C00A00 - Judiciary[845]

C00A00 Judiciary Operating Budget Data ($ in Thousands) FY 02-04 FY 04-05 Change FY 05 Change $25,099 $248,865 $5,023 $11,251 41,473 2,499 $895 28,651 1,428 $0 -1,048 -1,048 $37,245 $317,942 $7,902 282,576 7,570 -1,031 -1,031 $281,545 $6,539 33,705 2,708 -17 $2,691 587 793 -17 $776 Operations Contractual Services Grants Contingent & Back of Bill Reductions Adjusted Grand Total General Funds Contingent & Back of Bill Reductions Adjusted General Funds Special Funds Federal Funds Contingent & Back of Bill Reductions Adjusted Federal Funds Adjusted Grand Total FY 02 $218,744 27,723 26,328 0 $272,795 258,128 0 $258,128 12,849 1,818 0 $1,818 $272,795 FY 03 $225,801 25,642 28,368 0 $279,810 263,788 0 $263,788 13,609 2,414 0 $2,414 $279,810 FY 04 $243,843 38,974 27,223 0 $310,040 275,006 $16,878 0 $0 $275,006 $16,878 33,118 $20,269 1,915 0 $1,915 $97 $0 $97 $310,040 $37,245 $317,942 $7,902 Cost containment reduced fiscal 2003 expenditures $6,608,967 and the fiscal 2004 appropriation $10,008,594. Prior year reversions increased the fiscal 2003 cost containment actions to $7,472,967. The allowance includes $348,000 for drug court coordinators and expenses. The special fund grant to the Maryland Legal Services Corporation (MLSC) from the Interest on Lawyer Trust Accounts (IOLTA) is increased by $1.0 million to $7.0 million. ! ! ! Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. For further information contact: James L. Stoops Phone: (410) 946-5530 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 1 C00A00 – Judiciary Personnel Data Regular Positions Contractual FTEs Total Personnel Vacancy Data: Regular Positions Turnover Expectancy Positions Vacant as of 12/31/03 78.98 115.00 2.45% 3.57% FY 02 3,009.8 371.0 3,380.8 FY 03 3,223.8 390.0 3,613.8 FY 04 3,223.8 390.0 3,613.8 FY 02-04 Change 214 19 233 FY 05 3,243.8 371.0 3,614.8 FY 04-05 Change 20.0 -19.0 1.0 The Judiciary is asking for the contractual conversion of 20 positions and one new contractual position. The new contractual position is a District Court Commissioner for Charles County. The State’s assumption of salary and benefits for circuit court law clerks and masters added 146 and 58 new positions, respectively, in fiscal 2003. ! ! Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 2 C00A00 – Judiciary Analysis in Brief Issues Land Records: State Archives is archiving the Judiciary electronic land optical image (ELROI) records over ten years old onto the State Archives mdlandrec.net. It is recommended that the Judiciary and State Archives jointly evaluate the feasibility and cost of archiving all land records, not just records that are over ten years and consider using the State Archives scanning system as an alternative to the existing ELROI Optix and non-Optix systems. Drug Court Coordinators: Drug court coordination and drug treatment programs are primarily an executive function. Policy decisions on where to allocate scarce resources to fight crime should be a function of the Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention (GOCCP), the Governor’s policy office on criminal justice. It is recommended that funds for the coordinators be deleted from the Judiciary budget. Local Contribution for Circuit Court Law Clerks: The Chief Judge has cited problems in getting local jurisdictions to remit the 25% contribution for circuit court law clerk salaries. It is recommended that payments more than 90 days in arrears be deducted by the Comptroller from the local income tax payments due the jurisdiction. Abolish Vacant Positions: It is recommended that 58 vacant regular positions ($2,378,966), 12.25 FTE vacant contractual positions ($407,195), and 20 contractual conversion positions ($242,622) be denied. The $242,622 includes the abolition of 3 of the 20 contractual conversion positions currently vacant for a total of 61 positions abolished. Recommended Actions Funds 1. 2. Reduce funding for the use of retired judges to fiscal 2003 expenditures. Reduce cell phone appropriation 20% below fiscal 2003 expenditure level to reflect savings from new State cell phone contract. Deny contractual conversion of 17 positions. $ 618,791 17,796 Positions 3. 138,414 17.0 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 3 C00A00 – Judiciary 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Abolish 3 vacant contractual positions in District Court offices. Delete 3 vacant District Court data entry contractual conversion positions budgeted as regular positions in the 2005 allowance. Abolish 23 vacant frozen regular positions in the District Court. Reduce funds for annual judicial conference. Delete funds to support expansion of drug courts. Abolish 2 vacant contractual positions in the Administrative Office of the Courts. Delete Maryland Legal Services Corporation general fund grant. Delete frozen Information Specialist position in Administrative Office of the Courts. Adopt narrative to require a report on archiving electronic land record images. Abolish part-time (FTE 0.25) vacant contractual position in court related agencies. Abolish 7 vacant contractual positions in Clerks of the Circuit Court offices. Abolish 34 vacant frozen positions in the Clerks of the Circuit Court offices. Total Reductions 94,764 104,208 955,060 120,867 348,506 120,325 300,000 41,856 1.0 3.0 23.0 7,823 184,503 1,382,050 $ 4,434,963 34.0 78.0 Updates No New Circuit Court Judgeships Certified Although Study Projects a Need for 16 Circuit Court Judges and 15 District Court Judges: The Chief Judge for the Court of Appeals, by letter dated November 1, 2003, advised the General Assembly and the Governor that no new judges would be requested for fiscal 2005 due to the State’s financial condition. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 4 C00A00 Judiciary Operating Budget Analysis Program Description The Judiciary is composed of four courts and six agencies which support the administrative, personnel, and regulatory functions of the judicial branch of government. Courts consist of the Court of Appeals, Court of Special Appeals, circuit courts, and District Court. The Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals is the administrative head of the State s judicial system. The Chief Judge appoints the State court administrator as head of the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) to carry out the administrative duties which include data analysis, personnel policies, education, and training for judicial personnel. Other agencies are included in the administrative and budgetary purview of the Judiciary. The Maryland Judicial Conference, consisting of judges of all levels, meets annually to discuss continuing education programs. Court-related agencies also include the State Reporter, the Commission on Judicial Disabilities, Orphan’s Court, Maryland Conflict Resolution Office, and the State Board of Law Examiners. The State Law Library serves the legal information needs of the State. Judicial Data Processing manages information systems maintenance and development for the Judiciary. Major Information Technology (IT) development projects are in a separate program while all production and maintenance of current operating systems are in the Judicial Data Processing program. Performance Analysis: Managing for Results Judiciary case clearance or termination data is provided in Exhibit 1. The actual and projected circuit court civil caseload continues to reflect the growth in family-related cases before the court statewide but particularly in the suburban jurisdictions. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 5 = C00A00 – Judiciary Exhibit 1 Judiciary Managing for Results FY 01 Actual Court of Appeals Regular docket dispositions Petitions for certiori Atty. grievance proceedings Court of Special Appeals Regular docket Circuit Court Civil Case Clearance Baltimore City Counties Total Criminal Cases Cleared Baltimore City Counties Total Jury Trial Prayers Baltimore City Counties Statewide Juvenile Cases Cleared Baltimore City Counties Total District Court Civil Case Clearance Baltimore City Counties Total Criminal Cases Cleared Baltimore City Counties Total Traffic Cases Cleared Baltimore City Counties Total 148 712 68 FY 02 Actual 126 718 73 FY 03 Actual 139 707 81 FY 04 Est. 125 715 86 FY 05 Est. 120 717 91 FY 04 05 Amt. Chg. -5 2 5 FY 04 - 05 % Chg. -4.00% 0.28% 5.81% 1,825 1,813 1,901 1,759 1,841 82 4.66% 29,663 136,477 166,140 27,248 141,885 169,133 25,119 132,690 157,809 26,481 144,768 171,249 26,010 149,374 175,384 -471 4,606 4,135 -1.78% 3.18% 2.41% 24,782 48,543 73,325 23,417 49,442 72,859 24,156 47,212 71,368 23,501 49,400 72,901 23,202 50,124 73,326 -299 724 425 -1.27% 1.47% 0.58% 8,630 21,703 30,333 10,621 23,275 33,896 10,296 22,062 32,358 6,748 29,015 35,763 8,767 24,168 32,935 6,067 20,490 26,557 7,226 17,435 24,661 7,288 13,835 21,123 62 -3,600 -3,538 0.86% -20.65% -14.35% 73,255 258,157 331,412 68,789 282,153 350,942 71,210 288,971 360,181 67,336 308,728 376,064 65,291 325,027 390,318 -2,045 16,299 14,254 -3.04% 5.28% 3.79% 72,476 133,932 206,408 78,309 131,630 209,939 73,657 125,175 198,832 64,989 127,392 192,381 59,481 126,305 185,786 -5,508 -1,087 -6,595 -8.48% -0.85% -3.43% 103,890 958,003 1,061,893 135,612 1,010,917 1,146,529 150,062 991,662 1,141,724 133,277 1,001,707 1,134,984 133,027 1,007,899 1,140,926 -250 6,192 5,942 -0.19% 0.62% 0.52% Source: Administrative Office of the Courts Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 6 C00A00 – Judiciary A small decrease in the criminal caseload is projected for Baltimore City and a small increase is projected for the counties. However, jury trial prayers (JTPs) continue to be a problem impacting the circuit court criminal caseload. JTPs have increased dramatically in Baltimore City where non-motor vehicle JTPs have increased from 30 to 40% of the criminal docket compared to an increase from 28 to 32% of the criminal docket statewide. The situation has a major impact on the disposition of criminal cases in the city because criminal cases are 94% of JTPs in the city compared to suburban jurisdictions where they range from 52 to 73% of JTPs. (Proposed solutions to the JPT problem are discussed in the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee analysis D00A05.21). Juvenile court caseloads, after dramatic swings, are projected to stabilize in Baltimore City in the 7,200 – 7,300 range while the dramatic decline in juvenile cases is projected to continue in the counties. Juvenile delinquency continues to be a significant issue in Baltimore City but less of an issue in suburban jurisdictions. The District Court criminal caseload is projected to decline significantly in Baltimore City. This decline is likely driven by two factors – a change in policy by the police to issue citations for minor nuisance crimes and the JTP problem which results in the transfer of a significant number of criminal cases to the circuit court. Cost Containment Actions Fiscal 2003 and 2004 Cost containment actions reduced $6,608,967 in fiscal 2003 and in fiscal 2004 by $10,008,594 as indicated in Exhibit 2. There were additional savings of $864,000 from prior year reversions at closeout in fiscal 2003. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 7 C00A00 – Judiciary Exhibit 2 Judiciary Cost Containment Fiscal 2003 and 2004 Fiscal 2003 Cost Containment Judiciary January 2003 cost containment One-time bonus Subtotal Closeout reversions Additional savings Federal fund grant for child support enforcement masters Subtotal 2003 reversions Fiscal 2003 Cost Containment Prior year reversions Encumbrance canceled projects delayed Total Fiscal 2003 Cost Containment Actions $ 3,000,000 1,800,000 4,800,000 $ 4,800,000 1,200,967 608,000 1,808,967 1,808,967 6,608,967 864,000 $ 864,000 7,472,967 Fiscal 2004 Cost Containment Actions Position freeze 3.75% turnover reduction 2003 BRFA required 25% local match for circuit court law clerks 2003 BRFA delayed circuit court rent payments to local jurisdictions Clerks of the Court miscellaneous and additional assistance Subtotal Fiscal 2004 Budget Reductions District Court fee increases Total Fiscal 2004 Cost Containment Actions BRFA = Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act of 2003 Prepared by: Department of Legislative Services 2,602,741 1,350,000 1,225,000 830,853 6,008,594 6,008,594 4,000,000 $ 10,008,594 Cost Containment for Fiscal 2003 The Judiciary in January 2003 initially agreed to cost containment reductions of $3.0 million which combined with the $1.8 million one-time bonus deleted from the budget resulted in a voluntary reduction of $4.8 million. During the budget hearings, the Judiciary indicated that additional cost measures were in place and, while they were unable to give a firm commitment at the time, anticipated additional reversions of $700,000. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 8 C00A00 – Judiciary Final Fiscal 2003 Closeout There were general fund reversions of $1,808,967 in fiscal 2003 consisting of $1,200,967 additional savings and $608,000 for child support enforcement masters. The Judiciary used a $608,000 federal fund grant to replace general fund expenditures for the masters. Finally, the Judiciary reviewed prior year encumbrances and elected to delay specific projects and revert an additional $864,000 in prior year reversions. Fiscal 2004 Actions Fiscal 2004 budget action increased revenue and produced savings of $10,008,594. While there were other reductions that reduced future expenditures, all the $6,008,594 in reductions noted in Exhibit 2 avoided current expenditures in fiscal 2004. The Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act of 2003 (BRFA) delayed until fiscal 2008 $1,225,000 in circuit court rent payments to local governments that would have begun in fiscal 2004. In addition, the BRFA required a local 25% match of circuit court law clerk salaries to avoid an expenditure of an additional $1,350,000 in fiscal 2004 and subsequent years. Additional reductions of $2,602,741 continued the position freeze into fiscal 2004 and $830,853 reduced Clerks of the Court miscellaneous and additional assistance. The Judiciary also proposed to increase District Court fines and fees to generate an additional $4.0 million in general fund revenue. Impact of Cost Containment The Judiciary currently has 115 regular positions and 64 contractual positions vacant as indicated below: Regular Administrative Office of the Courts Court-related Agencies; Circuit Court District Court District Court Commissioners Judges Law Clerks Total 7 9 46 36 5 8 4 115 Contractual FTEs 17 43 4 64 The Judiciary has agreed voluntarily to $4.2 million in additional cost containment savings in fiscal 2004. The exact composition of the reductions has not been determined at this time. It is likely that the additional savings will include salary savings beyond the $2.6 million required in the fiscal 2004 budget appropriation and will again include $698,000 in savings to reflect federal funds for child support masters to replace general fund expenditures. This is the same federal grant noted in the fiscal 2003 closeout. The federal funds for the masters are reflected in the fiscal 2005 allowance but not in the current fiscal 2004 appropriation. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 9 C00A00 – Judiciary Judiciary Proposed Budget The Judiciary budget increases $7,901,861, an increase of 2.5% over the fiscal 2004 budget, as indicated in Exhibit 3. The general fund budget increase is $6,538,868. The fiscal 2005 allowance restores approximately $2.8 million of the $6.0 million for fiscal 2004 cost containment that can be directly attributable to 2004 budget actions. Exhibit 3 Judiciary Proposed Budget ($ in Thousands) FY 03 Actual General Funds Contingent & Back of Bill Reductions Adjusted General Funds Special Funds Federal Funds Contingent & Back of Bill Reductions Adjusted Federal Funds Adjusted Grand Total $263,788 0 $263,789 $13,609 $2,414 0 $2,414 $279,811 FY 04 FY 05 Approp. Allowance $275,006 0 $275,006 $33,118 $1,915 0 $1,915 $310,040 $282,576 -1,031 $281,545 $33,705 $2,708 -17 $2,691 $317,942 FY 04-05 FY 04-05 Change % Change $7,570 -1,031 $6,539 $587 $793 -17 $776 $7,902 2.8% 2.4% 1.8% 41.4% 40.5% 2.5% Where It Goes: Personnel Expenses New positions – net 20 contractual conversions and one contractual position.... Abolished/transferred positions......................................................................... Increments........................................................................................................ Employee and retiree health insurance .............................................................. Judges Retirement System ................................................................................ Unemployment compensation........................................................................... Workers' compensation premium assessment .................................................... Cost containment and turnover adjustments ...................................................... Accrued leave payout ....................................................................................... Other fringe benefit adjustments ....................................................................... Other Changes Telecommunications......................................................................................... Use of retired judges......................................................................................... Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 10 $275 -47 2,777 336 -2,496 235 391 2,874 272 331 254 576 C00A00 – Judiciary Where It Goes: District Court Rent Silver Spring ...................................................................... District Court building improvements ............................................................... Land Record Improvement Fund contract with State Archives.......................... Judicial Information Systems – Central Processing Unit Upgrade ..................... Direct Access Storage Devices ......................................................................... Systems software (maintenance) ....................................................................... Drug court coordinators and operating expenses ............................................... Equipment repairs and microfilming ................................................................. Maryland Legal Services Corporation special fund grant .................................. Administrative Office of the Courts fixed charges – rent and insurance ............ Major Information Technology projects............................................................ Other ................................................................................................................ Total Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. -316 -510 -100 450 244 349 348 530 1,000 232 -245 142 $7,902 Impact of Cost Containment Eliminating the 401(k) State match to employee 401(k) contributions in Section 29 of the budget bill only applies to the Executive Branch. The Judiciary has $1,048,040 budgeted for this item. However, the 401(k) has been recommended for reduction as indicated in Exhibit 3 consistent with the treatment of this expense in Executive Branch agencies. Judges Retirement System Contribution Adjusted There is a significant $2,495,560 decrease in the Judges Retirement System (JRS) contribution rate in the 2005 allowance. JRS benefit payments are tied to a percentage of the salary of a sitting judge, and there have been no increases in judicial salaries since January 2, 2002, when State employees received a 4% increase. Even with the JRS adjustment, the contribution rate assumes a 4% increase in benefits paid out to beneficiaries which is well above the current experience in which judicial salaries increased at the 4% rate in only two years since fiscal 1991. In 7 of the last 14 years, judges received no increase and in 2 years the increase was $1,275 each year consistent with the increases provided other State employees. Contractual Positions The allowance includes the contractual conversion of 20 positions throughout the Judiciary ($180,848 net cost) and one new contractual position in the District Court. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 11 C00A00 – Judiciary Use of Retired Judges The allowance includes $4,809,431 for the use of retired judges on the bench, an increase of $576,423 over the fiscal 2004 appropriation of $4,233,008. The Judiciary had expenditures of $3,849,102 for the use of retired judges in fiscal 2003. Judicial Information Systems and Major Information Technology Projects Judicial Information Systems (JIS) includes a general fund allowance of $650,000 for upgrades to the computer mainframe central processing unit (CPU) and $275,000 for direct access disk storage devices (DASD). This is an increase of $450,000 in CPU and $243,600 in DASD infrastructure enhancements over fiscal 2004. There were no general fund expenditures for CPU and DASD in fiscal 2003 under cost containment. These expenditures are in addition to any expenditure for IT infrastructure enhancements for Electronic Land Records Optical Images (ELROI) or Plats On-line (PLATO) financed with the Land Record Improvement Fund revenue. The general fund allowance for development and implementation of major IT projects reflects a decrease of $245,415. The Judiciary expects to complete case management ($317,331), web enabled access ($715,158), and e-license ($800,000) projects that received funds in fiscal 2004. The $1,259,634 IT framework project is the only significant project funded with general funds in fiscal 2005. The framework project is a critical high priority project. This project will increase bandwidth required to transmit data, voice, and video on the JIS IT network. Currently, JIS uses both frame relay and Switched Multimega Byte Data Service (SMDS) circuits for the JIS Wide Area Network. The SMDS circuits are being phased out by the JIS circuit provider and must be replaced. Asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) circuits are required. All circuits and network hardware will be updated to handle the ATM protocol Cisco routers, hubs, and Verizon Local Area Transport Access (LATA) installation. JIS currently maintains a 16Mbps link between the wide area network (WAN) and the Internet. Verizon is the Judiciary Internet provider. Maryland Legal Services Corporation The AOC administers the Interest on Lawyers Trust Account (IOLTA) grant to the Maryland Legal Services Corporation (MLSC). The fiscal 2004 appropriation is $6,000,000, and the actual grant was $6,931,549 in fiscal 2003. This grant is used by MLSC to fund services to represent defendants in civil matters. The AOC had projected $6.0 million from IOLTA in fiscal 2004 based on the general decline in interest rates. However, the sustained housing boom and mortgage refinancing fueled by low interest rates has increased IOLTA income. AOC is proposing to increase the IOLTA special fund grant to MLSC to $7,000,000 to reflect the increased IOLTA income. In addition the general fund $300,000 supplemental grant is continued in fiscal 2005. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 12 C00A00 – Judiciary Drug Court Coordinators The Judiciary has repeated the $348,000 request for drug coordinators ($315,006) and related expenses of $33,500 that was denied by the budget committees in fiscal 2004. Drug treatment courts are specialized dockets responsible for handling nonviolent, drug/alcohol related cases through judicial intervention, intensive supervision and immediate and consistent substance abuse treatment. Five jurisdictions currently have drug courts: Anne Arundel Juvenile Court and Adult District Court; Baltimore City Juvenile, Adult District, and circuit courts; Harford County Juvenile and Adult District Court; Prince George’s County Adult circuit courts; and St. Mary’s Juvenile Court. Coordinators for these courts are provided by funds from local government. Nine jurisdictions are actively planning drug court programs. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 13 C00A00 – Judiciary Issues 1. Land Records Clerks of the Circuit Court are responsible for recording and maintaining all land records. Land records include deeds, mortgages, releases, leases, assignments, powers of attorney, agreements, easements, and other instruments affecting title to an interest in real property. The Maryland Judiciary and State Archives share responsibility for preserving and providing access to land records. The Judiciary Clerks of the Circuit Court land record offices record the land record instruments, but State Archives is the ultimate repository and custodian of all land records. The indices to land records, both electronic and historic bound volumes, provide the public with the means to research land record instruments. The Electronic Land Records Optical Imagery System (ELROI) is the Judiciary’s answer to record electronically all land record instruments. ELROI was implemented in 13 jurisdictions prior to July 1, 2003. Last year the Judiciary and State Archives entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to archive ELROI land records and to accelerate implementation of ELROI in the remaining 11 jurisdictions. The Land Record Surcharge was increased in the BRFA of 2003 from $5 to $20 for each recordable instrument to finance the project through fiscal 2008. Exhibit 4 illustrates the projected Land Record Fund revenues for fiscal 2004 – 2006. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 14 C00A00 – Judiciary Exhibit 4 Land Record Fund Fiscal 2004 Total Revenue 7/03 Actual 8/03 Actual 9/03 Actual 10/03 Actual 11/03 Actual 12/03 Actual 1/04 Projected 2/04 Projected 3/04 Projected 4/04 Projected 5/04 Projected 6/04 Projected FY 2004 Total FY 2005 Projected FY 2006 Projected Surcharge $2,190,543 3,621,725 3,679,561 3,475,560 2,908,945 2,768,204 2,332,728 2,122,783 1,931,732 1,757,876 1,599,667 1,455,697 $29,845,021 Copy Fee $219,559 179,441 193,919 184,727 168,959 167,119 152,078 138,391 125,936 114,602 104,288 94,902 $1,843,922 Interest $16,393 19,747 21,903 25,614 27,322 32,975 30,007 27,306 24,849 22,612 20,577 18,725 $288,030 Total $2,426,495 3,820,913 3,895,383 3,685,901 3,105,226 2,968,298 2,514,813 2,288,481 2,082,517 1,895,090 1,724,532 1,569,324 $31,976,973 30,538,009 30,538,009 Note: The Judiciary is providing these projections based on current fiscal trends. Because of the volatility of the real estate market interest rate upon which the surcharge is based, it is extremely difficult to adequately predict whether the current revenue stream will remain constant. The projections provided are based on a noticed decline in the revenue since the surcharge increase went into effect in June 2003. Source: Maryland Judiciary MDLANDREC or mdlandrec.net is the State Archives’ project to archive all Maryland land records electronically. ELROI began electronic scanning of new land records in the Prince George’s County Land Record Office in 1991. Under the State Archives’ MOU, land records over 10 years old now on servers in the 13 ELROI jurisdictions will electronically migrate to mdlandrec.net. Archives is also performing the back file conversion of the land records that are currently on paper and microfilm from the 11 jurisdictions not currently on ELROI to place the records on the State Archives mdlandrec.net. State Archives has also scanned all paper and microfilm indices used to locate land records and in the future will maintain this index electronically. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 15 C00A00 – Judiciary The second major initiative supported by the Land Record Fund is PLATO or plats.net State Archives will have completed the scanning of all plats for the 24 subdivisions by the close of fiscal 2004 and will continue to maintain the electronic version of the subdivision plats. Exhibits 5.1 and 5.2 shows funds budgeted for the State Archives MOU in fiscal 2004 and 2005 together with the Judiciary implementation and maintenance of ELROI and PLATO. Essentially implementation of PLATO and ELROI are budgeted under program 12 Major Information Technology Projects while maintenance and Archival of ELROI scanned images are budgeted in the AOC Program 06. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 16 Land Records Fiscal 2004/2005 Changes Exhibit 5.1 Land Record File Maintenance Program 6 (Maintenance) ELROI ELROI Implementation ELROI Maintenance ELROI Upgrade JIS Infrastructure (for ELROI, PLATO, Land Rec.) Subtotal Judiciary Archives/mdlandrec.net Index Access New Image Acquisition Achival Backup mdlandrec.net maintenance PLATO PLATO Phase II Implementation PALTO Maintenance Subtotal State Archives MOU Total FY 2004 Appropriation FY 2005 Budget Allowance FY 2004 $0 4,323,661 0 0 $4,323,661 FY 2005 $0 7,198,661 0 685,548 $7,884,209 Change(+/-) $0 2,875,000 0 685,548 $3,560,548 Exhibit 5.2 Land Record File Development Program 12 (Major IT) ELROI ELROI Implementation ELROI Maintenance ELROI Upgrade JIS Infrastructure (for ELROI, PLATO, Land Rec.) Subtotal Judiciary Archives/mdlandrec.net Index Access New Image Acquisition Achival Backup mdlandrec.net maintenance PLATO PLATO Phase II Implementation PALTO Maintenance Subtotal State Archives MOU Total State Archives MOU FY 2004 $7,430,000 0 0 1,488,334 $8,918,334 FY 2005 $3,175,000 0 500,000 1,782,786 $5,457,786 Change(+/-) -$4,255,000 0 500,000 294,452 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 17 C00A00 – Judiciary -$3,460,548 0 0 0 328,864 0 0 3,108,571 328,864 0 0 3,108,571 0 400,000 2,139,901 3,108,571 0 400,000 2,139,901 0 0 0 0 -3,108,571 0 0 0 $328,864 0 0 $3,437,435 0 0 $3,108,571 $6,669,119 624,601 624,601 500,000 400,000 $ 6,773,073 $ 3,564,502 $15,691,407 FY 2004 FY 2005 $9,022,288 $ 7,101,937 $ 7,001,937 0 -100,000 -$3,208,571 -$6,669,119 $4,652,525 $11,321,644 $20,343,932 $20,343,932 Source: Administrative Office of the Courts C00A00 – Judiciary Since the initial