reimbursement for Class C travel for per diem and subsistence is prohibited in

section 112.061(15), Florida Statutes.

4. Convention and Conference Travel

Travel reimbursements for convention or conference travel (with the exception of

judges’ participation in circuit and county conferences’ education and business

programs) must be submitted for payment with a Travel Authorization Request

(TAR) form, according to State of Florida travel guidelines. TAR forms will be

prepared by the OSCA on the judges’ behalf for circuit and county conferences’

education and business programs. The TAR form must include a statement of the

benefits accruing to the State of Florida by virtue of attendance. Although an

event may be identified by a different title (e.g., “Symposium” or Summit”), it

may by its nature meet the definition of a conference or convention under Florida

Administrative Code 69I-42.002 and therefore require a TAR.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 19

In addition to a mission-critical statement, as provided under section C.1.c., the

travel voucher seeking reimbursement for attendance at a conference or

convention must include the statement of the benefits accruing to the State of

Florida by virtue of attendance.

5. Education and Training Activities

Travel for education and training activities must be directly related to the

employee’s current job duties and have primary benefit to the State.

6. Travel Paid from Local Circuit Budgets

Reimbursement of travel from funds of a judicial circuit is subject to certification

of the expenditures by the Trial Court Administrator or designee, pursuant to

section 939.08, Florida Statutes. The Trial Court Administrator’s signature in the

certification portion of the reimbursement voucher also signifies his or her

representation that all applicable approvals were followed for travel paid from

local circuit budgets.

7. Travel Voucher Submission

All travel vouchers must be submitted through the trial court administrator’s

office to the OSCA for payment.

E. Senior Judge Guidelines and Allocations

1. Allocation

Attachment VII reflects the allocation of senior judge days for the 2020-21

2019-20 fiscal year.

2. Utilization and Management

Please continue to follow the current guidelines for the utilization and

management of senior judges, as outlined in Attachment VII-A. Trial Court

Administrators are responsible for the administrative oversight of senior judge

service within their respective circuits, in coordination with the OSCA. All

senior judges shall submit requests for payment through Court Administration.

Designated court administration staff will request payment through the automated

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 20

web-based reporting and tracking system. Hard copy submissions will not be

accepted.

3. Compensation Rate

Senior judge compensation is $375 for each day of service for 2020-21 2019-20.

4. Travel Expenses

Expenses for senior judge travel have been budgeted and allocated by the TCBC

to your local circuit for work provided from the regular allocation of senior judge

days. All requests for reimbursement of senior judge travel expenses must be

submitted through the Trial Court Administrator. Such travel is subject to the

certification of the expenditures by the Trial Court Administrator or designee,

pursuant to section 939.08, Florida Statutes.

F. Assignment and Compensation of County Judges to Temporary Service in Circuit

Court

A county court judge designated to preside over circuit court cases shall receive the

same salary as a circuit court judge while performing such duties, to the extent that

funds are specifically appropriated by law for these purposes. Requests for

compensation shall be based upon allotments as approved by the TCBC.

G. Payment of Florida Bar Membership Fees/Legal Education Courses

The 2020-21 2019-20 General Appropriations Act allows the payment of Florida

Bar membership fees for staff attorneys, or those positions that require Bar

membership as a condition of their employment by the state. (For a list of eligible

position titles, please refer to the memorandum of June XX, 2020 June 27, 2019,

from Eric Maclure.) We are currently unable to authorize payment for continuing

legal education courses (those courses taken for the sole purpose of earning CLE

credits), or professional certification of any kind.

I am requesting that you disseminate the information contained in the

memorandum to all judges and other appropriate personnel in your courts. The policies

outlined herein will remain in effect until such time as they are succeeded with an

updated memorandum.

of 143


June XX, 2020

Page 21

If you have any questions about budget matters, please contact Sharon Bosley,

Acting Chief of Budget Services, at (850) 410-1484. Questions relating to personnel

matters should be directed to Dorothy Willard, Acting Chief of Human Resources, at

(850) 617-4028. Other finance questions should be directed to Jackie Knight, Chief of

Finance and Accounting Services, at (850) 488-3737.

CTC/sb

cc: Lisa Kiel

Eric Maclure

Sharon Bosley

Dorothy Willard

Jackie Knight

Steven Hall

of 143

1

Agenda Item III.B.: Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum

Attachment B – Trial Court Administrator Proposed Substantive Changes

Budget and Pay Administration Memorandum Substantive Changes Proposed by Trial Court Administrators Current Proposed Language

Salary Budget Management Retroactive Salary Increases under Rate

Distribution: The memorandum prohibits

retroactive salary increases as part of a rate

distribution.

Retroactive Salary Increases under Rate

Distribution: Eliminate the prohibition on

retroactive salary increases as part of a rate

distribution.

The effective date of actions may begin

the first day of the month following the

Chief Justice’s confirmation of

available rate and salary appropriation

and approval of a rate distribution plan.

A Personnel Action Request (PAR) for

all rate distribution actions must be

submitted to the OSCA Office of

Human Resources for processing on

the next available monthly payroll. No

retroactive salary increases are

permitted.

Return of Distributed Rate: The

memorandum does not currently address

situations in which an employee vacates a

position after receiving a salary adjustment

and whether the amount of rate applied

toward the adjustment may be returned to

the circuit for reuse.

For some rate distributions or in response to

exception requests, the TCBC and the

Executive Committee have authorized

circuits to redistribute the rate balance if an

employee vacates a position within 60 days

Return of Distributed Rate: Add

specific language codifying a policy to

allow a circuit to redistribute the rate

balance if an employee vacates a position

within 60 days of receiving an adjustment

under a rate distribution.

If an employee vacates a position

within 60 days of the date that

employee received his or her salary

adjustment from rate, the full amount

of the rate for that adjustment may be

returned to the circuit for the chief

judge’s reuse for another recruitment,

retention, equity, or merit salary issue.

However, reuse of this rate for another

employee may not overlap with the

period during which the original

employee was benefiting from the rate.

of 143

2


of receiving an adjustment under a rate

distribution.

Appointment at Salary Minimum: The

memorandum provides that all appointments

must be at the minimum of the pay range.

The chief judge may seek an exception from

the TCBC Executive Committee, with

documentation of inability to fill the position

after multiple advertisements.

Appointment at Salary Minimum:

Permit appointment above the minimum if

the circuit uses discretionary funds under a

rate distribution. If the circuit does not

have discretionary funds, permit the

seeking of an exception from the TCBC

Executive Committee but eliminate the

documentation criteria.

All appointment rates, including re-

employed retirees, must be at the

minimum of the pay range, unless a

circuit has discretionary funds to

address a salary above the minimum.

If a circuit does not have available

discretionary funds, a The chief judge

or designee may request an exception

by the TCBC Executive Committee.

Any exception requests must include

documentation of the affected position

being advertised no less than two

times, with indication that no applicant

met the qualifications, or that no

qualified applicant would accept the

position at the minimum salary. These

requests should be sent to the Chair of

the TCBC with copies to the State

Courts Administrator. However, the

circuit must first use any available

chief discretionary funds in this event.

Promotions: The memorandum authorizes

a promotional salary increase of up to 5%

above the employee’s current salary.

However, the memorandum specifies that

the increase may not place the employee’s

salary above the maximum for the pay

range.

Promotions: Eliminate the language that

specifies that the increase may not place

the employee’s salary above the maximum

for the pay range.

Upon promotion, an employee’s salary

shall be increased to the minimum of

the class to which the employee is

being promoted. However, if that

amount is less than five percent (5%),

the chief judge may approve a

promotional increase for an employee

of 143

3


of up to five percent (5%) of the

employee’s salary prior to promotion,

provided such an increase will not

place the employee’s salary above the

maximum for the new range.

Salary upon Reassignment, Transfer, or

Demotion: The memorandum provides that

the chief judge may approve retention or

reduction of current salary for an employee

who is reassigned, transferred between

circuits or demoted to a position in a class

with a lower pay grade, including a judicial

assistant moving from circuit court to county

court. However, retention of current salary

shall not be allowed when a demotion is the

result of a performance problem.

Salary upon Reassignment, Transfer, or

Demotion: Eliminate the authority for the

chief judge to reduce the current salary for

an employee who is reassigned, transferred

between circuits or demoted to a position

in a class with a lower pay grade. Thus,

the default would be that such an

employee would retain his or her current

salary. However, the proposal is to retain

the statement that retention of current

salary shall not be allowed when a

demotion is the result of a performance

problem.

Retention or reduction of current

salaries salary for employees who are

reassigned, transferred between circuits

or demoted to a position in a class with

a lower pay grade, including judicial

assistants moving from circuit court to

county court, may be approved by the

chief judge. The basis for such pay

decisions are to include level of

education and experience, longevity,

ability relative to other employees in

the newly assigned class, and salaries

of other employees in the class.

However, retention of current salary

shall not be allowed when a demotion

is the result of a performance problem.

TCA Appointment Rate: The

memorandum prescribes the starting salaries

for trial court administrators (TCAs) and

specifies that all appointment rates for TCAs

must be at the starting salaries.

TCA Appointment Rate: Eliminate the

requirement that all appointment rates for

TCAs must be at the starting salaries.

The starting salaries for the Trial Court

Administrator are $115,000, $120,000,

or $125,000, for small, medium, and

large circuits, respectively; or $130,000

for very large circuits, which include

the Eleventh and Seventeenth Judicial

Circuits. All appointment rates for

Trial Court Administrators must be at

these starting salaries.

of 143

4


Upward Reclassifications: The

memorandum prohibits upward

reclassification of positions for the fiscal

year.

Upward Reclassifications: Eliminate the

prohibition on upward reclassifications for

fiscal year 2020-21.

Upward reclassification of positions is

prohibited until further notice for FY

2019-20.

Merit: The memorandum authorizes the

TCBC to make a distribution to address

merit in June of the fiscal year. Further the

memorandum prescribes a 5% limit for

merit adjustments under such distribution

and documentation of exemplary

performance.

Merit:

◼ Eliminate the limitation for a merit

distribution to occur solely in June

of the fiscal year.

◼ Eliminate the 5% limit for merit

adjustments.

◼ Eliminate the specific requirement

for performance documentation.

◼ Provide that adjustments must be

consistent with the General

Appropriations Act (GAA).

The fiscal year 2020-21 GAA adopted by

the Legislature, but not yet approved by

the Governor, states that:

Each agency is authorized to grant merit

pay increases based on the employee’s

exemplary performance as evidenced by a

performance evaluation conducted

pursuant to chapter 60L-35, Florida

Administrative Code, or a similar

performance evaluation applicable to

other pay plans. The Chief Justice may

exempt judicial branch employees from the

Following an analysis of the salary

budget in May 2020, a distribution to

address merit may be made by the

TCBC in June 2020. Distributions If

such a distribution occurs, adjustments

will be limited to no more than 5% and

will require the approval of the chief

judge consistent with any qualifying

provisions in the GAA along with

documented exemplary performance

during the period June 2019 through

May 2020.

of 143

5


performance evaluation requirements of

this paragraph.

Overlap of Positions: The memorandum

provides that the TCBC Executive

Committee may consider overlap of a

judicial assistant position if the incumbent is

placed on an extended leave of absence

without pay for medical reasons.

Overlap of Positions: Broaden this

authority to include any position under the

same extended leave of absence criteria.

The TCBC Executive Committee may

consider an overlap of a judicial

assistant position if the incumbent

judicial assistant is placed on an

extended leave of absence without pay

for medical reasons.

Travel National Education Programs –

Recognized Programs: The memorandum

lists, in a subsection dealing with out of state

travel, specific national education programs

that are recognized as mission critical and

that therefore do not require chief justice

approval to attend using state funds.

The memorandum lists, in a subsection

dealing with in-state travel, the same events

as mission critical when held in state.

National Education Programs –

Recognized Programs:

◼ Consolidate the out-of-state and in-

state provisions relating to national

education programs.

◼ Broaden the list of eligible

programs to include additional

named programs as well as

categories or types of programs

(e.g., “Conferences for due process

employees”).

◼ Add the mid-year conference of the

National Association for Court

Management (NACM) to current

allowance for the NACM annual

conference. Note: The mid-year

conference of NACM will be held

in Jacksonville in February 2021.

◼ Eliminate exclusion of the e-Courts

conference from list of pre-

approved events.

Notwithstanding subsections a. and b.

above, the following national education

programs are determined herein to be

mission critical, and travel expenses

may be paid with state funds when they

are held either in-state or out-of-state:

National Association for Court

Management Annual and Mid-Year

Conferences Conference.

Court Technology Conference (CTC)

and e-Courts Conference (sponsored by

the National Center for State Courts).

This program does not include the e-

Courts conference.

Conference of Court Public

Information Officers Annual

Conference (Sponsored by the National

Center for State Courts).

of 143

6


National Association for Presiding

Judges and Court Executive Officers

(formerly National Conference of

Metropolitan Courts) Annual

Conference.

Conferences for due process

employees, including but not limited to

the National Association of Judiciary

Interpreters and Translators Annual

Conference and the National Court

Reporting Association Conference.

National Association of Drug Court

Professionals Annual Conference.

National Consortium of Racial and

Ethnic Fairness in Courts.

Government Social Media

Organization’s Annual Conference.

Other programs and courses sponsored

by the National Center for State Courts

and the Institute for Court

Management.

National Education Programs – Number

of Attendees: The memorandum prescribes

the maximum number of attendees by circuit

based on circuit size.

