If you will take your seat, we will go ahead and get started. Okay. Good Morning. We are going to be done by recognizing our pageants. I think we have some of them haven’t been in here this week. So, Pardon me. They say they can’t here. If I give any cause to this, I am concerned. So if the pageants will go to a mike and introduce yourself and who you are sponsored by, where you live and where you go to school. [Speaker Changes] Good Morning. My Name is [inaudible]. I am from Halifax County. I go to school [inaudible]. I am sponsored by Senator Angela Bryant. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, thank you for coming [Speaker Changes] Hello. My name is Jeffers Andrew. I am from North Carolina Jones County and I am sponsored by Miss Pat McElraft. [Speaker Changes] Good Morning. My Name is Josh Rogers. I am from Jamestown and I live in Guilford County and I am sponsored by Senator Trudy Wade. [Speaker Changes] Very Good. Thank You Gentlemen. Thank you for helping this week. Your Sergeant in arms, we have Barry Miller from the house. Thank you DH staff. [Inaudible]. You got the door and Jim Hamilton. Thank you Jim. You know, we had an interesting week. We gathered a lot of information. It makes me think of a story that used to circle in the court house. Back in the day, when if you are publicly drunk, you were publicly drunk. There were no, you know, all those things that had not been added and you had been lying on the side walk or coasting or bagging. You know this is fact that public drunkenness was public drunkenness. So the story goes there was a lot of public drunk people in the court that day they had been charged. And the DH started calming up the individuals. And the first guy gets up and the judge says sir, he said, how many drinks did you have. Facing the judge, he said, a couple. Thirty days. How does the next defend it? Judge asked the same question, how many drinks did you have? The man said a couple. The Judge said, thirty days. This went for a while and there was one good alternative guy sitting at the back. He was paying attention. So the DA [inaudible], he gets sent to the witness stand and the judge says, sir, how many drinks did you have? Facing the judge, he said, I am not even sure . He said it could have been one drink , he said, it could have been three drinks, but I am sure it wasn’t a couple. So, that’s kind of How we are in here. We ask questions. And it’s not like there is a right or a wrong answer. We are gathering information. So I appreciate the inputs we had this week. And you know this really helps us and as we move forward I want you know that there is no right or wrong answer. We just to want some answer. So if you don’t know an answer, just tell us we don’t know right now and we understand that and we know that you are going to get it back to us. So, the program today, if I had a program. Thank you. Now I have two. We are going to call upon Charles and he is going to do the financing the court system and court cops and then he will go into special district courts. So if you want to wait till he finishes on the first segment and then we will open it for questioning and then we will move to the next section and then we will open it for questioning. So again I appreciate you are being here and I appreciate all the hard work this week. [Speaker Changes] Thank you Madam Chair. I will be here again next week. I am afraid.
And if we have long been an eight bit windows Maine and one each in a letter of the of hope and Leonard Levine the bench and presentation this morning on top of them are shorter than the last few in the head of the wealthy and data collection that the bill at 11 and five available at least updated week and we can all agree that the again noting that every day this week that in the where we are we're talking about in the Watergate the 9,000,018 of the Tapia added a lot of offers today for the cars and that they were beaten in the takeover of the biggest chunk of the BEI Court the NT a limit on the court and then in the channel or just of the winters have a lot of power again this chart the condition by the fact of an old child-perceiving a maker of a paper stating longer than that of others wears a faction leaders and the goal line that a bit of money on the faction leaders and the other two-bit of a blower legally held that a missile gap of effort domestic violence victim assistance until the limited BHD ever be the validate active in a letter of radiation to then be enacted child actors legal Bergeron and then had there's still a part of worksheet against of the data today for them in the long end to team working mothers 218000000 in the long delay in charge of that on the other feet and crushed on different types of proceedings of the online in either the left side of the old at the crater over the work of a dead included all the current work of the winter barrel of the net which may try to get into and slides I diabetes, the general and ago crashed on different categories that as the estimated cost of going to court for the middle chargers investor who are on the action they have been below the others have the dollars an acre of another late then the way the law before half hour GTE GTE gave the order of the wears a beeper affiliates of the patel and the activity of that for information technology five -feet lower law enforcement officer for weaker than the entire of returning in training and employers offer in the anatomy and lemon fund that will let them or to get into the operations of NT a $5.00 service fee for ally of servers of the letters from sheer and were 10 to 28 bit of a vehicle for another $10.00 a unit of the island of Dr. Club misdemeanor the limelight there's a $2.00 DNA the nicknames for every criminal charge for all the little bit by bit of misdemeanors and level of $50.00 DNA the bottom 10 years for all buy for all charges of the fashion and a large this to make them a difference between a five-invalid way and offers and we're in a letter of the by the Ventura and Half and other times and then enter into a liver failure of these were so long on the day she is on trial in the attack happened at all of intent to run a Judge Mabel a partially or wholly of the illegal labor report that that would felt the blooded at a time for district basically, what if the partition of legal and labor report yet for the Sharon opening the potted data calls and data below a................