installation of ELROI was completed in Prince George’s County in 1995, ELROI has been deployed in twelve other counties. The last six jurisdictions received the latest version of Software (OPTIX) which will allow for web access once enabled. The Judiciary seeks to deploy ELROI in every jurisdiction before enabling the web access feature. However, the assumption is that the earlier installed systems (non-Optix) will continue to have vendor software and hardware support for the systems in place. There is a real possibility that vendor support may not be available in the future. The Judiciary has in fact replaced the Prince George’s and Harford counties’ non-Optix systems with the newer Optix systems and has a plan to upgrade the remaining four with the Optix system. Both the non-Optix and Optix ELROI files use proprietary software and an indexing system that is not sequential. It would be desirable and probably less expensive to move the ELROI files to an open architecture system. The State Archives mdlandrec.net backfile conversion and the archival of ELROI records over ten years old has demonstrated the feasibility of the open architecture State Archives System. Under the current plan, land record servers in each jurisdiction would maintain up to 10 years of land records with records older than 10 years archived onto the State Archives mdlandrec.net. A title examiner would be able to access the ELROI and mdlandrec.net land records from a work station in a courthouse land record office using electronic indexes. The location of the individual land records – on ELROI or mdlandrec.net – would be transparent. It is recommended that the AOC and State Archives jointly complete a feasibility study of the ELROI and State Archives mdlandrec.net by September 30, 2004, before converting any of the remaining four ELROI non-Optix jurisdictions to the Optix system. The study should address the cost and feasibility of the following: electronically transferring all records to mdlandrec.net after they are scanned in the courthouse land record offices, not just records that are over 10 years old; using the system currently deployed by State Archives to scan the records for the backfile conversion of the eleven jurisdictions currently implementing ELROI as a replacement for the current ELROI Optix and non-Optix system scanning of documents; using the current ELROI non-Optix and Optix system to scan all records but electronically transferring the records once they are scanned to mdlandrec.net rather than maintaining 10 years of records on the land record servers, and the cost and security issues involved in deploying ELROI and/or mdlandrec.net on the Internet so that title service agents and/or the general public can access the records from the Internet as a web enabled application. ! ! ! ! Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 18 C00A00 – Judiciary 2. Drug Court Coordinators The Judiciary allowance includes $348,506 for five drug coordinators and related expenses. The budget committees denied a similar request for fiscal 2004. Currently drug courts are operational in six jurisdictions as indicated in Exhibit 6. Exhibit 6 Drug Courts Jurisdiction Anne Arundel County Court Adult District Court Juvenile Circuit Court Baltimore City Harford County Baltimore County Prince George’s County St. Mary’s County Adult District and Circuit Courts Juvenile Circuit Court Adult District Court Juvenile Circuit Court Juvenile Circuit Court Adult Circuit Court Juvenile Circuit Court Year Instituted 1997 2002 1994 1998 1998 2001 2003 2002 2004 Source: AOC Drug Treatment Court Commission, February 10, 2004 There are nine additional jurisdictions involved in the planning process to implement drug courts and two jurisdictions that desire to expand their present programs indicated in Exhibit 7. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 19 C00A00 – Judiciary Exhibit 7 Drug Courts in the Planning Stage Jurisdiction Caroline County Cecil County Dorchester County Frederick County Harford County Howard County Montgomery County Prince George’s County Somerset County Talbot County Wicomico County Source: AOC Drug Treatment Court Commission February 10, 2004 Court Juvenile Circuit Court Adult Circuit Court Juvenile and Family Circuit Court Adult Circuit Court Adult and Family Court Adult District Juvenile and Adult Circuit Court Juvenile and Adult Circuit Court Juvenile Circuit Juvenile Circuit Court Juvenile Court The Drug Treatment Court Commission, a joint executive, legislative, and judicial commission, was established in 2002 to establish standards and best practices. The commission works with the courts and local jurisdictions to apply for technical assistance and grants. The commission reports that seven grants that totaled over $1.2 million were received for drug treatment programming. Local law enforcement block grants, federal Byrne grants, STOP grants, tobacco restitution funds, and local government are the source of funds to support drug court. NPC Research in Portland Oregon, at the request of AOC and the drug commission, has analyzed the effectiveness of the Anne Arundel County Adult District Court drug treatment court and the Baltimore City District and circuit court drug treatment courts. NPC findings indicate that 54.7 % of the participants that entered the drug court program in Anne Arundel County during 1997 – 1998 successfully completed the program. Four years later there were 12.3% fewer drug arrests, 18.8% fewer property crimes, and 73.3% fewer crimes against persons for the 172 individuals in the drug court group than among the comparison group that did not participate in the drug court program. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 20 C00A00 – Judiciary NPC findings for the Baltimore City District and Circuit Court drug court program tracked participants who entered the drug court program in 2000. For this group the re-arrest rate was 31.4% fewer arrests (62.3% in circuit court) for drug offenses, 68.8% fewer arrests for property crimes (71.9% fewer arrests in District Court), and 48% fewer property crime arrests (70% fewer arrests in circuit court) for the 758 drug court participants in the three-year study. Drug court coordination and drug treatment programs are primarily an Executive Branch rather than a Judicial responsibility. The Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention (GOCCP) is the Governor’s criminal justice policy agency. GOCCP has $12.5 million in general funds for local law enforcement and $17.3 million in federal grants to distribute. The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council coordinates the crime control initiatives in Baltimore City. It is recommended that the $348,508 for the drug coordinators and expenses be deleted from the judiciary budget and decisions on where to allocate scarce resources to reduce crime – expanded drug courts, drug treatment programs tracking, and apprehensions of violent offenders – should be coordinated through a refocused GOCCP. 3. Local Contribution for Circuit Court Law Clerks The General Assembly included a provision in the BRFA of 2003 to require local jurisdictions to make a 25% contribution for the salaries of circuit court law clerks. The Chief Judge, in a cover letter with the Judiciary’s budget submission to the Presiding Officers and the Chairmen of the budget committees, has indicated the Judiciary has had problems with several jurisdictions making the required payments. As of November 1, 2003, five jurisdictions had failed to respond to two notices for their contributions, amounting to over $200,000 in uncollectible payments. It is recommended that a provision be inserted into the budget reconciliation legislation to require the Comptroller to withhold funds from local income tax payments to any jurisdiction more than 90 days in arrears in making the local contribution to the law clerk salaries, upon certification by the Administrative Officer of the Courts. 