National Education Programs –

Number of Attendees:

Circuits may send at least 2 attendees,

but no more than 15% of total circuit

and county state FTEs, excluding TCA

and Chief Judge in the count. Small

of 143

7


◼ Replace the language setting a

maximum number of attendees by

circuit based on circuit size with

language comparable to what the

TCBC recommended and the chief

justice adopted last year governing

attendance at the judicial assistants

annual education program. That

language establishes a minimum of

2 and a maximum of up to 15% of

judicial assistant FTEs.

◼ Permit circuits to donate unused

slots to another circuit.

◼ Specify that the attendance limits

do not apply if a circuit is in such

close proximity to the event that

travelers would solely be entitled to

Class C reimbursement (e.g.,

mileage but no per diem).

circuits may send up to 2 attendees,

medium circuits may send up to 4

attendees, large circuits may send up to

6 attendees, and extra-large circuits

may send up to 8 attendees to each of

the above programs. Circuits who are

unable to utilize all allocated slots may

donate unused slots up to the maximum

to another circuit for use. When a

circuit’s attendees are in close

proximity to an in-state venue and will

only be permitted to claim Class C

travel reimbursement, the above caps

do not apply. Travel expenses will be

paid from local circuit budgets. The

travel requires prior approval from the

chief judge or designee, and the

traveler must submit with the

reimbursement voucher a Travel

Authorization Request (TAR) form that

was signed in advance of the travel by

the chief judge or designee.

Intra-Circuit Travel: The memorandum

authorizes routine intra-circuit travel as

approved by the chief judge in support of the

administration of justice.

Intra-Circuit Travel: Eliminate specific

provisions related to intra-circuit travel on

basis that such travel will be covered by

other provisions.

Routine intra-circuit travel as a result

of case-related or administrative

matters may be approved by the chief

judge or designee, provided such travel

is in support of the administration of

justice consistent with the Rules of

Judicial Administration.

Statewide Education Programs: The

memorandum lists statewide education

Statewide Education Programs:

The following education programs are

determined herein to be mission

of 143

8


programs that are deemed to be mission

critical and for which state funds may be

used to pay travel expenses.

◼ Add additional events to the list.

◼ Conform the attendance limitations

to the proposed national education

program limits.

◼ Permit circuits to donate unused

slots to another circuit.

◼ Specify that the attendance limits

do not apply if a circuit is in such

close proximity to the event that

travelers would solely be entitled to

Class C reimbursement (e.g.,

mileage but no per diem).

critical, and travel expenses may be

paid with state funds:

Judicial Assistants Summer

Educational Conference

Florida Trial Court Staff Attorneys

Annual Conference

Florida Courts Public Information

Officer Annual Conference

Annual Dependency Summit

(Sponsored by the Florida Department

of Children & Families)

Marital & Family Law Certification

Review (Sponsored by The Florida

Bar)

Annual Conference and Justice

Institute (Sponsored by Florida

Partners in Crisis) or comparable

statewide education and training on co-

occurring disorders

The Florida Court Reporting

Association Annual Conference or

comparable statewide education and

training for due process employees

of 143

9


Annual Criminal Law Review Course

(Sponsored by the Florida Association

of Criminal Defense Lawyers)

Annual Civil Trial Update and Board

Certification Review (Sponsored by

The Florida Bar)

Annual Guardianship Review

(Sponsored by The Florida Bar)

Bar Committees: The memorandum

prescribes a list of committees and sections

of The Florida Bar for which attendance by

judge and staff members of those

committees or sections may be reimbursed.

Bar Committees: Eliminate the list of

identified committees and sections and

thereby permit the chief judge or designee

to determine whether to approve the travel

reimbursement.

Circuit court judges, county court

judges, and other court staff who are

serving as members of selected

committees and sections of The Florida

Bar may be reimbursed for reasonable

travel expenses associated with the

meetings of those groups with prior

approval from the chief judge or

designee. These expenses will be

charged against your local circuit

budgets. The committees and sections

to which this policy applies are:

Alternative Dispute Resolution Section

Executive Council

Appellate Court Rules Committee

Appellate Practice Section Executive

Council

Civil Procedure Rules Committee

Code and Rules of Evidence

Committee

of 143

10


Constitutional Judiciary Committee

Continuing Legal Education

Committee

Criminal Law Section Executive

Council

Criminal Procedure Rules Committee

Family Law Rules Committee

Family Law Section Executive Council

Judicial Administration & Evaluation

Committee

Judicial Nominating Procedures

Committee

Juvenile Court Rules Committee

Law Related Education Committee

Legal Needs of Children Committee

Mental Health and Wellness of Florida

Lawyers Committee

Probate Rules Committee

Pro Bono Legal Services Committee

Professional Ethics Committee

Professionalism Committee

Real Property, Probate and Trust Law

Section Executive Council

Rules of Judicial Administration

Committee

Small Claims Rules Committee

Traffic Court Rules Committee

Trial Lawyers Section Executive

Council

of 143

11


TCBC Meeting Attendance: The

memorandum specifies that TCBC meetings

may be attended by up to 2 non-TCBC

member judges or employees, with approval

by the chief judge or designee and with

travel being paid from circuit funds.

TCBC Meeting Attendance: Eliminate

the limitation on the number of non-TCBC

members who may attend from a circuit.

Reasonable travel expenses necessary

for participation in State Courts System

committees or commissions (e.g., Trial

Court Budget Commission, Criminal

Court Steering Committee, Standard

Jury Instructions Committee -

Criminal) will be paid without separate

prior authorization, from the budgets of

and in accordance with the travel

guidelines established for each

committee. Trial Court Budget

Commission meetings may be attended

by up to 2 non-TCBC member trial

court judges or employees with the

approval of the chief judge or designee.

Non-TCBC member travel expenses

will be charged against your local

circuit budget.

of 143

Agenda Item III.C.: FY 2020-21 Budget –

Allocations

of 143

Agenda Item III.C.1.: FY 2020-21 Budget –

Allocations – Continuation Base Budget

Allocations

of 143

Agenda Item III.C.1.: Continuation Base Budget Allocations

FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Total All

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Total All

Categories

Statewide 25,748 25,748 25,748 25,748

1 4.00 6,276 6,276 2.00 6,276 6,276

2 2.50 4,184 4,184 2.50 4,184 4,184

3 1.50 2,426 2,426 1.50 2,426 2,426

4 7.75 8,784 8,784 7.75 8,784 8,784

5 4.50 2,789 2,789 4.50 2,789 2,789

6 6.00 9,563 9,563 6.00 9,563 9,563

7 2.50 2,956 2,956 2.50 2,956 2,956

8 3.00 11,384 11,384 3.00 11,384 11,384

9 6.00 7,593 7,593 6.00 7,593 7,593

10 5.00 4,417 4,417 5.25 4,417 4,417

11 7.00 8,337 8,337 7.00 8,337 8,337

12 5.00 7,472 7,472 5.00 7,472 7,472

13 5.50 5,578 5,578 5.50 5,578 5,578

14 2.50 3,985 3,985 2.50 3,985 3,985

15 4.00 5,578 5,578 4.00 5,578 5,578

16 0 0

17 4.00 5,911 5,911 4.00 5,911 5,911

18 2.00 6,276 6,276 2.00 6,276 6,276

19 2.00 3,819 3,819 2.00 3,819 3,819

20 2.25 3,288 3,288 4.25 3,288 3,288

Total 77.00 25,748 110,616 136,364 77.25 25,748 110,616 136,364

FY 2020-21 Trial Court Budget Allocations

Child Support Enforcement - Federal Grants Trust Fund

Cost Center - 024

Circuit

Proposed FY 2020-21Approved FY 2019-20

of 143


Approved FY 2019-20 Proposed FY 2020-21

Additonal Compensation

for County Judges

100035

Additonal Compensation

for County Judges

100035

Reserve 100 100

1 3,561 3,561

2 1,210 1,210

3 5,322 5,322

4 1,235 1,235

5 1,037 1,037

6 7,349 7,349

7 3,304 3,304

8 2,645 2,645

9 0 0

10 2,783 2,783

11 17,142 17,142

12 0 0

13 12,024 12,024

14 1,212 1,212

15 999 999

16 2,442 2,442

17 97 97

18 1,232 1,232

19 2,319 2,319

20 8,987 8,987

Total 75,000 75,000

Cost Center - 035

Circuit


Additional Compensation for County Judges

General Revenue Fund

of 143


FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories

1 48.00 57,246 0 5,342 62,588 48.00 57,246 0 5,342 62,588

2 32.00 40,662 14,922 55,584 32.00 40,662 14,922 55,584

3 14.00 7,428 7,428 14.00 7,428 7,428

4 70.00 102,741 11,510 803 115,054 70.00 102,741 11,510 803 115,054

5 62.00 139,364 1,523 140,887 62.00 139,364 1,523 140,887

6 90.00 10,000 98,887 16,718 9,851 135,456 90.00 10,000 98,887 16,718 9,851 135,456

7 54.00 93,924 1,713 95,637 54.00 93,924 1,713 95,637

8 26.00 5,667 1,601 7,268 26.00 5,667 1,601 7,268

9 88.00 26,706 26,706 88.00 26,706 26,706

10 56.00 122,410 122,410 56.00 122,410 122,410

11 160.00 37,407 195,043 232,450 160.00 37,407 195,043 232,450

12 44.00 53,012 53,012 44.00 53,012 53,012

13 90.00 103,019 5,022 108,041 90.00 103,019 5,022 108,041

14 22.00 14,302 14,302 22.00 14,302 14,302

15 70.00 174,070 174,070 70.00 174,070 174,070

16 8.00 4,781 4,781 8.00 4,781 4,781

17 116.00 146,323 8,309 154,632 116.00 146,323 8,309 154,632

18 52.00 54,478 14,715 0 69,193 52.00 54,478 14,715 0 69,193

19 38.00 65,756 6,152 71,908 38.00 65,756 6,152 71,908

20 62.00 42,992 42,992 62.00 42,992 42,992

Total 1,202.00 47,407 1,548,811 64,600 33,581 1,694,399 1,202.00 47,407 1,548,811 64,600 33,581 1,694,399

Circuit Judges and Judicial Assistants - General Revenue Fund and State Courts Revenue Trust Fund

Proposed FY 2020-21

Cost Center - 110/111


Circuit

Approved FY 2019-20

of 143


Approved FY 2017-18

FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories

1 22.00 142,547 142,547 22.00 142,547 142,547

2 20.00 106,883 106,883 20.00 106,883 106,883

3 14.00 69,498 480 3,900 73,878 14.00 69,498 480 3,900 73,878

4 40.00 123,740 5,985 129,725 40.00 123,740 5,985 129,725

5 24.00 96,811 5,760 5,673 108,244 24.00 96,811 5,760 5,673 108,244

6 48.00 183,694 2,425 186,119 48.00 183,694 2,425 186,119

7 32.00 125,567 125,567 32.00 125,567 125,567

8 20.00 64,361 21,120 2,036 87,517 20.00 64,361 21,120 2,036 87,517

9 44.00 156,472 156,472 44.00 156,472 156,472

10 24.00 108,555 108,555 24.00 108,555 108,555

11 86.00 397,658 156,480 788 554,926 86.00 397,658 156,480 788 554,926

12 20.00 44,264 14,400 58,664 20.00 44,264 14,400 58,664

13 34.00 64,258 5,760 70,018 34.00 64,258 5,760 70,018

14 18.00 84,112 84,112 18.00 84,112 84,112

15 38.00 194,993 2,223 197,216 38.00 194,993 2,223 197,216

16 8.00 41,803 2,352 44,155 8.00 41,803 2,352 44,155

17 64.00 179,389 179,389 64.00 179,389 179,389

18 34.00 11,000 147,714 34,000 0 192,714 34.00 11,000 147,714 34,000 0 192,714

19 20.00 72,597 72,597 20.00 72,597 72,597

20 38.00 166,784 166,784 38.00 166,784 166,784

Total 648.00 11,000 2,571,700 238,000 25,382 2,846,082 648.00 11,000 2,571,700 238,000 25,382 2,846,082

Circuit



County Judges and Judicial Assistants - General Revenue Fund and State Courts Revenue Trust Fund

Cost Center - 110/111

of 143


Approved FY 2019-20 Proposed FY 2020-21SPENDING CAP


Hearing Officer

100200

SPENDING CAP


Hearing Officer

100200

1 12,923 12,923

2 20,518 20,518

3 3,333 3,333

4 68,477 68,477

5 117,677 117,677

6 58,161 58,161

7 75,000 75,000

8 0 0

9 234,627 234,627

10 25,636 25,636

11 717,604 717,604

12 55,852 55,852

13 142,813 142,813

14 13,924 13,924

15 103,761 103,761

16 28,884 28,884

17 260,620 260,620

18 15,219 15,219

19 38,814 38,814

20 49,011 49,011

Total 2,042,854 2,042,854

Circuit


Civil Traffic Infraction Officers -


Cost Center - 121

of 143


FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories

1 12.00 12,480 12,480 12.00 12,480 12,480

2 6.00 6,089 6,089 6.00 6,089 6,089

3 6.00 15,012 15,012 6.00 15,012 15,012

4 20.00 30,916 924 1,606 33,446 20.00 30,916 924 1,606 33,446

5 12.00 27,819 1,830 29,649 12.00 27,819 1,830 29,649

6 24.00 14,600 24,987 39,587 24.00 14,600 24,987 39,587

7 14.00 30,450 30,450 14.00 30,450 30,450

8 7.00 9,600 9,600 7.00 9,600 9,600

9 20.00 38,031 38,031 20.00 38,031 38,031

10 12.50 16,093 16,093 12.50 16,093 16,093

11 48.00 4,139 4,139 48.00 4,139 4,139

12 9.00 11,589 11,589 9.00 11,589 11,589

13 22.00 19,237 86,400 105,637 22.00 19,237 86,400 105,637

14 7.00 13,265 13,265 7.00 13,265 13,265

15 20.00 34,853 34,853 20.00 34,853 34,853

16 6.00 5,655 5,655 6.00 5,655 5,655

17 33.00 33,552 2,400 35,952 33.00 33,552 2,400 35,952

18 12.50 19,212 19,212 12.50 19,212 19,212

19 7.00 6,317 6,317 7.00 6,317 6,317

20 18.00 19,400 19,400 18.00 19,400 19,400

Total 316.00 42,419 352,707 89,724 1,606 486,456 316.00 42,419 352,707 89,724 1,606 486,456