Speaker changes: presentation which number from last yer Speaker changes: follow up Representative ?? you my proceed Speaker changes: ?? so we seriously underfund them ?? Speaker changes: thank you madam chair i have what is collected and what is paid out to the courts bout the relationship is not quite direct Speaker changes: my next question is we got 5.2 million gong to the court information ?? fund is that direct return to the AOC ?? thank you madam chair Speaker changes: that is direct ?? fund Speaker changes: general fund budget for AOC Speaker changes: my next question is ?? what is chapter 20 and when did we ?? that 20 sets thank you madame chair i actually don't know ?? where odes it where does it useful i thin ?? really seeing that what that fund is for and then the next questions on the ?? where do they go whether they go the fund allowing Speaker changes:?? Speaker changes: OK follow up to that we have special DAV to use ?? is that money is gonna lost Speaker changes:thank you madame this is one item disbursement to the DAV's hospital archeology initiative all trying to do last year ?? so the conference of the money still has ?? Speaker changes:that was all my question up to this point ?? Speaker changes:?? Speaker changes: thank you madame chair ?? i do know the 5.2 million women last every i do know that's special fund it does not revert to AOC i believed to the past ?? like in the court houses Speaker changes: follow up Representative ?? are there any questions up to this point, Speaker changes: thank you madam chair Speaker changes: Representative ?? Speaker changes:?? i think AOC's has they used to have local period so they will probably use whatever that hey ?? Speaker changes:yes john Speaker changes:??
When a 19 a half hour behind and a half day old testament may have been long and a one of the counter of intent of the hall one and all the hype of old and a high of one of one of them at a half acre of the message at all at the time that happened in the long haul and(SPEAKER CHANGES) I am not a factor in making the Internet and out of the mall on the network of staff and to these elections and state government and oftentimes and when we all pay one of the dollar up with the help of time you hit a home at all and end-to have been updated data that often talked a little of the evacuation of a lifetime in one day on Friday a definite question that made you may get constituents of certainly into this question a lot during long of the year the home for on one lead a part of what they like I've basically enters a lot of support longer include a job or just be the victim support the court system in the title indirectly to the court system child to declare war on the part of the content of the antibody that even if a person in the page on line until after support department of them are still part of the dealing with the data were still in a bad idea ration of the nation to be working on it to me as to be there in the literature of the winter's out whether the person paid online or system of the letter which often(SPEAKER CHANGES) connecting to -quarter charge of one of the nation's that one indication of the general assembly to the report from station in line with the idea that judicial officials and should not have a direct benefit from imposing workers in a way that the idea is still persist and the court system in addition to being a relationship between the report after the end of the court after the interns of the college official title of the older and the responsibilities of NT is engaged in the relevant to the general fund that of the general fund for as being a week of operations over again to the work of the other three types of London as he collects the defeat of(SPEAKER CHANGES) which can lead a better deal on although there are some exceptions where we got a few minority air forfeitures which the levy of what what the judge wouldn't others came in lower by a defender in this money would typically be back to the local better than school district and then there's the restitution and lower money is returned to the times into the large letters not less attention by the nation a large the long ball and then just a second recommended a in a tent in team in the body when they're high............