4. Abolish Vacant Positions The Judiciary Currently has 179 vacant positions including 64 contractual positions. The 179 vacant positions includes one Court of Special Appeals judge, four circuit court judges, and three District Court judges in addition to one Court of Special Appeals, and three circuit court law clerks. The Judiciary has frozen approximately half or 61 regular positions and one-third or 20 of the contractual positions to meet salary savings under cost containment. The Judiciary has exempted from the hiring freeze positions that are critical to the operation of the courts. Positions exempted from the hiring freeze include all vacant judges, law clerks, District Court Commissioners, most information technology positions, and supervisory positions. Section 41 of the fiscal 2004 budget bill imposed a cap of 74,100 regular positions and 8,800 contractual positions on the Executive Branch. The General Assembly salary cap required the Executive Branch to abolish 1,675 out of 75,889 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 21 C00A00 – Judiciary regular positions and 370 out of 9,170 contractual positions. The Board of Public Works approved the abolition of 1,680.75 regular positions and 389.83 contractual positions in two separate actions in July and November 2003. The Judiciary, as a separate branch of government, was not required to abolish any positions. Similar reductions in the Judiciary should be taken to make the salary savings permanent. It is recommended that 58 of 61 existing regular positions and 12.25 full-time equivalent contractual positions subject to the Judiciary hiring freeze, be abolished for a total reduction of $2,378,966 in the regular salary payroll and $407,415 in the contractual payroll. It is also recommended that 17 of 20 contractual conversion positions be denied together with the outright abolition of 3 vacant contractual conversion positions ($242,622) for a total reduction of $3,029,003. The proposed action is summarized in Exhibit 8. Exhibit 8 Judiciary Recommended Salary Actions Recommended Action Deny contractual conversion Abolish District Court contractual Abolish vacant contractual conversions Abolish 23 vacant District Court positions 23.00 Abolish vacant AOC contractual positions Abolish vacant AOC contractual position 1.00 Abolish part-time contractual position in Court-related agencies Abolish Clerk of the Circuit Court contractual positions Abolish vacant Clerk of the Court positions 34.00 Total Reduction Source: Department of Legislative Services 58.00 1,382,050 $2,378,966 12.25 $407,415 20 $242,622 41,856 0.25 7 7,823 184,503 $955,060 2 120,325 3 $94,764 3 104,208 Regular Positions Contractual Positions Contractual Conversions 17 $138,414 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 22 C00A00 – Judiciary Alternatively, the budget committees could make a reduction of $3,029,003 in the regular and contractual salary payrolls equal to the components indicated in Exhibit 8 and require the Judiciary to meet a position cap of 3,162.8 regular and 374.75 full-time equivalent contractual positions by December 1, 2004, as was done with the Executive Branch in fiscal 2004. However, it is recommended that the 61 regular positions and 12.25 FTE contractual positions be abolished as all of the positions recommended for abolition are currently vacant under the Judiciary hiring freeze, and all of the positions represent the broad spectrum of positions in the Judiciary and are not unique positions. The Judiciary has already exempted from the hiring freeze positions that are unique and those that are critical to operations of the courts. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 23 C00A00 – Judiciary Recommended Actions Amount Reduction Position Reduction 1. Reduce funding for the use of retired judges to fiscal 2003 expenditures of $3,849,102. It is the intent that the Judiciary may redistribute this reduction between the courts of the Judiciary. Reduce cell phone appropriation 20% below fiscal 2003 expenditure level to reflect savings from new State cell phone contract. The new rate is 7 cents a minute with no monthly minimum. Deny contractual conversion of 17 positions indicated below: 10 - District Court 2 - Court Related Agencies 3 - Judicial Data Processing 2 - Charles County Clerk of the Court $ 618,791 GF 2. 17,796 GF 3. 138,414 GF 17.0 4. Abolish three vacant contractual positions in District Court offices. District Court Baltimore City District Court Prince George’s County District Court ADR Commission 94,764 GF Office Clerk I Criminal/Traffic Clerk Alternative Dispute Resolution $26,595 $24,954 $49,077 5. Delete three vacant data entry contractual conversion positions budgeted as regular positions in the 2005 allowance in the District Court. Positions have been vacant since August 29, 2002. 104,208 GF 3.0 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 24 C00A00 – Judiciary 6. Abolish 23 vacant frozen positions in the District Court indicated below: Office PIN # 001162 001209 001228 069636 076864 079014 081937 001051 001066 000761 000430 000943 000958 000965 080548 000432 000867 060164 000625 000653 Title District Court Clerk (DCC) II DCC II DCC II DCC I/Civil DCC II DCC I DCC II DCC III DCC II DCC Criminal DCC II DCC I DCC II DCC II DCC II Clerk II Human Resource Associate DCC II DCC II Supervisor Admin Servs. Spec. Office Clerk Office Clerk II S/T Vacant 12/12/2003 9/2/2003 9/2/2003 7/25/2003 12/9/2003 8/19/2003 8/6/2003 9/17/2003 9/30/2003 1/20/2004 11/11/2003 10/23/2003 1/31/2003 1/15/2004 11/11/2003 11/25/2003 1/20/2004 12/24/2003 8/13/2003 6/10/2003 Total $45,340 37,370 38,266 42,110 38,266 36,808 38,132 47,858 34,332 42,478 36,503 35,957 57,489 37,819 36,081 40,193 44,306 43,405 41,132 52,290 955,060 GF 23.0 Baltimore City Baltimore City Baltimore City Baltimore City Baltimore City Baltimore City Baltimore City District 2 District 2 District 4 District 5 District 5 District 5 District 5 District 5 District 6 District 6 District 7 District 8 District 8 District 13 HQS District 13 HQS District 13 HQS 001084 001276 060098 11/4/2003 1/7/2004 12/31/2003 55,170 33,825 39,930 $955,060 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 25 C00A00 – Judiciary 7. Reduce funds for annual judicial conference as a cost containment. This reduction will provide $10,000 to hold the annual judicial conference as a day conference in Annapolis as held in fiscal 2003 and is planned for fiscal 2004. Delete funds to support expansion of drug courts. This is an Executive Branch function, and the policy decision to expand support for drug courts and provide State funding should be evaluated as a policy issue by the Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention (GOCCP) against other proposals to reduce crime. Abolish two vacant frozen contractual positions in the Administrative Office of the Courts as indicated below: Position Administration Administration PIN # 999913 999915 Vacant 07/01/02 07/01/02 Salary $63,883 $63,883 120,867 GF 8. 348,506 GF 9. 