Cost Center - 122

Circuit



Case Management - General Revenue Fund

of 143


FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories

1 6.50 6,828 6,828 6.50 6,828 6,828

2 4.00 6,365 6,365 4.00 6,365 6,365

3 1.00 7,012 7,012 1.00 7,012 7,012

4 13.00 17,818 17,818 13.00 17,818 17,818

5 10.00 25,920 25,920 10.00 25,920 25,920

6 14.25 5,000 15,496 33,400 53,896 14.25 5,000 15,496 33,400 53,896

7 7.50 21,334 21,334 7.50 21,334 21,334

8 3.00 17,026 17,026 3.00 17,026 17,026

9 10.00 39,591 39,591 10.00 39,591 39,591

10 7.00 11,799 11,799 7.00 11,799 11,799

11 22.00 7,989 7,989 22.00 7,989 7,989

12 7.00 6,835 6,835 7.00 6,835 6,835

13 14.00 8,962 27,000 35,962 14.00 8,962 27,000 35,962

14 3.00 6,298 6,298 3.00 6,298 6,298

15 13.00 38,219 38,219 13.00 38,219 38,219

16 32,728 32,728 32,728 32,728

17 17.50 56,079 1,200 57,279 17.50 56,079 1,200 57,279

18 7.00 8,298 8,298 7.00 8,298 8,298

19 6.00 10,467 2,520 12,987 6.00 10,467 2,520 12,987

20 10.00 15,400 16,320 31,720 10.00 15,400 16,320 31,720

Total 175.75 22,026 310,710 110,648 2,520 445,904 175.75 22,026 310,710 110,648 2,520 445,904


Magistrates - State Courts Revenue Trust Fund

Cost Center - 123

Circuit


of 143


FTE

Expense

040000

Due Process

Costs

105420

Total All

Categories FTE

Expense

040000

Due Process

Costs

105420

Total All

Categories

1 376,955 376,955 376,955 376,955

2 341,720 341,720 341,720 341,720

3 45,466 45,466 45,466 45,466

4 157,076 157,076 157,076 157,076

5 206,078 206,078 206,078 206,078

6 1.00 1,095 383,237 384,332 1.00 1,095 383,237 384,332

7 176,814 176,814 176,814 176,814

8 76,710 76,710 76,710 76,710

9 595,248 595,248 595,248 595,248

10 418,243 418,243 418,243 418,243

11 1,427,889 1,427,889 1,427,889 1,427,889

12 309,398 309,398 309,398 309,398

13 524,311 524,311 524,311 524,311

14 79,829 79,829 79,829 79,829

15 420,521 420,521 420,521 420,521

16 35,433 35,433 35,433 35,433

17 957,305 957,305 957,305 957,305

18 174,692 174,692 174,692 174,692

19 314,061 314,061 314,061 314,061

20 327,474 327,474 327,474 327,474

Total 1.00 1,095 7,348,460 7,349,555 1.00 1,095 7,348,460 7,349,555


Expert Witness - State Courts Revenue Trust Fund


Circuit

Cost Center - 127

of 143


FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Due Process

Costs

105420

Total

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Due Process

Costs

105420

Total

Categories

1 18.00 72,102 66,261 138,363 18.00 72,102 66,261 138,363

2 10.00 36,309 22,915 59,224 10.00 36,309 22,915 59,224

3 5.00 17,680 19,964 37,644 5.00 17,680 19,964 37,644

4 10.00 1,286 662,948 664,234 10.00 1,286 662,948 664,234

5 16.00 19,200 258,632 277,832 16.00 19,200 258,632 277,832

6 36.00 4,000 67,701 522,211 593,912 36.00 4,000 67,701 522,211 593,912

7 13.50 47,357 122,841 170,198 13.50 47,357 122,841 170,198

8 14.00 46,558 48,454 95,012 14.00 46,558 48,454 95,012

9 36.00 19,512 88,245 133,895 241,652 36.00 19,512 88,245 133,895 241,652

10 12.00 13,281 381,685 394,966 12.00 13,281 381,685 394,966

11 4.00 1,800 1,581,001 1,582,801 4.00 1,800 1,581,001 1,582,801

12 15.00 60,979 40,693 101,672 15.00 60,979 40,693 101,672

13 3.00 46,522 1,271,905 1,318,427 3.00 46,522 1,271,905 1,318,427

14 5.00 19,065 11,724 30,789 5.00 19,065 11,724 30,789

15 23.75 44,412 322,178 366,590 23.75 44,412 322,178 366,590

16 4.00 10,216 26,285 36,501 4.00 10,216 26,285 36,501

17 29.00 57,800 1,200 626,594 685,594 29.00 57,800 1,200 626,594 685,594

18 13.00 37,426 161,229 198,655 13.00 37,426 161,229 198,655

19 13.00 41,190 0 98,342 139,532 13.00 41,190 0 98,342 139,532

20 15.00 5,250 464,322 469,572 15.00 5,250 464,322 469,572

Total 295.25 23,512 734,379 1,200 0 6,844,079 7,603,170 295.25 23,512 734,379 1,200 0 6,844,079 7,603,170

Cost Center - 129

Approved FY 2019-20

Circuit

Proposed FY 2020-21


Court Reporting - General Revenue Fund

of 143


FTE

Expense

040000

Due Process

Costs

105420

Total

Categories FTE

Expense

040000

Due Process

Costs

105420

Total

Categories

Statewide 0 3.00 0

1 69,100 69,100 69,100 69,100

2 29,556 29,556 29,556 29,556

3 24,742 24,742 24,742 24,742

4 393,348 393,348 393,348 393,348

5 5.00 187,996 187,996 5.00 187,996 187,996

6 304,263 304,263 304,263 304,263

7 4.00 4,454 78,201 82,655 4.00 4,454 78,201 82,655

8 1.00 51,609 51,609 1.00 51,609 51,609

9 10.00 30,079 265,034 295,113 10.00 30,079 265,034 295,113

10 6.00 8,928 83,173 92,101 6.00 8,928 83,173 92,101

11 37.00 27,000 670,000 697,000 37.00 27,000 670,000 697,000

12 2.00 225,528 225,528 2.00 225,528 225,528

13 10.00 6,372 220,548 226,920 10.00 6,372 220,548 226,920

14 50,358 50,358 50,358 50,358

15 13.00 23,144 266,545 289,689 13.00 23,144 266,545 289,689

16 2.00 19,400 19,400 2.00 19,400 19,400

17 15.50 37,117 225,611 262,728 15.50 37,117 225,611 262,728

18 1.00 411 58,739 59,150 1.00 411 58,739 59,150

19 2.00 6,488 664,214 670,702 2.00 6,488 664,214 670,702

20 7.00 2,700 543,328 546,028 7.00 2,700 543,328 546,028

Total 115.50 146,693 4,431,293 4,577,986 118.50 146,693 4,431,293 4,577,986

Cost Center - 131


Circuit


Court Interpreting - General Revenue Fund

of 143


FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

OCO

060000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

OCO

060000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories

1 12.00 34,267 6,762 14,016 2,694 57,739 12.00 34,267 6,762 14,016 2,694 57,739

2 9.50 22,076 4,428 11,589 38,093 9.50 22,076 4,428 11,589 38,093

3 8.00 17,325 1,000 3,243 2,081 23,649 8.00 17,325 1,000 3,243 2,081 23,649

4 20.00 28,000 62,082 30,739 21,795 3,282 145,898 20.00 28,000 62,082 30,739 21,795 3,282 145,898

5 14.00 6,194 41,907 7,916 427 56,444 14.00 6,194 41,907 7,916 427 56,444

6 24.75 5,299 61,829 12,296 4,790 84,214 24.75 5,299 61,829 12,296 4,790 84,214

7 12.00 40,699 10,126 2,797 53,622 12.00 40,699 10,126 2,797 53,622

8 8.00 31,687 9,221 2,050 42,958 8.00 31,687 9,221 2,050 42,958

9 20.00 162,182 90,308 14,450 25,250 292,190 20.00 162,182 90,308 14,450 25,250 292,190

10 13.00 40,969 10,759 2,628 54,356 13.00 40,969 10,759 2,628 54,356

11 38.00 49,159 68,000 39,742 156,901 38.00 49,159 68,000 39,742 156,901

12 13.00 52,762 10,759 0 63,521 13.00 52,762 10,759 0 63,521

13 20.00 76,685 22,284 24,000 122,969 20.00 76,685 22,284 24,000 122,969

14 6.00 17,530 7,349 162 25,041 6.00 17,530 7,349 162 25,041

15 26.00 22,762 54,781 9,221 34,259 121,023 26.00 22,762 54,781 9,221 34,259 121,023

16 5.00 16,048 3,074 0 19,122 5.00 16,048 3,074 0 19,122

17 21.00 45,204 11,106 11,545 67,855 21.00 45,204 11,106 11,545 67,855

18 12.25 34,574 15,370 17,837 67,781 12.25 34,574 15,370 17,837 67,781

19 8.00 38,000 24,074 3,074 4,000 3,001 72,149 8.00 38,000 24,074 3,074 4,000 3,001 72,149

20 12.00 90,680 8,684 26,526 125,890 12.00 90,680 8,684 26,526 125,890

Total 302.50 262,437 904,646 266,618 246,656 11,058 1,691,415 302.50 262,437 904,646 266,618 246,656 11,058 1,691,415

Cost Center - 210

Circuit



Trial Court Administration - State Courts Revenue Trust Fund

of 143


FTE

Expense

040000 FTE

Expense

040000

1 1.00 4,936 1.00 4,936

2 2,455 2,455

3 1.00 3,018 1.00 3,018

4 1.00 8,429 1.00 8,429

5 1.00 5,397 1.00 5,397

6 3,763 3,763

7 2.00 8,909 2.00 8,909

8 3,920 3,920

9 2.00 8,909 2.00 8,909

10 2,414 2,414

11 2.00 1,229 2.00 1,229

12 2.00 3,447 2.00 3,447

13 1.00 5,875 1.00 5,875

14 1.00 1,958 1.00 1,958

15 1.00 3,637 1.00 3,637

16 2.00 2,612 2.00 2,612

17 1.00 3,840 1.00 3,840

18 2.00 8,075 2.00 8,075

19 2.00 7,876 2.00 7,876

20

Total 22.00 90,699 22.00 90,699

Circuit



Drug Court Case Management


Cost Center - 217

of 143


FTE

Expense

040000 FTE

Expense

040000

1 2.00 6,613 2.00 6,613

2 3.00 3.00

3 1.00 1,117 1.00 1,117

4 2.00 2.00

5 2.00 1,457 2.00 1,457

6 2.00 457 2.00 457

7 1.50 1,457 1.50 1,457

8 2.00 1,077 2.00 1,077

9 1.00 1,457 1.00 1,457

10 2.00 2.00

11 3.00 3.00

12 2.00 1,093 2.00 1,093

13 2.00 1,457 2.00 1,457

14 2.00 2.00

15 2.00 1,457 2.00 1,457

16 -

17 2.00 1,728 2.00 1,728

18 1.00 661 1.00 661

19 1.00 729 1.00 729

20 1.00 1.00

Total 34.50 20,760 34.50 20,760

Cost Center - 257

Circuit



Post Conviction Trial Court Law Clerks


of 143


FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase

105281

Total All

Categories

1 7.00 5,949 5,949 7.00 5,949 5,949

2 5.00 7,858 7,858 5.00 7,858 7,858

3 2.00 6,295 6,295 2.00 6,295 6,295

4 11.50 7,639 11,151 18,790 11.50 7,639 11,151 18,790

5 8.00 44,578 452 546 45,576 8.00 44,578 452 546 45,576

6 14.00 21,000 10,348 12,280 43,628 14.00 21,000 10,348 12,280 43,628

7 7.00 18,922 18,922 7.00 18,922 18,922

8 4.00 14,120 14,120 4.00 14,120 14,120

9 14.00 13,953 13,953 14.00 13,953 13,953

10 8.00 20,150 20,150 8.00 20,150 20,150

11 22.00 6,783 6,783 22.00 6,783 6,783

12 6.00 16,811 16,811 6.00 16,811 16,811

13 15.00 39,367 1,920 41,287 15.00 39,367 1,920 41,287

14 4.00 7,008 7,008 4.00 7,008 7,008

15 9.50 14,858 14,858 9.50 14,858 14,858

16 1.00 679 679 1.00 679 679

17 16.00 30,448 0 30,448 16.00 30,448 0 30,448

18 8.00 7,669 7,669 8.00 7,669 7,669

19 4.00 7,942 7,942 4.00 7,942 7,942

20 9.00 12,500 12,500 9.00 12,500 12,500

Total 175.00 65,578 249,751 25,897 0 341,226 175.00 65,578 249,751 25,897 0 341,226

Cost Center - 258

Circuit



Trial Court Law Clerks - General Revenue Fund

of 143


FTE

Expense

040000

SPENDING

AUTHORITY

Due Process

Costs

105420¹

Total All

Categories FTE

Expense

040000

SPENDING

AUTHORITY

Due Process

Costs

105420¹

Total All

Categories

Statewide 657,668 657,668

1 16,201 16,201 16,201 16,201

2 2,532 2,532 2,532 2,532

3 0 0 0 0

4 2,611 2,611 2,611 2,611

5 32,285 32,285 32,285 32,285

6 3.00 109,455 109,455 3.00 109,455 109,455

7 11,384 11,384 11,384 11,384

8 18,216 18,216 18,216 18,216

9 1.00 3,928 37,578 41,506 1.00 3,928 37,578 41,506

10 46,765 46,765 46,765 46,765

11 7,092 7,092 7,092 7,092

12 14,140 14,140 14,140 14,140

13 8,894 8,894 8,894 8,894

14 852 852 852 852

15 37,765 37,765 37,765 37,765

16 6,370 6,370 6,370 6,370

17 36,555 36,555 36,555 36,555

18 12,669 12,669 12,669 12,669

19 30,781 30,781 30,781 30,781

20 15,117 15,117 15,117 15,117

Total 4.00 3,928 1,104,930 451,190 4.00 3,928 1,104,930 451,190


¹ Represents budget/spending authority only, actual spending is based on available cash. Allocation released at 100% or up to available cash.