When a, when a, when a citizen, when a person is paying, their overall judgment, in what order is the money applied? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, madam chair. I know that first on the priority list is money that goes back out to citizens, so I believe restitution is the first priority for money that is collected. I saw that while looking through some documents on the financial management system yesterday. I don't know what the remainder of the priority is, but I do know that money that is returned to citizens is what happens first, basically. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Wow. That's interesting. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So can we get the AOC to get us that chart of the priority orders for distribution and send it to all the members? Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This pie shows disbursements and receipts in fiscal year 13-14. I put, I put a chart, or I put a table online so it's far too long and far too complicated to appear in a PowerPoint slide that shows all of the different places that AOC disbursed their moneys in fiscal year 13-14. They issue a report, such a report every year. In this case, you can see 262.1 million was returned to the general fund. This is generally the general court of justice fee, although there are a few other fees that feed into that. There was 69.3 million returned to local governments in terms of funds, forfeitures, and then other, there are certain facility fees and, and other fees that do go back to local governments. 348.5 million in money returned to citizens. Some of that is restitution, the largest part of that is condemnation awards. That is a, a very interesting category and the document online lays this out, what the money is or how the money is returned to citizens. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hurley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, madam chair. Out of official funds, ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes ma'am, and, and the chart online does list, list what those are. The largest, the largest amount of that does go to the court of information technology fund. So out of that 5.7 that's returned to AOC special funds, I believe, I think we said it was 5.2 million that was going back, into the court of information technology fund? So most of that is that phone fee, that $4 phone fee. Then there's receipts to other state agencies. That's the 55 million. This will be law enforcement retirement, law enforcement officer retirement, law enforcement officer training. There are a number of other small fees that are designated to particular agencies, but that is, a lot of that, and the misdemeanant confinement fund, 25.2 million of that is misdemeanant confinement fund. This is a chart comparing general fund collections, this is the amount returned to the general fund by the AOC, with appropriations over the last 10 years. It is kind of a complicated chart but I've attempted to track how much the percentage of the returns was is compared to the appropriation. Representative Faircloth asked about court cost waivers. This is the result of a court cost waiver report from 2013. I put the statewide number across the top and then I put a few outlier counties, this is broken up by county. And as you can see, Cumberland county had most of the partially waived court costs in 12-13. Mecklenburg and Robinson had a lot of, about half of the full, fully waived court cost in 12-13. There's a special category over here for local rule. What I learned this morning, I didn't know what that was so I pulled that together, but what I learned this morning is that it is basically an, a category in USCIS that mostly is for trying to track how these, how these waivers come about, whether they come about by local practices and local reasons. So for our purposes, these probably should, they should have been aggregated in with the fully waived and partially waived categories because essentially there are so many unknowns there that we don't care. Yes sir? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Jackson. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Child, I take it from what you just said that there is no known answer for why
There’s this huge spectrum of fully waived and partially waived court costs throughout the counties that appears to be explained by judicial temperament, just the judicial personality of those counties. Some counties are just more inclined to waive these fees. Is that your impression. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Chair, thank you Madam Chair. Senator Jackson at this point it would just be conjecture, so what you just said seems reasonable but we actually, we don’t have any hard facts about why Cumberland has so many partially waived court costs while Robertson would have so many fully waived court costs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have several clerks here today. Do any of those clerks have an answer? Okay, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] Clerk of Court in Crawford County. I would just say it’s the temperament of [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] And their discretion to waive costs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Susan, if you could start over please in the mic. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. My name is Susan Fine. I’m the Clerk of Court, Forsyth County. In Forsyth County waivers is the bench, judicials have the right to waive costs and enter judgment so that the only discretion that can be used, so I would say as he said, the temperament of the bench in Forsyth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, ma’am. Representative Boles. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Maybe I’m, I can’t remember or, does a judge have to fill out an explanation why they waive the costs? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. You all passed a special provision the year before last that directed judges to fill out a direct reason, finding of facts before they issued a waiver. [SPEAKER CHANGES] But I think you’re talking about when the costs are remitted, aren’t you? When they don’t pay any costs? Are you talking about that? I think he’s talking about when the costs are remitted the judge has to write out a. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A reason [??]. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m sorry, Madam Chair. I would have to give that back. I don’t know. I would have to get that information and get back to you. This is, these are waivers. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Waivers. These are waivers. [??] Do you want to respond to that [??] . [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. These are waivers here, these are not remittances, so this is a report of the court costs that have been waived as reported or as recorded by the clerk at the time of judgment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hurley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. I was wondering if some of these could be [??] and also where it’s low income. That could be, I’m just conjecture there. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, eventually. They’re just not [??] . Representative Faircloth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. Is there anywhere that [??] . [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair. I think it would be difficult to get that. We can go back to AOC and see, no, they’re saying there’s no way. That since the clerk, well, since the judges waiving the costs at the point of, I believe that the way that they’re collecting the data it would be probably difficult to link up what the costs would be, actually as I’m saying it, we’ll talk to AOC and get back to you. I’ll have to get back to you on that. That actually doesn’t make much sense. If we know what sort of offense they are, then. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a comment Madam Chair, is it seems that we’re talking about a significant dollar figure here. [??] sometimes understanding this is the only way to [??] these particular fees and costs [??] . [SPEAKER CHANGES] Actually that was the costs to remit [??] $50, $180 [??]
We’re gonna do some clarification on this particular part of the presentation and then we will come back to the committee with that, and I have Representative Stevens. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. When I first saw [??] County I [??] and actually looked at Representative Graham and said I guess since there’s a lot of indegency there and so that’s one reason it’s this way. I can tell you from experience in Stokes County, a lot of times the judge will waive the court cost because of the good record. So if they find them guilty and they haven’t ever had a ticket or it’s been 30 years where they don’t have a ticket or 40 years we’ll waive the cost because, you know, they’ve had such a good driving record, so there’s any number of discretionary reasons I think that the judge does that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Speciale. [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] Why they’re doing, why they’re waiving this? Is somebody correcting that information? Is there a report available? Is there a way of getting that report? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The judges should be stating the cause. I know that they’re pulling this report from information that’s entered in ASIS so there is a waiver report so it does aggregate the number by county. I don’t know if there’s any correction of the reason. I’m looking at, AOC is saying no, that they’re not collecting the reason when they collect the waiver information. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So what do we need to do for them to collect the reason because if you give a reason and nobody’s paying attention to it. [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I seem to recall, I think this lady is checking that we thought we had made a special provision that [??] for waivers. So. [SPEAKER CHANGES] But Madam Chair, I think one of the clerks was going to respond that there’s not a place to put it in the system. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, let’s let the Senator finish and then we’ll recognize [??] on that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We need to clarify that perhaps. [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let me bring it back to this slide. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] So does one of the clerks want to speak? Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair. Jan Kennedy, Clerk of Superior Court in Hanover County, you’re correct, Senator. There was a statute that was passed that the judges have to make a [??] in effect whenever they are waiving or remitting the court costs. That finding is put in the file as it may be and it’s not recorded but it is put into a CCIS and there is no, it’s basically what’s done is it’s in the file, so there’s no tracking system per se. The finding is put into the case. Into the [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] I just have one question. Do we know that the judges are doing that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So they are doing that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, ma’am. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In New Hanover anyway. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In New Hanover, yes, ma’am, I can say that my judges are. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, there was a report due March 1st to AOC. It is overdue, it is coming soon is what I’m hearing on, this would just list the number of waivers for the 13, 14, I don’t think it’s gonna list the finding of fact. That doesn’t sound like that’s being tracked. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So do we have a timeframe on when we should be getting that report. Somebody from AOC? No? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m with the Administrative Office of the Courts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, ma’am. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We hope to get that report to you next week Madam Chair, however it will not be by a judge. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does it comply with the requirement of the report? [SPEAKER CHANGES] We’ve changed our system, so we’re trying to do a report that doesn’t by a judge. We will have that information but we may not have it for this report because I think at this stage if we have it we only have two months of information. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jackson. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’d like to ask a question of the AOC. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Would you, would ASIS have at least able to report the type of charge
That’s being waived, like just giving you my, I only practice in one of these four counties, but in Wake County I can tell you that 95% of those 224 fully waived court costs were charged I’ll bet you with public [??] cause that’s usually the only time I ever see a judge in Wake County waive court costs is someone, somebody’s out on the street begging for money and so of course they can’t afford the court costs. The choice is either leave them in jail at the taxpayer expense or let them go without court costs, so I wonder if at least the minimum would be court cost waived type of a thing. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do you have a question? Oh, I’m waiting on somebody from ASC. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Now, but. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Chair, thank you. No, because there would be multiple charges and we’re not able to assess the specific waiver for a specific charge. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Did that answer your question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Not the way I had hoped. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Remember, no right or wrong answers. Have a question? Representative Turner. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’d like to ask the [??] regarding the [??] how much information [??] is even collected [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Jane Kennedy, Clerk of Superior Court in New Hanover County. Yes, they’re waived, and it’s up to most of my in New Hanover County, I have instructed my staff to put more information in because I know that there’s the data out there. I can’t speak for all 100 counties, but I have always instructed my staff to put more information in the special comments. So it depends on each county, but we put in there that yes, it is waived so that the information’s there in case somebody in the General Assembly wants that extra information. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So, question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, ma’am. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do you have instructions on practices and procedures that’s been given you by the AOC that addresses this issue or is it just kind of each county’s doing it every how they wanna do it? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No instruction, but I’d like, Madam Chair, thank you, Jane Kennedy, Clerk of Superior Court, no instruction for those specific. If you understand CCIS and I believe Mr. Taub did a screen shot yesterday on it. If you look at that screen shot there are certain bullet information that you will enter, you know, was court costs waived and you’ll enter that, but there’s a specific comment section that you can put in that comment section what you want and that’s why I’ve instructed my staff over the years to always put as much information in there so that if there is a data gathering of information people can go to that screen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Other questions? Yes. Senator Jackson. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a brief comment. Based on that it seems that it is therefore impossible to tabulate useful data based on the rationale that judges are using and that maybe we should look into a check the box system and give judges an option so that we can actually produce some data. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Senator Jackson. Other questions? Comments? [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] In 2011 a North Carolina State Auditor conducted an audit of court collections. Can you all hear me okay? I’m sorry. The auditor found that court collection rates for certain offenses were at 85.1% for traffic cases, 84.3% for cases resulting in unsupervised probation. AOC responded that, I’m gonna read down my slide, that compliance rates for infractions were at 99%. That these collections include DWI and criminal defendants, some of whom were sent to prison. Some of this population is among the poorest in the state and that due process may delay collections. I think the point area is that sometimes what we see as collections is not necessarily collections. It may just be money that has been imposed by not necessarily money that the court system imposes is not always collected I think is the point. [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think a lot [??] by infraction. [SPEAKER CHANGES] One
give two comparisons with other states. The National Center for State Courts in 2013 did a survey of administrative offices of the courts around the country and found that of the unified court systems from the states that responded, in North Carolina 2.2% of the entire state budget is spent on the court system. As you can see from the chart here on the left, that is actually pretty close to the median of what states spend on their court systems out of their entire general fund budget. On the right there's some non-unified court systems. That number would naturally be lower because generally they're paying for appellate-level only and the local governments pay for circuit courts and trial courts. The NCSC also has a comparison of filing fees in other states and I brought this chart forward just for information for y'all, so you can see where filing fees fall in North Carolina compared to other unified systems and non-unified court systems. And that is all that I have on financing the court system and court costs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm gonna try to do this, if I may, to hopefully resolve any confusion and hopefully where we won't have to go back to this slide. We talking about different kinds of waivers on slide 12, because you've heard the waivers where you can pay on them online, where they get a ticket to waive their appearance in court and they go ahead and pay their fine and cost. So that is a waiver. So on slide 12, in the court world the judge can remit cost. He can remit it partially or in whole, so on slide 12, this is where the defendant goes to court, judge hears the case, and based on some factor the judge decides either to remit partial or full cost on that case. So that is what slide 12 is actually doing. It's separate and apart from those waivers, where people are waiving their court appearance, if that helps any. Questions on this part of the presentation? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madame Secretary. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. Representative Faircloth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For the benefit of those of us who aren't in court regularly, can we have one of the clerks ?? judges ?? separate cost of ?? what takes place and how is it ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Which clerk would like to respond to that? Representative Faircloth, if you would just restate your question, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, ma'am. If you can give us an idea of once the judge orders a certain cost be payed, what is the process for the payment of that and the record keeping and the enforcement of the ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Jane Kennedy, clerk Superior Court in Hanover County. In Hanover County, the defendant physically goes down to ?? cashier and makes the payment via credit card or cash, cashier's check, the money's receipted in, and comes back. Sometimes they're given time to pay. If they are then of course they're assessed the $20 installment fee, and they come back as to a date to be determined and pay that money and do the same thing. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If they don't pay ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] If they do not pay it, we issue an order for arrest or failure to appear and collect that money later. And if it's a chapter 20 offense, of course their license is eventually revoked, and they call us up very upset and want to know why their license is revoked. They've been stopped, arrested, and put in handcuffs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ever a ?? process ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No, sir. There are, if it's probation. I'm going with simple traffic. I'm speaking, you're getting into a much greater, down the line, if it's a probation case, and they're revoked. That's a whole 'nother area. We can talk about that, but. Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Representative Daughtry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just looking at this slide up there. There' court costs, waivers. Weren't waivers used in this particular slide means waiving the cost? That is what the waiver in this particular instance means. It's confused the word remit or waivers in respect to cost.
And signed a two eight and one of them-and-patient and the Ventura a four of the nation-efficiency of them on any of the committee of the movement of the overview and they include the five on the demonic NT mainly for information over to this report that and the top of that conversation from the general assembly for many years dollars family court family court consolidate a family of the listed for sale that record entertain gutters like one daily 11(SPEAKER CHANGES) dentist and the daughter of the process indicators involved in the blatantly of domestic violence charge that the chemical and case management system and other entertainers and the channel and coordination recorders on the state paying lower by courtiers the courtiers and teach courting her case managers essentially to bob limitation together in front of a particular direction what a high court deems for others of the budgeting WorkStation is that the state paying for somebody to all the data together enter into the same judge cars and 13 of 41 district's 21 counties and this chart Lavell which I ever saw are 18 comprise 44% of the population hearted time high of and billy Howard-time high of NT (SPEAKER CHANGES)and a return call for king of the evidence for their team working this morning and divided into the slide of that members of the change significantly better teachers and parking working and awfully tough 1 to 6% of all that report of all domestic takers and a family court jesters are less likely to hold the gators pain for more than a year of the numbers and are working a little while older than 18.6% for family court investors and 51.3% in the family quarters and other liars of the current rate was slightly and a family court district 3% of the center for family were detected the same of this feature roughly the same continuation of the end of the family 20 11th the delta would let a fee to conduct of the two pride they committed by information in the course of the general assembly to decide whether that to continue funding in the body was made on the current 2011 as you recommend restoring funding and adding additional petitions of me provide several large matter for family court and that in this report the gel family dinners for funding the performance measures were fairly interesting, and a demonstration or that are all better than a family partitioned, and I am a native of lumber in the state fish and 2118 and 20¢ which are worse light into the wind chill for any teenager whichever have included the time and 20 states which have a family court and for all these matters of 21 to launch better than 20¢ percent(SPEAKER CHANGES) the makeover in all of these matters of that year high fashion a report of old contractors are different and Internet are some of them occurred after some other mothers factors to be exported to the other testers others defining what are sorted by nine million for 44 at the half-liter, 2.9 million for 4520 left the offer them a place like chuck Finley the NT-party organizations to create a new category of family court judicial assistant to pay more in line with powers and then to the funding of roughly two 1,000,000 current year...........