Circuit

Cost Center - 267

Proposed FY 2020-21Approved FY 2019-20

Cost Recovery - Administrative Trust Fund

of 143


FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Lease

Purchase

105281

Mediation

Services

105415

Total All

Categories FTE

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

Lease

Purchase

105281

Mediation

Services

105415

Total All

Categories

Reserve 90,232 90,232 90,232 90,232

1 3.00 3,521 116,559 120,080 3.00 3,521 116,559 120,080

2 4.50 8,475 50,608 59,083 4.50 8,475 50,608 59,083

3 3.00 2,433 12,953 15,386 3.00 2,433 12,953 15,386

4 9.00 12,033 1,205 0 13,238 9.00 12,033 1,205 0 13,238

5 4.00 16,800 137,223 154,023 4.00 16,800 137,223 154,023

6 5.50 6,400 13,400 449,380 469,180 5.50 6,400 13,400 449,380 469,180

7 3.00 6,721 91,740 98,461 3.00 6,721 91,740 98,461

8 4.00 7,693 69,826 77,519 4.00 7,693 69,826 77,519

9 8.50 39,080 571,214 610,294 8.50 39,080 571,214 610,294

10 6.00 12,484 27,120 39,604 6.00 12,484 27,120 39,604

11 11.00 5,700 181,675 187,375 11.00 5,700 181,675 187,375

12 5.00 24,318 0 24,318 5.00 24,318 0 24,318

13 11.00 29,321 343,882 373,203 11.00 29,321 343,882 373,203

14 4.00 10,038 54,910 64,948 4.00 10,038 54,910 64,948

15 9.50 14,901 2,163 127,626 144,690 9.50 14,901 2,163 127,626 144,690

16 3.00 7,560 7,906 15,466 3.00 7,560 7,906 15,466

17 12.00 31,533 0 201,400 232,933 12.00 31,533 0 201,400 232,933

18 6.50 22,336 137,754 160,090 6.50 22,336 137,754 160,090

19 5.00 17,916 1,504 19,420 5.00 17,916 1,504 19,420

20 6.00 7,600 490,847 498,447 6.00 7,600 490,847 498,447

Total 123.50 6,400 293,863 3,368 3,164,359 3,467,990 123.50 6,400 293,863 3,368 3,164,359 3,467,990

Cost Center - 430

Approved FY 2019-20

Circuit

Proposed FY 2020-21


Mediation Arbitration Services - State Courts Revenue Trust Fund

of 143


Expense

040000 Days

Comp. to

Senior Judges

100630¹ Total

Expense

040000 Days

Comp. to

Senior Judges

100630 Total

Statewide 51 19,405.04 19,405.04 51 19,405.04 19,405.04

1 211 80,272.84 80,272.84 211 80,272.84 80,272.84

2 141 53,642.04 53,642.04 141 53,642.04 53,642.04

3 77 29,293.88 29,293.88 77 29,293.88 29,293.88

4 309 117,555.96 117,555.96 309 117,555.96 117,555.96

5 245 93,207.80 93,207.80 245 93,207.80 93,207.80

6 381 144,947.64 144,947.64 381 144,947.64 144,947.64

7 244 92,827.36 92,827.36 244 92,827.36 92,827.36

8 121 46,033.24 46,033.24 121 46,033.24 46,033.24

9 404 153,697.76 153,697.76 404 153,697.76 153,697.76

10 221 84,077.24 84,077.24 221 84,077.24 84,077.24

11 672 255,655.68 255,655.68 672 255,655.68 255,655.68

12 171 65,055.24 65,055.24 171 65,055.24 65,055.24

13 338 128,588.72 128,588.72 338 128,588.72 128,588.72

14 25,000 387 147,230.28 172,230.28 0 387 147,230.28 147,230.28

15 328 124,784.32 124,784.32 328 124,784.32 124,784.32

16 40 15,217.60 15,217.60 40 15,217.60 15,217.60

17 520 197,828.80 197,828.80 520 197,828.80 197,828.80

18 253 96,251.32 96,251.32 253 96,251.32 96,251.32

19 160 60,870.40 60,870.40 160 60,870.40 60,870.40

20 286 108,805.84 108,805.84 286 108,805.84 108,805.84

Total 25,000 5,560 2,115,249.00 2,140,249.00 0 5,560 2,115,249.00 2,115,249.00

Circuit


Senior Judge Days - General Revenue

Cost Center - 630

of 143


Approved FY 2017-18

Circuit FTE Circuit FTE Circuit FTE Circuit FTE

Statewide Statewide Statewide Statewide

1 4.0 1 1 4.0 1

2 5.0 2 2 5.0 2

3 1.0 3 3 1.0 3

4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5

6 2.0 6 6 2.0 6

7 1.0 7 7 1.0 7

8 2.0 8 8 2.0 8

9 8.0 9 9 8.0 9

10 2.0 10 10 2.0 10

11 11 11.0 11 11 11.0

12 3.0 12 12 3.0 12

13 11.0 13 13 11.0 13

14 2.0 14 14 2.0 14

15 2.0 15 15 2.0 15

16 1.0 16 16 1.0 16

17 2.0 17 17 2.0 17

18 18 18 18

19 19 19 19

20 20 20 20

Total 46.0 Total 11.0 Total 46.0 Total 11.0

Court Reporting

Cost Center 729

FY 2020-21 Trial Court Budget AllocationsDue Process Cost Sharing

State Courts Revenue Trust Fund

Court Interpreting

Cost Center 730


Court Reporting

Cost Center 729

Court Interpreting

Cost Center 730

of 143


Allocations – Child Support Enforcement

Hearing Officers and General Magistrates

of 143


June 23, 2020

Video Conference

Agenda Item III.C.2.: FY 2020-21 Budget – Child Support Enforcement

Hearing Officers and General Magistrates

Background

Each year, circuit allocations for General Magistrates (GM), Child Support Enforcement Hearing

Officers (CSEHO), and administrative support staff are developed using a 3-year maximum

workload methodology that indicates each circuit’s net need for hearing officers and general

magistrates. At the August 28, 2019, meeting, the Trial Court Budget Commission (TCBC) directed the

Funding Methodology Committee (FMC) to study current trends in child support case filings to

determine if a change was needed in the funding methodology for Title IV-D CSEHOs. The

TCBC placed a moratorium on the reallocation of resources and allowed the circuits to fill any

vacancies while the analysis was being conducted.

On February 17, 2020, the FMC recommended and the TCBC unanimously approved

temporarily modifying the existing methodology to consider the significant workload for hearing

officers associated with administrative cases for contempt, enforcement, and modifications as re-

opened cases. Further, the TCBC approved lifting the moratorium on reallocations, allowing for

vacant positions in negative net need circuits to move to positive net need circuits according to

the new methodology calculation.

Current

According to the Reallocation Policies and Procedures (Attachment A), if a position becomes

vacant during the year and the circuit has a negative net need, as reflected in Attachment B, the

circuit is required to contact Office of the State Courts Administrator staff to initiate the

reallocation process.

Due to the uncertainty of factors that may impact next year’s needs and budget, on April 28,

2020, through an email vote, the commission approved a continuation budget for each circuit

based on the circuit’s FY 2019-20 budget, including any permanent budget amendments,

approved personnel actions, and deduction of non-recurring funding received in FY 2019-20.

Based on the prior decision for a continuation budget next year and any decisions made today to

address uncertainties in the stability of next year’s budget, there may be implications for

continuing the reallocation GM, CSEHO, and administrative support staff. There are currently

no vacancies in these elements awaiting reallocation.

of 143

Decision Needed

Option 1: Approve placing a moratorium on the reallocation of General Magistrate, Child

Support Enforcement Hearing Officer, and administrative support staff positions, until more

information is known on the stability of the FY 2020-21 budget.

Options 2: Do not approve placing a moratorium on the reallocation of General Magistrate, Child

Support Enforcement Hearing Officer, and administrative support staff positions.

Option 3: Recommend an alternative.

of 143

General Magistrate and Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officer

Reallocation Policies and Procedures

Each year, circuit allocations for General Magistrates, Child Support Enforcement Hearing

Officers, and administrative support staff are developed using a 3-year maximum workload

methodology that indicates each circuit’s net need for hearing officers and general

magistrates. The administrative support net need is based on maintaining a 1:1 ratio of hearing

officer or magistrate to support staff. The Trial Court Budget Commission (TCBC) approves the

beginning allocation and net need charts for these elements. The information reflected in the

charts will be consulted if a vacancy occurs in one of these elements throughout the fiscal year.

If you have a position that becomes vacant during the year and your circuit has a negative net

need, as reflected in the attached charts, please contact Kelsey Harper ([email protected]) in

Resource Planning, and Dorothy Willard ([email protected]) in Human Resources as soon

as possible. This will initiate the reallocation process. The TCBC will evaluate the net need and

recommend reallocating hearing officers, magistrates, and administrative support FTEs based on

the following criteria: 1) maximum net need based on workload, 2) a one-to-one ratio of hearing

officer or magistrate to administrative support personnel, 3) Department of Revenue (DOR)

information where appropriate, 4) circuit information, and 5) a minimum threshold of 0.5 FTE

negative (excess) net need must be met before reallocation will be considered. For reallocation of

general magistrate positions, the combined net need in both the GM and CSEHO categories are

considered.

The procedures for evaluating the position for reallocation to another circuit are listed below:

1) Reallocations will occur through attrition only. No filled positions will be reallocated. Both

elements should be monitored throughout the year for vacancies.

2) The position must be held vacant until the process is complete. Only the portion of the

position that is considered excess, as indicated by the negative net need or ratio, needs to

be held vacant and will be considered for reallocation. A minimum excess net need of 0.5

FTE must be met for reallocation to occur. The Office of Human Resources will work with

your circuit to align the FTE portion of the position that you may fill.

3) OSCA staff will collect all relevant information, including information from the

Department of Revenue where applicable, to conduct a workload analysis. In addition,

affected circuits will be contacted and asked to provide information.

4) Information regarding the reallocation of resources will be presented to the Trial Court

Budget Commission for consideration. The decision will then be forwarded to the affected

circuits and to the appropriate OSCA staff in Resource Planning, Budget, and Human

Resources for implementation.

OSCA Resource Planning and Support Services, February 2020

Agenda Item III.C.2.: FY 2019-20 Budget - Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officers and General Magistrates Attachment A

of 143

A B C D E F G H

Circuit

General

Magistrate FTE

Administrative

Support

FTE

General

Magistrate

Total Need

Administrative

Support

Total Need3

General

Magistrate Net

Need

Administrative

Support

Net Need

1 3.50 3.00 4.4 4.00 4.00 0.50 1.00

2 2.00 2.00 2.1 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00

3 1.00 0.00 1.4 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00

4 7.00 6.00 6.9 7.00 7.00 0.00 1.00

5 5.00 5.00 5.9 6.00 6.00 1.00 1.00

6 7.25 7.00 7.3 7.00 7.00 -0.25 0.00

7 4

3.50 4.00 5.1 5.00 5.00 1.50 1.00

8 2.00 1.00 2.1 2.00 2.00 0.00 1.00

9 6.00 4.00 8.6 9.00 9.00 3.00 5.00

10 4.00 3.00 4.8 5.00 5.00 1.00 2.00

11 11.00 11.00 14.7 15.00 15.00 4.00 4.00

12 4.00 3.00 4.1 4.00 4.00 0.00 1.00

13 7.00 7.00 8.6 9.00 9.00 2.00 2.00

14 2.00 1.00 2.1 2.00 2.00 0.00 1.00

15 7.00 6.00 6.7 7.00 7.00 0.00 1.00

16 6

0.00 0.00 0.5 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00

17 9.00 8.50 10.7 11.00 11.00 2.00 2.50

18 4.00 3.00 4.8 5.00 5.00 1.00 2.00

19 3.00 3.00 3.3 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00

20 5.00 5.00 6.8 7.00 7.00 2.00 2.00

Total 93.25 82.50 110.7 112.00 112.00 17.75 28.50


June 23, 2020, Meeting

6Circuit 16 uses contracted services for General Magistrates.

1FY 2019-20 FTE allocation using current methodology is based on FY 2018-19 FTE. No reallocations have occurred since June 25, 2019.

General Magistrates

FY 2019-20 FTE Allocation

Net Need5


Approved by TCBC June 25, 2019

Using Current Methodology1

Total FTE NeedTotal

Need2

5Net Need is the difference between total need and FY 2019-20 FTE allocation.

2Total need reflects the maximum General Magistrate FTE total need over a three year period. The total need is based on the maximum number of

projected filings over fiscal years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 for non-capital murder, sexual offense, felony drug court, professional malpractice,

products liability, auto negligence, other negligence, condominium, contract & indebtedness, real property/mortgage foreclosure, eminent domain,

other circuit civil, simplified dissolution, dissolution, child support, UIFSA, other domestic relations, domestic violence, repeat violence,

delinquency, dependency, TPR, probate, guardianship, trust, Baker Act, Substance Abuse Act, and other social. The total need was calculated in

two steps. The first step estimates General Magistrate workload by multiplying filings by the appropriate case weight. In the second step, General

Magistrate total need is calculated by dividing the estimated General Magistrate workload by the total time available for case related work.3Administrative support maximum total need assumes a 1:1 ratio of Administrative Support to General Magistrate.

4Circuit 7 FY 2019-20 allocation has 0.5 FTE more Administrative Support FTE than General Magistrate FTE but is not considered in excess of the

1:1 ratio of Administrative Support to General Magistrates due to their total need.

Agenda Item III.C.2.: FY 2019-20 Budget - Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officers and General Magistrates Attachment B

of 143

A B C D E F G H

Child Support

Enforcement

Hearing

Officer

Total Need

Administrative

Support

Total Need3

Child Support

Enforcement

Hearing Officer

Net Need

Administrative

Support

Net Need

1 1.00 1.00 1.9 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00

2 1.50 1.00 1.1 1.00 1.00 -0.50 0.00

3 1.00 0.50 0.8 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.50

4 4.00 3.75 2.8 3.00 3.00 -1.00 -0.75

5 2.50 2.00 2.8 3.00 3.00 0.50 1.00

6 3.00 3.00 2.6 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00

7 1.50 1.00 1.7 2.00 2.00 0.50 1.00

8 1.50 1.50 0.7 1.00 1.00 -0.50 -0.50

9 3.00 3.00 2.6 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00

10 3.00 2.00 3.5 3.00 3.00 0.00 1.00

11 4.00 3.00 4.7 5.00 5.00 1.00 2.00

12 2.50 2.50 2.1 2.00 2.00 -0.50 -0.50

13 3.00 2.50 4.4 4.00 4.00 1.00 1.50

14 1.50 1.00 1.7 2.00 2.00 0.50 1.00

15 2.00 2.00 1.3 1.00 1.00 -1.00 -1.00

16 0.00 0.00 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

17 2.00 2.00 2.3 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00

18 1.00 1.00 1.2 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00

19 1.00 1.00 1.8 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00

20 2.25 2.00 2.7 3.00 3.00 0.75 1.00

Total 41.25 35.75 42.8 44.00 44.00 2.75 8.25


June 23, 2020, Meeting

Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officers


3Administrative support maximum total need assumes a 1:1 ratio of administrative support to CSEHO.

4Net need is the difference between total need and FY 2019-20 FTE allocation.

FY 2019-20

Child Support

Enforcement

Hearing Officer

FTE1

Total FTE Need

FY 2019-20

Administrative

Support

FTE1

Net Need4

FY 2019-20 FTE Allocation Approved by TCBC February 17, 2020

Using Alternative Methodology

Total

Need2

Circuit

1Column B and C have been updated to include reallocations that have occurred in FY 2019-20.

2Total need reflects the maximum Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officer (CSEHO) FTE total need over a three year period. The total need is based on

the maximum number of projected filings over fiscal years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 for child support, UIFSA, and paternity cases. The total need is

calculated in two steps. The first step estimates CSEHO workload by multiplying projected filings by the temporarily modified case weight (195). In the

second step, CSEHO total need is calculated by dividing the estimated CSEHO workload by the total time available for case related work.

Agenda Item III.C.2.: FY 2019-20 Budget - Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officers and General Magistrates Attachment B

of 143


Allocations – Statewide Allocations

of 143

Agenda Item III.C.3.: Statewide Allocations

Line

#

Cost

Center Allotment Description

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

OCO

060000

Add Comp

to County

Judges1

100035

Comp to

Retired

Judges1,2

100630

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase of

Equipment

105281

Mediation

Services

1054151

Due

Process

Contractual1

105420

Other Data

Processing

Services

210014

Total All

Categories

OPS

030000

Expense

040000

OCO

060000

Add Comp

to County

Judges1,2

100035

Comp to

Retired

Judges1,3

100630

Contracted

Services

100777

Lease

Purchase of

Equipment

105281

Mediation

Services

1054151

Due

Process

Contractual1

105420

Other Data

Processing

Services

210014

Total All

Categories

1 000 Statewide Operating-OPS Health Ins. 182,641 182,641 185,780 1,287 187,067

2 136 Circuit Operating Reserve 38,000 263,489 54,772 17,615 373,876 83,120 154,825 54,772 17,615 310,332

3 136 County Operating Reserve 16,066 260,628 15,000 100 39,994 331,788 16,066 98,148 15,000 100 39,994 169,308

4 136 Comp. to Retired Judges 19,022.00 19,022 19,022 19,022

5 136 Mediation Services Reserve 90,232 90,232 90,232 90,232

6 136 Due Process Reserve 282,178 282,178 282,178 282,178

7 236,707 524,117 15,000 100 19,022.00 54,772 57,609 90,232 282,178 0 1,279,737 284,966 252,973 15,000 100 19,022 54,772 57,609 90,232 283,465 0 1,058,139

8 125⁴,⁵ ICMS 145,600 245,000 390,600 145,600 245,000 390,600

9 134 Florida Bar Dues 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000

10 135 Unemployment Comp 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000

11 137 National Center for State Court Dues 314,482 314,482 324,960 324,960

12 144 Property Insurance Premium 16,500 16,500 16,500 16,500

13 145 OpenCourt 454,000 454,000 454,000 454,000

14 176 VRI Statewide Call Manager 108,100 108,100 108,100 108,100

15 239 Trial Court Process Improvement 253,200 10,400 263,600 253,200 10,400 263,600

16 262 State Court Network Lines 271,300 97,902 369,202 271,300 97,902 369,202

17 373 Legal Services 50,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 100,000

18 177 Online Dispute Resolution Pilot (N/R) 124,680 124,680 79,560 79,560

19 270,280 1,450,482 0 0 0 60,400 0 0 562,100 97,902 2,441,164 225,160 1,460,960 0 0 0 60,400 0 0 562,100 97,902 2,406,522

20 506,987 1,974,599 15,000 100 19,022.00 115,172 57,609 90,232 844,278 97,902 3,720,901 510,126 1,713,933 15,000 100 19,022 115,172 57,609 90,232 845,565 97,902 3,464,661

Note: Shaded cells indicate change from prior year.

1 The reserve amounts for Add Comp, Senior Judges, Mediation, and Due Process are based rollover allocation from FY 19-20

² County judges are paid for circuit service an additional $4.26 per hour base rate, $6.32 per hour with FICA and retirement

³ 50 days or 19,022 for reserve, $375 per day base rate, $380.44 with Medicare

⁴ Budget amendment required to move funds from Expense to Contracted Services or ODPS category


Statewide Allocations

Total Statewide Reserve

FY 2019-20 Approved Allocations

Total Other Statewide Allotments

Grand Total Statewide Allotments

FY 2020-21 Approved Allocations

of 143


June 23, 2020

Video Conference

Agenda Item III.C.3: FY 2020-21 Budget - Statewide Allocations - Online

Dispute Resolution Pilot Project

Background

In May 2018, the Supreme Court requested an assessment of online dispute resolution solutions

and the anticipated impact of implementing this technology in court-connected alternative

dispute resolution services in Florida. Online dispute resolution (ODR) involves litigants

progressing through a series of questions and steps in an online platform designed to assist the

litigants with bringing the case to resolution. The Online Dispute Resolution Workgroup was

created jointly under the Commission on Trial Court Performance and Accountability and the

Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules and Policy. The Workgroup developed the

report, Online Dispute Resolution in Florida’s Trial Courts, which advanced the following three

recommendations to the Court:

1) Authorize a pilot to study the application of ODR in Florida’s trial court small claims

cases;

2) Communicate to the trial court chief judges and clerks of court the scope and intent of the

ODR pilot and emphasize the need for continued compliance with existing court rules and

statutes governing court-connected mediation; and

3) Direct a legal analysis of ODR as a method of dispute resolution for court-connected cases.

The Court approved the recommendations from the initial report in October 2018 and requested

that the ODR Workgroup be reconvened to oversee the establishment of a pilot to study the

application of ODR in a variety of case types including, but not limited to, small claims, family,

and civil traffic. They requested that the Workgroup return to the Court with a pilot

implementation plan. In June 2019, the Court approved the Online Dispute Resolution Pilot

Project Plan for Florida’s Trial Courts and requested that the Workgroup move forward with its

implementation. Staff of the Office of the State Courts Administrator (OSCA) consulted with

the six participating pilot circuits to identify the case types in which ODR would be tested in

their circuit and to determine the case processing sample and associated costs.

At its June 25, 2019, meeting, the Trial Court Budget Commission (TCBC) approved non-

recurring funding from FY 2019-20 statewide reserves for the pilot in the amount of $124,680.

Current Issue

Following the TCBC’s decision to fund the ODR pilot using FY 2019-20 funds, OSCA staff

transferred the approved funds to the respective circuit budgets and placed the remaining balance

in a reserve. Subsequently, the Workgroup, in partnership with the six participating circuits,

selected vendors and received updated cost estimates. As of June 15, 2020, three of the six

of 143


June 23, 2020

Video Conference

participating circuits have launched their ODR platform (3rd, 9th, and 11th circuits) and the

remaining three circuits plan to begin processing cases by June 30, 2020. Since most of the cost

associated with the pilot comes from the per-case processing fees billed on a monthly basis for

the duration of the pilot, a substantial portion of the approved funds not expended in FY 2019-

20, have been returned.

At this time, FY 2020-21 funds are being requested (see Attachment A, column I) for the per-

case processing fees the circuits will incur during the remainder of the pilot. Staff will continue

to monitor expenditures and provide updates to the TCBC at future meetings.

Decision Needed

The Online Dispute Resolution Workgroup requests funding to cover the remaining portion of

the ODR pilot.

Option 1: Allocate FY 2020-21 non-recurring funds for the online dispute resolution pilot

project based on the estimated need of $79,560 (Attachment A, Column I).

Option 2: Develop an alternative.

of 143

A B C D E F G H I

3 Small Columbia Small Claims 290 $8,700 $0 $8,700 NA

Lake Small Claims (Non-Integrated1) 560 $17,800 $17,800 $0 $16,800

9 Large Orange Small Claims (Integrated1) 1,360 $34,000 $24,000 $10,000 $24,000

10 Medium Polk Dissolution without Children2

465 $14,950 $8,450 $6,500 $8,450

11 Extra Large Miami-Dade Civil Traffic Infractions3

1,530 $18,800 $6,700 $12,100 $0

17 Extra Large Broward Dissolution without Children2

930 $31,310 $31,310 $0 $30,310

5,135 $125,560 $88,260 $37,300 $79,560

Online Dispute Resolution Pilot Project

Estimated Funding Needs for FY 2020-21

Circuit Circuit Size Pilot County Pilot Case Type

Sample of

Cases4

Remaining

Estimated State

Funding Needed

for FY 2020-21

Total

Estimated

Cost for

Pilot

5

Local

Funding5

1Refers to the integration method between the ODR platform and the clerk case maintenance system.

2Includes only those dissolution of marriage cases where no

children are involved. Does not include simplified dissolution cases. 3Includes only those civil traffic infraction proceedings presided over by a judge or hearing

officer. 4Proposed sample developed by estimating the number of filings in a six-month period and then determining the appropriate sample size needed to ensure a

95-percent confidence interval with a 2.5-percent margin of error. 5

Where funds are available, circuit has committed to providing all or a portion of the funding.

Local funding for the Ninth Circuit is estimated.