These are the districts that have family court. I think I showed you this slide the other day but I don't think it hurts to but information in front of you again. And there are other specialty courts these are operating in counties these are funded with local funds, with grant funds, or their not funded. I have a chart online in the specialty courts folder of the website for today shows where these courts are operating and what sort of funds they are using. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Do we have questions? Representative Daughtry. [SPEAKER CHANGE] This is for the AOC and I don't know these towns these particular districts supposing family court ?? as opposed to some ?? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Madam chair good morning I am Mckinley Wooten deputy director of the ALC. Representative, those decisions were made locally, a lot of it had to do with case load the number of cases that were coming in but the local chief district court judge basically in a lot of these were replaced certainly before I got to ALC but those requests came from those districts that have the interest locally to follow the family court model. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Stevens. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you madam chair. My question and concern I guess is that they recommended that we take it state wide at nine point six million. And of course if you offer a family court administrator every district is going to want to take it. But why would we make that recommendation when we've got two very large districts who are doing better statistics than those without one? I guess, what would be the rationale? If I was a judge and you were offering it to me I'm going to take it but I'm already doing well without it. So, maybe like your ALC's rationale for recommending it go state wide. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Someone from ASC. You wanna get back with us? [SPEAKER CHANGE] I'm Brad Holloway ASC, think part of the recommendation came from your right those two districts were doing better than. But I think the recommendation really came from a when you compare globally family court districts versus non family court districts at least on percentage of cases pending more than three hundred sixty five days family court was doing better. So I think that's where the logic of the recommendation came. And also from concern from the members of the general assembly at the time is that if family court is valuable then does it need to be state wide. The question of if it's good for one place would it be good for others as well. Thanks for the question. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Follow up representative Stevens. [SPEAKER CHANGE] So, I guess maybe more my question or even recommendation would be that we allow every district to have an extra administrator whether they want to do family court, front court, or drug treatment court let them decide which one will be beneficial for their district as opposed to simply imposing a family court on everyone. Does that make sense? [SPEAKER CHANGE] And from my experience when the family court was created and started to be put out to the counties there was input from the locals which is correct and a lot of the decisions were made by the chief district court judge and bar. Bar had a role in that too in whether they thought it was beneficial whether they thought it would move cases. The local bar had a big input in that. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative ?? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Well I think you can do anything with the districts you want to and it seemed kind of interesting to me that you picked two non family districts and compared it to one family court district in Mecklenberg county. And I think maybe if you want a fair comparison maybe you just need to do a little, include it all. Just like you said globally how's it doing globally? I mean I might cherry pick three districts and decide to compare them. I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Yeah, I think that staff wants to respond then AOC wants to respond. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative McNeill I'll put that whole report online for you to look at. I did pull out these three districts , I just wanted to illustrate that while family court did generally perform better in some of the districts
That was not a universal and I believe that, I think you took it the other way and I’m very sorry about that. That is my fault. I should’ve pulled the glove away in that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m Brad Fowler, ASC, if Representative, the full continuation review report that we have pulled this out of, it shows both family court versus non-family court in general and then these comparisons, and it explains the methodology in the report better, these were peer groups, so Mecklenberg was compared to the biggest non-family court district just like Wake was, and if you go in there, there’s to district 8 which has three counties, it was compared to multi-county districts of similar size, so in the full continuation review, each family court district, a peer group was picked for them to look at their similar groups that were not in family court, how they did. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hurley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] have to be in [??] whatever, they put them all together and they’re [??] and so part of the chart is to really compare if you do a separate [??] . [SPEAKER CHANGES] Other questions? Yes, Representative McNeill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think Wake should’ve been in here because I think Wake’s a [??]. Wake has a family court district. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir, there are several pages of statistics here that include this grouping, so I’ll make sure that our report is in the folder at the end of the meeting here today. So if it’s not already. I may have already put it in there. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Other questions? I have one question for staff and William, I don’t know that you would be able to take the question, it may have to go to Miss Legett. 2011 we had a difficult task in trying to balance a budget with a decreasing amount of money, so can you tell me if there are any other programs, non-statewide programs, that are still in existence other than family court? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe, if I remember correctly, and I’ll go back and look to make sure I’m telling you the right thing, but at the time there were several non-statewide programs of this type across all of the [??] agencies. There was, drug treatment court was one of them and that was eliminated. Family court I believe is the only one of them still [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, follow up. In that same train of thought and discussion, we had several programs that we did pass through funding. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, ma’am, and I [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, ma’am, so can you speak to those for those members who were not involved and possibly weren’t even here in 2011 in the budget process. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, ma’am. At the time there were several [??] that received pass through funding that [??] in appropriation that passed through AOC or at the time [??] correction and then went to a non-profit somewhere else to [??] . All of those were eliminated. The only ones that remain now are the actual [??] that received appropriations from [??] but there are many more [??] for our process [??] . [SPEAKER CHANGES] Excuse me, and access to civil justice was cut. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, does this other, okay, yeah. [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Other questions? So our next meeting is Wednesday, March the 11th and I’m sure the staff will have us some great reports and we’ll have plenty of discussions and I do have one question that I would like to ask the AOC and it may be some information that you could get us. You know, we talk about, a lot about the local courthouses and how morale is down in the local courthouses and I know that it is. I hear it every day. I have clerks telling me that their staff’s trying to hold on but they don’t know how much longer they’re gonna hold on, so, you know, I know a lot of the court staff, they haven’t had raises. They had the little, you know, some had steps last year, some had very minimal raises last year, a little raise the year before. Can you get me any
...information regarding internal rates is that the AOC has given...at the AOC and I'd like to know what the amounts were and where that money was...what source of the funding was. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McNeil. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And this is something that I would like to see if it's possible and I think AOC [INAUDIBLE] to do it. I know the clerks are allowed to use some of their lap salaries -- or however you want to phrase that term -- this year to give, I think, basically as they choose. I like to kind of break down by county how much the clerks were allowed...how much of that lap salary they got and were allowed to use because that kind of goes back towards what you're talking about as far as the raises go. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [NAME INAUDIBLE] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Can I clarify that is [INAUDIBLE] reserve. I know, but I just want to make sure that-- [INAUDIBLE] reserve is a recurring funding for us that's going to continue on and it happened when Representative [INAUDIBLE] is paid ten thousand dollars and Representative Johnson is paid twenty thousand dollars and Representative Johnson leaves and Representative Salmon takes his spot, but he's only getting paid ten because he only got ten thousand dollars in salary reserve. [CROSSTALK] [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would say it's just a matter of semantics and if we're [INAUDIBLE] laps hours. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, the laps hour is generated by vacant position. So, you've got a position that's only filled six months out of the year, the other six months of salary that exist, that's lap salary. That's non-recurring money and there are several allowable uses for that in the staff sheets and you see that-- Don will talk about this more, but DPS has over eighty million dollars left after every year. So, there's a difference in the allowable uses for those two pots of money and last year you did specify that the clerks could keep their salary reserve and use that to provide raises. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Then I will rescind that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Proceed, sir.