Medium

Estimated Total

Beginning FY

2019-20

Allocation from

State Funds

Agenda Item III.C.3. Statewide Allocations - ODR Pilot Project - Attachment A

of 143


Allocations – Problem-Solving Courts

Appropriation

of 143


June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar

Agenda Item III.C.4.: Problem-Solving Courts Appropriation

Cir

cuit

Co

st C

en

ter

Type of Problem-Solving Court County

FY 19-20

Approved

Base

Allocations

FY 19-20

Non-Recurring

Funds

Allocations

Total

FY 19-20

Allocations

FY 20-21

Continuation

Of Base

Allocations

0 000 PSC Statewide Reserve Statewide 0 17,437 17,437 60,095

0 124 PSC Statewide OPS Support/Health Ins. Statewide 183,617 0 183,617 183,617

370 Mental Health Court Escambia 0 34,694 34,694 0

370 Mental Health Court Okaloosa 0 16,753 16,753 0

377 Veterans Court Escambia 150,000 42,986 192,986 150,000

377 Veterans Court Okaloosa 150,000 19,306 169,306 150,000

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Escambia 555,756 73,653 629,409 555,756

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Okaloosa 203,713 48,262 251,975 203,713

377 Veterans Court Leon 155,615 13,796 169,411 155,615

751 Adult Drug Court Leon 156,000 42,143 198,143 156,000

370 Mental Health Court Nassau 0 58,080 58,080 0

370 Mental Health Court Duval 0 26,700 26,700 0

377 Veterans Court Clay 199,996 0 199,996 199,996

377 Veterans Court Duval 200,000 0 200,000 200,000

377 Veterans Court Nassau 150,000 0 150,000 150,000

753 Adult Drug Court Clay 0 62,354 62,354 0

753 Adult Drug Court Duval 74,940 81,780 156,720 74,940

753 Adult Drug Court Nassau 149,982 40,150 190,132 149,982

371 Early Childhood Court Marion/Sumter 60,000 9,480 69,480 60,000

377 Veterans Court Lake 200,000 0 200,000 200,000

377 Veterans Court Hernando 0 23,469 23,469 0

377 Veterans Court Marion 105,706 0 105,706 105,706

753 Adult Drug Court Hernando 0 7,480 7,480 0

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Marion 330,032 59,110 389,142 330,032

754 Adult Drug Court Sumter 0 18,195 18,195 0

756 Juvenile Drug Court Marion 0 28,795 28,795 0

758 Family Dependency Court Marion 0 5,840 5,840 0

758 Family Dependency Court Citrus 0 5,840 5,840 0

377 Veterans Court Pasco 150,000 0 150,000 150,000

377 Veterans Court Pinellas 150,000 0 150,000 150,000

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Pinellas 599,928 0 599,928 599,928

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Pasco 0 74,997 74,997 0

754 Adult Drug Court Pinellas 69,936 0 69,936 69,936

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Volusia 370,820 13,465 384,285 370,820

754 Adult Drug Court Putnam 0 3,365 3,365 0

126 Multi-PSC Case Management 24,130 0 24,130 24,130

370 Mental Health Court Bradford 2,000 1,821 3,821 2,000

370 Mental Health Court Levy 300 0 300 300

377 Veterans Court Alachua 150,000 0 150,000 150,000

2

6

FY 2020-21 PROBLEM-SOLVING COURT ALLOCATION SUMMARY

1

7

8

4

5


Cir

cuit

Co

st C

en

ter


FY 19-20

Approved

Base

Allocations

FY 19-20

Non-Recurring

Funds

Allocations

Total

FY 19-20

Allocations

FY 20-21

Continuation

Of Base

Allocations


370 Mental Health Court Orange 54,775 22,595 77,370 54,775

371 Early Childhood Court Orange 27,000 32,600 59,600 27,000

377 Veterans Court Orange 200,000 7,672 207,672 200,000

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Orange 623,193 0 623,193 623,193

754 Adult Drug Court Orange 0 176,590 176,590 0

754 Adult Drug Court Osceola 0 22,595 22,595 0

126 Multi-Problem Solving Courts Polk 0 75,000 75,000 0

374 DUI Court Polk 40,564 0 40,564 40,564

376 Behavioral Health/Veterans Court Polk 40,564 163,977 204,541 40,564

750 Adult (Misdemeanor) Drug Court Polk 40,564 0 40,564 40,564

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Polk 774,955 0 774,955 774,955

754 Adult Drug Court Polk 40,564 0 40,564 40,564

756 Juvenile Polk 40,564 0 40,564 40,564

368 Mental Health Court-Misdemeanor Miami-Dade 54,311 0 54,311 54,311

369 Mental Health Court-Felony Miami-Dade 54,311 0 54,311 54,311

370 Mental Health Court Miami-Dade 0 25,621 25,621 0

753 Adult Drug Court (PADC) Miami-Dade 0 6,700 6,700 0

377 Veterans Court Miami-Dade 262,885 0 262,885 262,885

754 Adult Drug Court Miami-Dade 60,911 33,700 94,611 60,911

756 Juvenile Drug Court Miami-Dade 247,388 23,060 270,448 247,388

757 Domestic Violence Drug Court Miami-Dade 0 37,004 37,004 0

758 Family Dependency Drug Court Miami-Dade 32,480 7,344 39,824 32,480

370 Mental Health Court Manatee 0 30,947 30,947 0

374 DUI Court Sarasota 0 17,573 17,573 0

379 Comprehensive Court Desoto 180,752 0 180,752 180,752

754 Adult Drug Court Sarasota 0 40,332 40,332 0

754 Adult Drug Court Manatee 0 3,900 3,900 0

377 Veterans Court 70,891 30,990 101,881 70,891

754 Adult Drug Court 0 31,485 31,485 0

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court 948,800 0 948,800 948,800

370 Mental Health 22,480 0 22,480 22,480

377 Veterans Court 109,523 0 109,523 109,523

371 Early Childhood Court 167,824 24,462 192,286 167,824

754 Adult Drug Court 0 6,250 6,250 0

756 Juvenile Drug Court 0 22,688 22,688 0

758 Family Dependency Court 0 21,219 21,219 0

372 Dependency Therapeutic Court 33,025 0 33,025 33,025

371 Early Childhood Court 71,426 0 71,426 71,426

756 Juvenile Drug Court 0 18,016 18,016 0

758 Family Dependency Court 0 32,050 32,050 0

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court 991,226 0 991,226 991,226

754 Adult Drug Court (Pretrial) 121,295 41,325 162,620 121,295

14 Bay

15

17 Broward

Palm Beach

13

12

Hillsborough

10

9

11


Cir

cuit

Co

st C

en

ter


FY 19-20

Approved

Base

Allocations

FY 19-20

Non-Recurring

Funds

Allocations

Total

FY 19-20

Allocations

FY 20-21

Continuation

Of Base

Allocations


377 Veterans Court Brevard 27,360 36,723 64,083 27,360

754 Adult Drug Court Brevard 0 25,345 25,345 0

756 Juvenile Drug Court Brevard 0 36,005 36,005 0

377 Veterans Court Seminole 0 3,100 3,100 0

753 Adult (Post-Adjudicatory) Drug Court Seminole 105,599 0 105,599 105,599

754 Adult Drug Court Seminole 100,955 20,143 121,098 100,955

756 Juvenile Drug Court Seminole 175,000 0 175,000 175,000

126 Multi-PSC Case Management 104,958 0 104,958 104,958

750 Adult (Misdemeanor) Drug Court Okeechobee 3,663 0 3,663 3,663

750 Adult (Misdemeanor) Drug Court St. Lucie 3,663 0 3,663 3,663

751 Adult (Felony) Drug Court Indian River 27,662 0 27,662 27,662

751 Adult (Felony) Drug Court Martin 3,662 29,867 33,529 3,662

751 Adult (Felony) Drug Court Okeechobee 3,662 9,833 13,495 3,662

751 Adult (Felony) Drug Court St. Lucie 31,263 3,833 35,096 31,263

756 Juvenile Drug Court Indian River 3,662 0 3,662 3,662

756 Juvenile Drug Court Martin 3,662 21,387 25,049 3,662

756 Juvenile Drug Court Okeechobee 3,662 0 3,662 3,662

370 Mental Health Court St. Lucie 0 1,917 1,917 0

756 Juvenile Drug Court St. Lucie 9,962 0 9,962 9,962

370 Mental Health Court Lee 122,599 2,000 124,599 122,599

370 Mental Health Court Collier 40,000 3,339 43,339 40,000

377 Veterans Court Collier 79,564 0 79,564 79,564

377 Veterans Court Lee 0 19,136 19,136 0

751 Adult Drug Court Lee 0 18,800 18,800 0

754 Adult Drug Court Hendry 80,160 0 80,160 80,160

10,785,460 2,017,074 12,802,534 10,845,555

GAA FY20-21 10,845,555

TOTALS

20

19

18



June 23, 2020

Zoom Webinar

Agenda Item III.C.4.: Problem-Solving Courts Appropriation

Background

The FY 2019-20 General Appropriations Act (GAA) provided $11.2 million for treatment

services, drug testing, case management, and ancillary services for participants in problem-

solving courts. In addition, funds can also be used to provide training and education for

multidisciplinary problem-solving court team members to gain up-to-date knowledge on best

practices. When the Trial Court Budget Commission approved the short-term and long-term

funding plans in February 2019, the approval included the following guidance on non-recurring

reallocations:

1. Circuits may revise a budget, within that program only, from any unallowable

expenditures to allowable expenditures internally through OSCA staff and would not

require TCBC approval.

2. Circuits may transfer funds among problem-solving courts within their circuits; and

3. A circuit may transfer unobligated funds to another circuit.

Scenarios #2 and #3 are allowable if the funds are not restricted by proviso language in the GAA,

and all requests must be considered by the TCBC Executive Committee for approval based on

the recommendations from the Advisory Group.

Discussion

At the February 1, 2019 meeting, the TCBC approved a 3-year funding strategy for problem-

solving courts. Based on the FY 2020-21 allocations and the potential need for circuits to revise

their program budgets, the following questions should be considered.

• Should circuits be provided the flexibility to transfer unobligated funds among problem-

solving court programs within their circuit?

• Should circuits be provided the flexibility to transfer unobligated funds to another circuit?

Decision Needed

Option 1: Allow circuits the flexibility to transfer unobligated funds among problem-solving

court programs within their circuits and to another circuit.

Option 2: Do not allow.

of 143


Allocations – Allocations for Other Special

Appropriations

of 143


June 23,2020

Zoom Webinar

Agenda Item III.C.5.: Allocations for Other Special Appropriations

1. Domestic Violence Active Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) Technology

In the fiscal year 2019-20 General Appropriations Act (GAA), the Legislature appropriated recurring

funding totaling $316,000 in the Domestic Violence Offender Monitoring category for the

Eighteenth Judicial Circuit to continue its program to protect victims of domestic violence with

Active Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) technology. Under the program, a judge may require a

defendant or an offender in a criminal case involving domestic violence to wear a GPS device as a

condition of being released into the community.

Specifically, proviso states: “Funds in Specific Appropriation 3251 are provided to the Eighteenth

Judicial Circuit to continue its program to protect victims of domestic violence with Active Global

Positioning Satellite (GPS) technology (recurring base appropriations project).”

Cost Center 178

Circuit

Domestic Violence

Offender Monitoring

101078

(recurring)

18 $316,000

Action: For Information Purposes Only.

2. Vivitrol/Naltrexone to Treat Alcohol- or Opioid-Addicted Offenders

In the fiscal year 2019-20 General Appropriations Act, the Legislature appropriated recurring

funding totaling $5,000,000 in the Contracted Services category for Vivitrol/Naltrexone to treat

alcohol- or opioid-addicted offenders.

Specifically, proviso states: “From the funds in Specific Appropriation 3250, $5,000,000 in

recurring general revenue funds are provided for naltrexone extended-release injectable medication

to treat alcohol- or opioid-addicted individuals involved in the criminal justice system, individuals

who have a high likelihood of criminal justice involvement, or who are in court-ordered, community-

based drug treatment (recurring base appropriations project). The Office of the State Courts

Administrator shall contract with a non-profit entity for the purpose of purchasing and distributing

the medication.”

Cost Center 755

Circuit

Drug Treatments for

Drug Court Participants

100777

(recurring)

Statewide $5,000,000

of 143

Agenda Item III.G. Allocations for Special Appropriations (continued)

In addition, $6,000,000 in recurring general revenue funding in the Contracted Services category is

appropriated for medication-assisted treatment of substance abuse disorders.

Specifically, proviso states: From the funds in Specific Appropriation 3250, $6,000,000 in recurring

general revenue is provided to the Office of State Court Administrator for medication-assisted

treatment of substance abuse disorders in individuals involved in the criminal justice system,

individuals who have a high likelihood of becoming involved in the criminal justice system, or

individuals who are in court-ordered, community-based drug treatment. Such medication-assisted

treatment may include, but is not limited to, methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone extended

release injectable. The Office of the State Courts Administrator shall contract with a non-profit

entity for the purpose of purchasing and distributing the medication.

Action: For Information Purposes Only.

of 143


Allocations – New Resources

of 143


June 23, 2020

Video Conference

Agenda Item III.C.6.: FY 2020-21 Budget – New Resources

At its May 12, 2020, meeting, the Executive Committee discussed the new FY 2020-21 trial

court appropriations for resources to provide timely resolution of cases, court interpreting

services, digital court reporting equipment, and courthouse furnishings. The committee decided

to not start the process for allocating the resources, but instead hold until more information is

known about the state of the FY 2020-21 budget.

The FY 2020-21 General Appropriations Act (HB 5001 Enrolled) was presented to the Governor

for action on June 17, 2020. At the time these materials were finalized, the Governor had not

acted on the budget.

New Resources Appropriated FY 2020-21

Amount Type

Funding

Source

Recurring/

Non-

recurring

Allocate/

Do Not

Allocate

Refer to

FMC

Hold

Vacant

Timely Resolution of Cases

21.0 FTE

Law Clerks, Case

Managers, Mediators,

Operations/Administration

Support

GR Recurring

$50,000 Mediation Contractual GR Recurring

$175,180

Online Dispute Resolution

Pilot Project Continuation

Funding

SCRTF Non-

recurring

Court Interpreting Services

37.5 FTE

Court Interpreters, ASL

Interpreters, Remote

Interpreters,

Operations/Administration

GR Recurring

$6,000 OCO SCRTF Non-

recurring

$8,000 Contracted Services GR Recurring

$278,420 Due Process Contractual GR Recurring

$1,130,512 VRI Bandwidth GR Recurring

$108,100 Statewide Call Manager GR Recurring

$272,600 VRI Workstations SCRTF Non-

recurring

of 143

New Resources Appropriated FY 2020-21

Amount Type

Funding

Source

Recurring/

Non-

recurring

Allocate/

Do Not

Allocate

Refer to

FMC

Hold

Vacant

Early Childhood Court

20.0 FTE

Community Coordinator

for Each Participating

Circuit

GR Recurring

Digital Court Reporting Equipment

$35,000 Refresh (11th Circuit) SCRTF Non-

recurring

Courthouse Furnishings

$118,177

New or Renovated


(5th Circuit)

SCRTF Non-

recurring

$144,136

New or Renovated


(14th Circuit)

SCRTF Non-

recurring

Decision Needed

Different decisions may be needed based on the specific resources appropriated to the trial courts

in the categories above.

Option 1: Allocate new resources to the circuits using the normal process through Funding

Methodology Committee or directly.

Option 2: Do not allocate new resources. Hold resources at the state level until more

information is known about the state of the FY 2020-21 budget.

Option 3: Allocate new resources using the normal process through Funding Methodology

Committee but require the circuits to hold positions vacant.

of 143

FTE

General

Revenue

(recurring)

General

Revenue

(non-

recurring)

Trust Fund

(recurring)

Trust Fund

(non-

recurring

Total GR

and Trust

4 EXECUTIVE DIRECTION - 22010200

5 Problem-Solving Courts 4.0 385,808 179,970 15,790 581,568

6 Family Courts 2.0 221,066 88,500 7,880 317,446

7 Judicial Data Management (Access to Florida Criminal Justice Network) 448,696 448,696

8 On-line Legal Research 101,124 101,124

9 Reduce Excess Grants and Donations Trust Fund Budget Authority (352,378) (352,378)

10 Early Childhood Courts (HB 1105) 1.0 333,951 3,940 337,891

11 TOTAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTION 7.0 940,825 3,940 465,912 23,670 1,434,347

12 ADMINISTERED FUNDS - 22020100

13 Union County Courthouse and Jail-FCO (Senate Form 2430) 275,000 275,000

14 Nassau County Courthouse Annex Completion Project-FCO (Senate Form 1680) 250,000 250,000

15 Taylor County Courthouse Improvements-FCO (Senate Form 1457) 250,000 250,000

16 Liberty County Courthouse Improvements-FCO (Senate Form 1451 and HB 2959) 380,000 380,000

17 Union County Courthouse and Jail (Senate Form 2430) 125,000 125,000

18 TOTAL ADMINISTERED FUNDS 0.0 0 0 0 1,280,000 1,280,000

19 DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL - 22100600

20 Appellate Headquarters; Subsistence/Travel Reimbursement 125,000 125,000

21 Appellate Court Security 516,139 516,139

22 2nd DCA New Courthouse Building 21,000,000 21,000,000

24 TOTAL DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL 0.0 0 21,000,000 641,139 0 21,641,139

25 TRIAL COURTS - 22300100/22300200

26 Timely Resolution of Cases 21.0 1,629,808 225,559 1,855,367

27 Court Interpreting Services 37.5 4,600,961 404,395 5,005,35628 Furnishings and Equipment of Non-Public Areas 297,313 297,313

29 The Alternative Programs, Inc. - Alternative to Incarceration (HB 2197) 300,000 300,000

30 Fort Lauderdale Community Court (Senate Form 1292) 136,387 136,387

31 Extended-Release Injectable Naltrexone Program (HB3879) 500,000 500,000

32 Juvenile Drug Court - Seminole (Senate Form 1954) 260,000 260,00033 Early Childhood Courts (HB 1105) 20.0 1,864,719 47,080 1,911,799

34 TOTAL TRIAL COURTS 78.5 8,095,488 547,080 0 1,623,654 10,266,222

Budget Entity/Issues

Agenda Item III.C.6. FY 2020-21 New Resources

of 143

FTE

General

Revenue

(recurring)

General

Revenue

(non-

recurring)

Trust Fund

(recurring)

Trust Fund

(non-

recurring

Total GR

and TrustBudget Entity/Issues

35 CERTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL JUDGES

36

(1) Circuit Courts: 4 circuit court judges (1-1st, 2-9th, 1-14th), 4 circuit court judicial

assistants, and 2 trial court law clerks

(2) County Courts: 6 county court judges (4-Hillsborough, 1-Lee County, 1-Orange

County) and 6 county court judicial assistants

(3) Executive Direction - FL Cases Southern 2nd Reporter: Based on 10 judgeships and 2

staff attorney positions for a total request of $7,080

See HB 5301.

21.0 3,368,134 50,379 3,418,513

39 TOTAL JUDICIAL BRANCH WITH CERTIFICATION 106.5 12,404,447 21,601,399 1,107,051 2,927,324 38,040,221

STAFF NOTES

Agenda Item III.C.6. FY 2020-21 New Resources

of 143

Agenda Item IV.: FY 2021-22 Legislative

Budget request (LBR)

of 143

Agenda Item IV.A.: FY 2021-22 Legislative

Budget request (LBR) – LBR Timeline

of 143

FY 2021-2022 Legislative Budget Request (LBR) Timeline

Trial Courts

Tuesday, June 23 Approval of LBR plan for new issues; Trial Court Budget Commission

meeting Zoom Meeting

Thursday, June 25 Notice of LBR plan, LBR timeline, and LBR instructions (if applicable)

distributed to Chief Judges and Trial Court Administrators

TBD Circuit specific issues due to the OSCA Office of Budget Services (if

applicable)

TBD Approval of preliminary LBR recommendations; TCBC Funding

Methodology Committee meeting Zoom Meeting

Thursday, August 6 Approval of final LBR recommendations; Trial Court Budget Commission

meeting Zoom Meeting

Tuesday, August 11 Notice of TCBC Final LBR decisions distributed to circuits

Friday, August 21 LBR issue appeals, if any, due to TCBC (10 days following Notice of

TCBC Final LBR decisions)

Thursday, September 3 Joint meeting of leadership materials sent out via email

Wednesday, September 9 Joint meeting of leadership with the Chief Justice, District Court of Appeal

Budget Commission, Trial Court Budget Commission, JQC, Judicial

Conference Chairs, and OSCA to review the LBR recommendations 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. – Zoom Meeting

Thursday, September 10 Final LBR recommendations distributed to the Supreme Court for Court

Conference

Wednesday, September 23 Approval of LBR recommendations by the Supreme Court

Wednesday, October 14 Public Hearing Location TBD

Thursday, October 15 Submission of the Legislative Budget Request to the Legislature

of 143

bosleys

Text Box

Agenda Item IV.A.

Agenda Item IV.B.: FY 2021-22 Legislative

Budget Request (LBR) – Issues for

Consideration at August TCBC Meeting

There are no materials for this agenda item.

of 143

Agenda Item V.: Report from Chief Justice

Designee to Florida Clerks of Court Operations

Corporation Executive Council

of 143

Supreme Court of Florida 500 South Duval Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1925CHARLES T. CANADY CHIEF JUSTICE RICKY POLSTON JORGE LABARGA C. ALAN LAWSON CARLOS G. MUÑIZ JUSTICES

May 19, 2020

JOHN A. TOMASINO CLERK OF COURT

SILVESTER DAWSON

MARSHAL

The Honorable Ron DeSantis Governor of Florida PL 05 The Capitol 400 South Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001 Dear Governor DeSantis: Throughout the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the judicial branch has emphasized keeping the courts operational to the fullest extent consistent with public safety. Although it has been imperative to suspend grand jury proceedings, jury selection proceedings, and criminal and civil jury trials, the trial courts have continued to conduct essential, critical, and certain other proceedings either in person when necessary or remotely by maximizing the use of teleconference and videoconference technology. Notwithstanding those efforts, one of the effects of the pandemic has been a significant decline in fines, fees, services charges, and costs that support the operations of the court system and the clerks of the circuit court due to a reduction in new case filings and other court-related activities. The courts system estimates an $11.9 million loss in revenue for its State Courts Revenue Trust Fund through June 30, 2020. Despite this loss in revenue, the existing cash balance in the trust fund is sufficient to meet court system expenditures through the end of the fiscal year. It is difficult to estimate the revenue impact in the next fiscal year because of many unknown factors such as the return to more normal court operations and the health of the economy. The possibility of continued reductions in revenue at this level is very troubling, however, because this trust fund accounts for a substantial portion of the court system salary budget.

Agenda Item V.: Report from Chief Justice Designee to Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation Executive Council

of 143

The Honorable Ron DeSantis May 19, 2020 Page 2 The budgets of the clerks of circuit court are even more heavily dependent on court-related fines, fees, services charges, and costs. I have been advised by the president of the Florida Court Clerks and Comptrollers that, due to the sudden and steep reduction in revenue, the clerks are estimating a significant shortfall in their current year budget ending September 30, 2020. This deficit is causing the clerks to consider cost-saving measures such as staff furloughs, which could have a serious impact on operations. This immediate and serious fiscal issue confronting the clerks is a matter of serious concern to chief judges of the trial courts and to me as chief administrative officer of the judicial branch. The clerks are indispensable partners in processing cases and conducting other trial court business, including staffing court proceedings. The trial courts’ ability to continue performing the work that is now being done and to return to more normal operations – including ultimately the resumption of jury trials – is dependent upon the ability of the clerks to participate fully in these operations. The clerks’ current fiscal crisis is particularly significant because the unavoidable suspension of activity in some pending cases due to the pandemic will result in a backlog, particularly in criminal and civil jury trials. Further, the judicial branch can anticipate an influx of new cases due to negative economic conditions and COVID-specific disputes. The courts and the clerks will need to marshal resources to tackle this workload for the benefit of individuals, business, and, ultimately, Florida’s economy. For these reasons, I respectfully encourage the exploration of solutions for the clerks’ current year budget deficit. Thank you for your ongoing going support for the effective and efficient operations of the entire justice system and for your continued leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sincerely, Charles T. Canady CTC:ewm cc: The Honorable Bill Galvano The Honorable Jose R. Oliva The Honorable Stacy Butterfield


of 143

May 26, 2020

Governor Ron DeSantis

State of Florida

The Capitol

400 South Monroe Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001

Re: Florida Clerks’ response to the COVID-19 crisis and recommendations concerning

budgetary impacts

Dear Governor DeSantis:

We hope that you and your family remain safe and healthy during this unprecedented crisis. As

fellow elected officials, we sincerely appreciate your leadership and frequent communication with

our shared constituents across Florida as we navigate together through this difficult time.

The purpose of this letter is to provide you with additional information to the correspondence sent

to you on May 19, 2020, from Chief Justice Charles Canady. In that letter, he expressed concerns

about the projected current-year deficit for Florida’s Clerks of Court that resulted from the closures

and mitigation efforts for COVID-19, and how that would impact the Clerks’ ability to support the

reopening of the court system properly.

Clerks greatly value our partnership with the Chief Justice and the courts. I am honored to serve

on the Chief Justice’s Courts Continuity Workgroup, which is working on a plan to safely reopen

the court system for our fellow Floridians. I genuinely believe that having a properly functioning

court system is an essential element to reopening Florida under your Safe. Smart. Step-by-Step. Plan.

As the Chief Justice’s letter stated, the current fee-based funding structure requires revenues

from various fines, fees, and costs to be collected locally to fund our court–related services.

There is no safety net—such as a reserve fund. When these revenues fail to support the

essential services Clerks provide to Floridians, there is no additional funding source or “rainy

day” fund. Therefore, while the long-term impact is not yet fully understood, we do know that

Clerks are confronting a severe, and short-term revenue loss. This stems from the pandemic’s

effects on court proceedings, law enforcement activities, payments of fines and fees, and specific

statutory revenue streams like civil traffic cases.


of 143


May 26, 2020

Page Two

The Florida Clerks of Court Operations Corporation (CCOC) is charged by Florida Statutes to

support Clerks’ court-related budget activities. Thus, the CCOC is closely working with Clerks’

offices and other partners, such as the Office of the State Courts Administrator (OSCA), to

understand the revenue impacts of COVID-19 mitigation efforts on Clerk funding and other state

trust funds. As we are facing unprecedented events, the data and deficit projections are very

dynamic, and we continue to refine our estimates as more and more information is received. Clerks

are committed to continuing to update those numbers for you and your team as we move forward.

Understanding the severity of the revenue losses, the CCOC Executive Council has taken

responsible steps and has asked Clerks to take action to reduce current-year expenditures; for

example, by not filling vacant positions. However, it is essential to note that actions to reduce costs

alone will not be enough to mitigate the immediate losses. And, as the Chief Justice also noted,

the vast majority of cases and court proceedings currently delayed due to the COVID-19 crisis will

require immediate processing once normal operations resume. Consequently, Clerks will need our

highly trained staff and resources in place and ready to support the court system’s backlog and our

constituents.

On April 30, leadership from the Clerks’ association, Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers, and

the CCOC met with your Legislative Director and budget staff to provide a briefing on our budget

and projected revenue losses. We have also provided detailed information on our revenues and

expenditures to your team, as well as members of the House and Senate and their appropriations

staff. We greatly appreciate their willingness to meet with us to hear our concerns.

On May 27, the CCOC Budget Committee will meet to update the projected deficits and discuss

what actions the Council needs to take to reduce the current year budget to account for the losses.

We have invited your staff to join us so they can hear about this situation directly.

We share your concerns about our state’s crisis and understand that it is affecting everyone’s

financial well-being. Hard choices will have to be made, and everyone will have to tighten our

belts. But, part of a healthy recovery is a properly functioning court system and we seek to work

with you to find a balance that allows critical services to continue. We cannot seek assistance

from our legislative partners at this time, because the Legislature is not able to appropriate any

additional funding to the Clerks of the Court Trust Fund while not in session. Therefore, we need

your help to maintain our services and solvency.


of 143


May 26, 2020

Page Three

To ensure the continuation and stabilization of Clerks’ essential court-related services, and on

behalf of Florida’s 67 Clerks of Court, we respectfully request the following actions be taken:

Through your emergency powers, as provided in Chapter 252, Florida Statutes, have funds

transferred out of the Budget Stabilization Fund or unappropriated surplus funds to support

Clerk offices that are in deficit due to the COVID-19 crisis.

Authorize your budget staff to work with the CCOC to develop a methodology to determine

the projected deficits by county to maintain court-related operations and the emergency

funds that would be needed to backfill these deficits

Authorize the CCOC to provide a plan to the Executive Office of the Governor and

Legislature on how these funds will be drawn down as deficits occur and allocated to the

individual counties up to the CFY 19-20 approved budget authority.

On behalf of Florida’s Clerks of Court and our teams, thank you for your continued leadership and

steady guidance of our state. Clerks stand ready to be your partners as we work to get Florida safe

and back to business, better than ever. Please do not hesitate to contact us directly with any

questions or for additional information or updates that we may provide in support of our request

for emergency funding relief on behalf of the many Floridians we serve.

Most sincerely,

Stacy M. Butterfield, CPA

Polk County Clerk of Court and Comptroller

President, Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers

cc: The Honorable Charles Canady, Chief Justice, Florida Supreme Court

Shane Strum, Chief of Staff, Executive Office of the Governor

The Honorable JD Peacock II, Okaloosa Clerk and Comptroller, Chair, Clerk of Court Operations Corporation


of 143

Agenda Item VI.: Report from Clerk of court

Representative


of 143

Agenda Item VII.: Coronavirus 2019

of 143

Agenda Item VII.A.: Coronavirus 2019 –

Tracking COVID-19 Expenditures and Federal

CARES Act Funding

of 143

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136), signed into law on March 27, 2020, created the Coronavirus Relief Fund, which provides $150 billion in direct assistance for domestic governments.

CARES ACT FUNDING FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

ELIGIBLE USES OF CARES ACT FUNDING

Eligible Purposes Section 5001(d) of the CARES Act provides the eligible purposes for which Coronavirus Relief Fund payments may be used. Specifically, it allows state and local governments to make payments for programs that: • 1. are necessary expenditures incurred due to the public health emergency with respect to

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19);

• 2. were not accounted for in the budget most recently approved as of the date of enactment [March 27, 2020] of this section for the State or government; and

• 3. were incurred during the period that begins on March 1, 2020 and ends on December 30, 2020.

STATE OF FLORIDA ALLOCATION

The CARES Act stipulates that the $150 billion provided to the Coronavirus Relief Fund is allocated to governments in states, territories, and tribal areas as follows: $139 billion is allocated for governments in the 50 states based on their populations (as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2019), with no state receiving less than $1.25 billion. Due to the $1.25 billion minimum allocation for states, every state with an allocation greater than the minimum amount receives a smaller allocation share (excluding amounts provided to tribal areas) than its share of the population. Most states with a minimum allocation amount, in contrast, have a larger allocation share than their population share. Florida’s Allocation = $8.328 Billion or 6% of total funds set aside for states although its population is approximately 6.6% of the total U.S. population.

Agenda Item VII.A. Conronavirus 2019 - CARES Act Funding

of 143

STATE SHARE versus LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHARE

The legislation provides that of each state allocation 55% is reserved for the state and 45% of the allocation is reserved for direct payments to eligible local government jurisdictions (that exceed 500,000 in population). However, if the 45% reserved for eligible local government jurisdictions is not completely distributed, any remaining balance of this sub-allocation reverts to the state, in addition to the original 55% reserved for use at its discretion.

FLORIDA LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WITH POPULATION GREATER THAN 500,000

Coronavirus Relief Fund assistance is generally provided to state governments. Local governments serving a population of at least 500,000, as measured in the most recent census data, may elect to receive assistance directly from Treasury. Such direct local assistance allocations reduce the allocation made to the state government (keeping the state allocation constant) and are equal to the product of: • the state or territory allocation amount;

• the percentage of the state or territory population served by the local government; and

• 45%


of 143

Based on the above chart, eligible Florida local governments would be able to receive approximately $2.482 billion in direct federal assistance. However, this sum is approximately $1.269 billion less than the total sub-allocation reserved for eligible Florida local governments of $3.747 billion (See STATE SHARE versus LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHARE above). According to the text of the law, the remaining balance of approximately $1.269 billion would revert to the State of Florida for use at its discretion.

OTHER FLORIDA LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

The text of the legislation is silent with regard to local government jurisdictions with a population under 500,000. However, it is assumed that these local government jurisdictions would be eligible sub-grantees to their respective State and its use of its share of allocated funds.


of 143

Alachua County 11,736,482

Baker County 1,230,214

Bay County 7,621,169

Bradford County 1,175,075

Calhoun County 621,454

Charlotte County 8,240,835

Citrus County 6,528,498

Clay County 9,564,446

Collier County 16,790,607

Columbia County 3,127,164

DeSoto County 1,657,720

Dixie County 734,002

Escambia County 14,321,324

Flagler County 5,020,187

Franklin County 528,930

Gadsden County 1,991,829

Gilchrist County 806,721

Glades County 615,303

Gulf County 629,394

Hamilton County 602,478

Hardee County 1,274,230

Hendry County 1,833,129

Hernando County 8,459,386

Highlands County 4,633,686

Holmes County 855,754

Indian River County 6,976,333

Jackson County 1,839,498

Jefferson County 664,685

Lafayette County 367,394

Lake County 16,014,815

Leon County 12,806,949

Levy County 1,937,606

Liberty County 364,427

Madison County 810,604

Manatee County 17,591,135

Marion County 15,947,679

Martin County 7,023,315

Monroe County 3,250,835

Nassau County 3,866,095

Okaloosa County 9,193,039

Okeechobee County 1,810,488

Osceola County 16,391,412

Putnam County 3,238,053

CARES Allocation By County


of 143

Santa Rosa County 8,040,299

Sarasota County 18,921,158

Seminole County 20,582,500

St. Johns County 11,545,806

St. Lucie County 13,885,922

Sumter County 5,776,567

Suwannee County 2,024,721

Taylor County 940,906

Union County 594,975

Wakulla County 1,471,799

Walton County 3,231,205

Washington County 1,111,211


of 143

Agenda Item VII.B.: Coronavirus 2019 –

Workgroup on the Continuity of Court

Operations and Proceedings During and After

COVID-19


of 143

Agenda Item VII.C.: Coronavirus 2019 –

COVID-19 Backlog Impact Plan

of 143

Statewide FilingsTrendline Charts

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

MAR C H 1 MAR C H 8 MAR C H 1 5 MAR C H 2 2 MAR C H 2 9 AP R I L 5 AP R I L 1 2 AP R I L 1 9 AP R I L 2 6 MAY 3 MAY 1 0 MAY 1 7 MAY 2 4 MAY 3 1 JUN E 7

WEEK OF:

CIRCUIT FILINGSCIVIL CRIMINAL FAMILY PROBATE

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

MAR C H 1 MAR C H 8 MAR C H 1 5 MAR C H 2 2 MAR C H 2 9 AP R I L 5 AP R I L 1 2 AP R I L 1 9 AP R I L 2 6 MAY 3 MAY 1 0 MAY 1 7 MAY 2 4 MAY 3 1 JUN E 7

WEEK OF:

COUNTY FILINGSCIVIL CRIMINAL CIVIL TRAFFIC

Agenda Item VII.C.: Coronavirus 2019 - COVID-19 Backlog Impact Plan

of 143

Court Type March Total

Estimated March Loss

Percentageof Estimated March Loss

April Total

Estimated April Loss

Percentageof Estimated April Loss

May Total

Estimated May Loss

Percentage of Estimated

May Loss

Estimated June Total

Estimated June Loss

Percentage of Estimated

June LossAppeal from County Court 156 -55 -26% 58 -152 -72% 67 -143 -68% 74 -136 -65%

Felony 18,538 -3,356 -15% 13,892 -8,003 -37% 18,394 -3,500 -16% 16,729 -5,166 -24%

Circuit Civil 15,632 -1,187 -7% 9,721 -7,098 -42% 10,671 -6,149 -37% 12,955 -3,865 -23%

Domestic Relations/Family 17,965 -4,287 -19% 10,236 -12,015 -54% 13,390 -8,861 -40% 19,431 -2,820 -13%Delinquency 3,521 -672 -16% 2,577 -1,617 -39% 2,420 -1,773 -42% 2,488 -1,706 -41%Dependency 1,137 -167 -13% 894 -411 -31% 1,036 -268 -21% 1,063 -241 -19%

Probate/Guardianship 7,082 -1,142 -14% 4,737 -3,486 -42% 5,639 -2,585 -31% 7,068 -1,155 -14%Guardianship 770 -169 -18% 469 -470 -50% 623 -315 -34% 680 -259 -28%Mental Health 5,796 -681 -11% 4,480 -1,997 -31% 5,130 -1,347 -21% 5,679 -797 -12%

County Civil 15,513 -2,102 -12% 5,144 -12,471 -71% 6,645 -10,970 -62% 8,710 -8,905 -51%Small Claims 47,422 -7,437 -14% 25,495 -29,364 -54% 26,726 -28,133 -51% 38,696 -16,163 -29%

Misdemeanor 16,907 -1,875 -10% 11,547 -7,234 -39% 14,276 -4,506 -24% 14,449 -4,332 -23%Criminal Traffic 19,899 -5,296 -21% 7,862 -17,332 -69% 13,952 -11,242 -45% 14,988 -10,206 -41%Municipal Ordinance 1,562 -309 -16% 546 -1,325 -71% 868 -1,003 -54% 931 -940 -50%County Ordinance 2,696 -191 -7% 996 -1,892 -66% 1,745 -1,142 -40% 1,996 -891 -31%

Traffic Infraction 172,113 -57,874 -25% 62,901 -167,086 -73% 102,649 -127,338 -55% 113,172 -116,814 -51%Non-Criminal Infraction 2,988 -296 -9% 1,503 -1,781 -54% 3,016 -267 -8% 3,246 -38 -1%Total 349,697 -87,096 -20% 163,060 -273,732 -63% 227,248 -209,545 -48% 262,356 -174,436 -40%

Total Cases Expected to Return1 -16,546 -65,467 -57,425 -33,545Note: Based on June 15, 2020, weekly filings information provided by Florida Court Clerks and Comptrollers (FCCC) staff.1Highlighted cells indicate those included in the total cases expected to return calculation.

March 2020 - June 2020Trial Court Case Filings and Estimated Losses


of 143

Summary Reporting SystemJury Trials By Division of Court

Mid-March through Mid-June, 2017 through 2019

Division 2017 2018 2019 AverageCircui Criminal 683 705 643 677Circuit Civil 172 194 178 181County Criminal 328 267 318 304County Civil 22 15 16 18

Total Circuit Court 855 899 821 858Total County Court 350 282 334 322

State Total 1,205 1,181 1,155 1,180

Note: These statistics were extracted from a dynamic database and may be amended at a later date. Summary data is based on one-half of March and June plus total April and May.


of 143

May 2019 Events

May 2020 Events

May 2019 Pending Cases

May 2020 Pending Cases

May 2019 Events per

Pending Case2

May 2020 Events per

Pending Case2

Case Event Productivity3

(May 2019 vs May 2020)

1 491 962 5,877 8,858 0.08 0.11 130%2 441 386 3,842 4,811 0.11 0.08 70%3 183 96 2,276 3,129 0.08 0.03 38%4 1,655 466 16,658 26,772 0.10 0.02 18%5 720 200 9,724 11,861 0.07 0.02 23%6 1,076 296 14,706 19,323 0.07 0.02 21%7 1,035 546 10,481 17,271 0.10 0.03 32%8 205 167 2,711 2,972 0.08 0.06 74%9 5,161 1,859 43,422 49,433 0.12 0.04 32%10 927 944 7,069 9,614 0.13 0.10 75%11 7,376 7,323 86,627 123,495 0.09 0.06 70%12 925 981 7,409 9,319 0.12 0.11 84%13 1,280 2,155 49,936 59,924 0.03 0.04 140%14 380 169 3,107 3,403 0.12 0.05 41%151 NA NA 17,895 18,621 NA NA NA16 84 60 518 611 0.16 0.10 61%171 NA NA 42,304 58,251 NA NA NA18 444 78 4,158 9,591 0.11 0.01 8%19 720 1,132 5,099 6,444 0.14 0.18 124%20 345 127 12,441 15,654 0.03 0.01 29%

Statewide Total 23,448 17,947 346,260 459,357 0.07 0.04 58%

Comparison of May 2019 and May 2020 Productivity

Identify Metrics to Monitor Case Backlogs and PerformanceCOVID-19 Impact Workload Analysis - Statewide Performance Report as of May 31, 2020

Court Division: County Civil

Circuit

1The 15th and 17th circuits do not provide standard mappings of County Civil court events.2Events per Pending Cases is calculated by finding the monthly average for the number of events in the timeframe and dividing that average by the total number of pending cases up to the end of the respective timeframe.3Case Event Productivity is the number of events per pending case occurring post COVID-19 divided by the number of events per pending case that typically occured pre COVID-19.


of 143

Agenda Item VIII.: Other Business


of 143

meeting agenda...tcbc agenda june 23, 2020 page two iii. fy 2020-21 budget (continued) 6. new...

Documents