120,325 GF 10. Delete Maryland Legal Services Corporation (MLSC) general fund grant. A general fund appropriation of $300,000 was provided in fiscal 2004 to provide a supplement to the special fund grant from the Interest on Lawyer Trust Accounts (IOLTA). In fiscal 2004 IOLTA was expected to realize $6.0 million in revenue compared to $7.0 million in fiscal 2003. In fiscal 2005 the IOLTA grant is anticipated to be $7.0 million because of higher interest rates and a continuing boom in mortgage refinancing. Delete frozen Information Specialist position (vacant 7/25/03) PIN #077526. Adopt the following narrative: 300,000 GF 11. 12. 41,856 GF 1.0 Archiving Land Record Images: The Administrative Office of the Courts and State Archives shall prepare a feasibility study of the Judiciary Electronic Land Optical Image (ELROI) system and the State Archives mdlandrec.net by September 30, 2004, before converting any of the remaining four ELROI non-Optix jurisdictions to the ELROI Optix system. The study, which should be submitted to the committees by September 30, 2004, shall address the cost and feasibility of the following: Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 26 C00A00 – Judiciary • • electronically transferring all land record images to mdlandrec.net after they are scanned in the courthouse land record offices, not just records that are over ten years old; using the system currently deployed by State Archives to scan the records for the backfile conversion of the eleven jurisdictions currently installing ELROI as a replacement for the current ELROI Optix and non-Optix system to scan all land records in the land record offices; using the current ELROI non-Optix and/or Optix system to scan all records but electronically transferring the records once they are scanned to mdlandrec.net rather than maintaining ten years of records on the land record office servers, and the cost and security issues involved in deploying ELROI and/or mdlandrec.net so that title service agents and/or the general public can access the records from the Internet as a web enabled application. Authors Due Date • 13. Abolish part-time (FTE 0.25) frozen (vacant 6/30/02) contractual Judicial Disabilities Clerk position in Court-related Agencies Program. Abolish 7 vacant contractual positions in circuit court clerk offices as indicated below: Frederick County Howard County Montgomery County Prince George's County Prince George's County St. Mary's County Baltimore City 08/27/03 11/18/03 12/12/03 12/29/03 09/04/03 05/12/02 10/01/03 $29,219 29,220 29,220 25,713 29,219 29,219 24,109 14. CT Civil Asst. CT – Land Records CT Family Assistance CT – Land Records CT – Civil Assistance Paternity Assistant Family Services ! Information Request Study of ELROI and mdlandrec.net alternatives Judiciary AOC and State Archives September 30, 2004 Amount Reduction Position Reduction 7,823 GF 184,503 GF Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 27 C00A00 – Judiciary 15. Abolish 34 vacant frozen positions in the Clerks of the Circuit Court offices as indicated below: Jurisdiction Anne Arundel Anne Arundel PIN # 059071 059090 Position Fiscal Clerk Trust Clerk S/T Vacant Date 09/16/03 10/06/03 Salary $39,607 44,710 84,317 1,382,050 GF 34.0 Baltimore County Baltimore County Baltimore County 059159 059196 059217 File Assistant Land Records Assistant Civil Assistant S/T Land Record Assistant Fiscal Clerk 09/23/03 09/23/03 12/10/03 33,991 30,674 36,005 100,670 45,523 40,578 Cecil County Harford County Montgomery County Montgomery County Montgomery County Montgomery County Montgomery County Montgomery County Montgomery County Montgomery County 059297 059387 09/16/03 09/07/03 059442 059462 059463 059476 059478 059484 059523 060073 Courtroom Assistant Civil Assistant Criminal Assistant Courtroom Assistant Family Assistant Civil Assistant License Assistant Civil Assistant S/T 10/15/03 10/03/03 08/17/03 11/06/03 08/26/03 11/28/03 09/02/03 09/19/03 44,918 37,898 39,921 38,498 37,898 36,569 40,810 39,301 315,813 Prince George's County Prince George's County 059588 059602 Civil Assistant Land Records Assistant 07/15/03 08/21/03 37,446 36,868 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 28 C00A00 – Judiciary Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County Prince George's County 059608 059631 059641 059647 059664 059683 064901 064908 072611 073311 073323 073324 074758 Criminal Assistant Criminal Assistant Courtroom Assistant Courtroom Assistant Criminal Assistant License Assistant Paternity Assistant Paternity Assistant Paternity Assistant Administrative Assoc Civil Assistant Paternity Assistant Civil Assistant S/T 08/08/03 01/14/04 08/29/03 09/26/03 09/05/03 12/22/03 01/16/04 12/31/03 11/26/03 07/18/03 08/22/03 11/12/03 08/22/03 37,445 37,894 39,437 38,029 38,820 43,077 36,130 38,820 38,820 42,082 38,357 37,446 36,564 577,235 Washington County Baltimore City Baltimore City Baltimore City Baltimore City 059744 059926 059966 059998 076629 Courtroom Juvenile Associate VII-Q Family Services Asst Civil Assistant Associate VII S/T 10/31/03 07/22/03 11/26/03 01/14/04 01/30/04 46,945 50,085 37,440 44,478 38,556 $170,559 Total General Fund Reductions $ 4,434,963 78.0 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 29 C00A00 – Judiciary Updates 1. No New Circuit Court Judgeships Certified Although Study Projects a Need for 16 Circuit Court Judges and 15 District Court Judges The Chief Judge for the Court of Appeals, by letter dated November 1, 2003, advised the General Assembly and the Governor that no new judges or judicial masters would be requested for fiscal 2005 due to the State budget financial condition. Since 1979, the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals annually certifies to the General Assembly the need for additional judges in the State. The determination of need is based upon a statistical analysis of factors affecting workload and performance, as well as the comments of circuit court administrative judges and the Chief Judge of the District Court in consultation with area representatives. Legislation to create additional judgeships based upon the certification of need is then introduced to the General Assembly. This is the third year that the Judiciary has used a new assessment model developed by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC). NCSC was commissioned by the Judiciary to conduct a judicial workload assessment to be used to determine the number of judges necessary in the circuit courts. NCSC submitted a final report dated July 2001 titled Workload Assessment Model for the Maryland Circuit Courts. Exhibit 9 indicates the current number of circuit court judges and the additional judges needed by each county and Baltimore City. The total additional circuit court judges needed statewide is 16 compared to 13 last year. Family cases now comprise 33.5% of circuit court civil caseloads. When juvenile cases are factored in, family-related matters now comprise almost 46% of the circuit court statewide. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 30 C00A00 – Judiciary Exhibit 9 Additional Circuit Court and District Court Judges Needed As of November 2003 Actual Number Circuit Court Judges 0 2 10 30 16 2 1 3 3 4 1 4 1 5 5 1 20 23 1 3 1 1 4 3 2 146 Additional Circuit Court Judges Needed 0 0 3 4 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 (1) 17 Actual Number District Court Judges 1 2 8 26 13 1 1 2 2 2 1 3 1 4 5 1 11 13 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 106 Additional District Court Judges Needed 0 0 1 2 4 (2) 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 (2) 0 0 1 0 1 15 Jurisdiction Chief Judge of the District Court Allegany Anne Arundel Baltimore City Baltimore Calvert Caroline Carroll Cecil Charles Dorchester Frederick Garrett Harford Howard Kent Montgomery Prince George's Queen Anne's St. Mary's Somerset Talbot Washington Wicomico Worcester Statewide (1) Judgeship would be shared with other counties in the First Judicial Circuit (Dorchester, Somerset, and Wicomico) for family law matters. One additional judgeship would be shared with Calvert County. (2) Source: Judiciary Judgeship Needs for Fiscal 2005, Administrative Office of the Courts, November 1, 2003 Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 31 C00A00 – Judiciary Jury Trial Prayers (JTP) from the District Court continues to be a significant problem. JTPs have increased 15.3% from 28,244 in fiscal 1999 to 32,577 filings in fiscal 2003. In Baltimore City three judges are devoted to hearing JTPs. Baltimore City comprised 32.6% of all criminal cases filed in the circuit court statewide with 24,936 and approximately 38% of all indictment and information filings recorded in fiscal 2003. Baltimore City has experienced a surge in the number of hearings conducted over the last five years, increasing 61.1% from 56,745 in fiscal 1999 to 91,428 in fiscal 2003. The Judiciary attributes the increase to a significant rise in juvenile hearings. The amount of time required to dispose of criminal appeals and indictment and information cases is now significantly less in Baltimore City than statewide – as much as 30 minutes less per case. The case processing initiative implemented in Baltimore City now includes enforcement of a stricter postponement policy, extensive monitoring of open cases, and central assignment of cases involving the more complex criminal offenses. The certification cites the need in Anne Arundel, Baltimore, and Montgomery counties for three additional judges in each county. In Anne Arundel and Baltimore counties the increase can be attributed to the increase in family-related cases that take more court time, while in Montgomery County the need seems to be across the board driven by a 7.4% population increase to 938,000 since the 2000 census. In both Carroll and St. Mary’s counties the need for one additional judge seems to be population driven where the population of Carroll County has increased 9% and St. Mary’s County 7.6% since the 2000 census. The Chief Judge cited the need for an additional judgeship in Worcester County to serve as a family law judge for the entire First Judicial Circuit that includes Dorchester, Somerset, and Wicomico counties. Exhibit 9 indicates that 15 additional District Court judges are required statewide compared to 10 last year. The Chief Judge of the district also restates his priority for six judgeships in Anne Arundel County (2), Baltimore City (1), Prince George’s County (2), St. Mary’s County (1), and Worcester County. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 32 C00A00 – Judiciary Appendix 1 Current and Prior Year Budgets Current and Prior Year Budgets Judiciary ($ in Thousands) General Fund Fiscal 2003 Legislative Appropriation Deficiency Appropriation Budget Amendments Cost Containment Reversions and Cancellations Actual Expenditures Fiscal 2004 Legislative Appropriation Cost Containment Budget Amendments Working Appropriation $275,006 0 0 $275,006 $20,672 0 12,446 $33,118 $1,915 0 0 $1,915 $0 0 0 $0 $297,594 0 12,446 $310,040 $270,397 0 0 -4,800 -1,809 $263,788 $12,912 0 770 0 -73 $13,609 $1,865 0 697 0 -148 $2,414 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $285,174 0 1,467 -4,800 -2,030 $279,810 Special Fund Federal Fund Reimb. Fund Total Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. Fiscal 2003 Cost containment includes the $3.0 million Judiciary voluntary budget reduction and $1.8 million for the one-time salary bonus. There were additional general fund reversions at close-out consisting Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 33 C00A00 – Judiciary of $1.2 million additional savings and substituting $696,749 in general fund expenditures with a federal grant for child support enforcement masters. The Judiciary had budget authority to transfer in additional unappropriated special fund income from the Land Record Improvement Fund. The $770,000 was used to cover additional computer maintenance expenses incurred by the AOC in support of ELROI. Fiscal 2004 The $12,446,291 special fund amendment provides additional funds from the Land Record surcharge increase from $5 to $20 enacted in the BRFA of 2003 to support ELROI, the State Archives mdlndrec.com and PLATO projects and to cover $5.0 million in operating expenses of the Clerks of the Court Land Record Offices as required by the fiscal 2004 budget action. Analysis of the FY 2005 Maryland Executive Budget, 2004 34 Object/Fund Difference Report Judiciary FY04 Working Appropriation Object/Fund Positions 01 02 Regular Contractual FY03 Actual FY05 Allowance FY04 - FY05 Amount Change Percent Change 3223.75 390.00 3223.75 390.00 3243.75 371.00 20.00 -19.00 0.6% -4.9% Total Positions Objects 3613.75 3613.75 3614.75 1.00 0% C00A00 - Judiciary 01 02 03 04 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 Salaries and Wages Technical & Spec Fees Communication Travel Fuel & Utilities Motor Vehicles Contractual Services Supplies & Materials Equip - Replacement Equip - Additional Grants,Subsidies,Contr Fixed Charges Land & Structures $ 184,979,396 9,096,412 9,471,489 715,359 363,044 88,479 25,641,529 4,402,225 1,765,532 2,539,691 28,367,927 10,670,632 1,708,509 $ 190,931,890 11,470,982 8,622,914 1,268,039 456,010 150,576 38,974,081 5,322,349 5,937,465 4,584,232 27,222,895 12,579,775 2,518,648 $ 197,423,279 10,975,908 8,876,886 1,278,933 474,286 152,608 41,473,385 5,622,702 6,648,564 3,162,590 28,650,965 12,380,651 1,869,000 $ 6,491,389 -495,074 253,972 10,894 18,276 2,032 2,499,304 300,353 711,099 -1,421,642 1,428,070 -199,124 -649,648 3.4% -4.3% 2.9% 0.9% 4.0% 1.3% 6.4% 5.6% 12.0% -31.0% 5.2% -1.6% -25.8% 35 Total Objects Funds 01 03 05 General Fund Special Fund Federal Fund $ 279,810,224 $ 310,039,856 $ 318,989,757 $ 8,949,901 2.9% $ 263,788,042 13,608,680 2,413,502 $ 275,006,252 33,118,430 1,915,174 $ 282,576,405 33,705,432 2,707,920 $ 7,570,153 587,002 792,746 2.8% 1.8% 41.4% Appendix 2 Total Funds $ 279,810,224 $ 310,039,856 $ 318,989,757 $ 8,949,901 2.9% Note: The fiscal 2004 appropriation does not include deficiencies, and the fiscal 2005 allowance does not reflect contingent reductions. Fiscal Summary Judiciary FY04 FY04 Legislative Working FY03 - FY04 Appropriation Appropriation % Change Unit/Program FY03 Actual FY05 Allowance FY04 - FY05 % Change 01 Court of Appeals 02 Court of Special Appeals 03 Circuit Court Judges 04 District Court 05 Maryland Judicial Conference 06 Administrative Office of the Courts 07 Court Related Agencies 08 State Law Library 09 Judicial Data Processing 10 Clerks of the Circuit Court 11 Family Law Division 12 Major IT Projects $ 6,119,213 6,657,796 40,714,213 102,724,908 3,953 19,215,297 4,291,021 1,646,499 16,209,765 64,218,086 11,796,881 6,212,592 $ 6,687,500 7,060,374 45,512,324 108,450,793 130,867 20,680,381 4,488,084 1,765,910 19,291,525 66,441,989 11,313,908 5,769,910 $ 6,608,592 6,976,405 45,319,244 107,457,982 130,867 20,872,806 4,450,914 1,749,975 19,346,160 68,203,046 11,298,473 17,625,392 8.0% 4.8% 11.3% 4.6% 3210.6% 8.6% 3.7% 6.3% 19.3% 6.2% -4.2% 183.7% $ 6,790,285 7,018,808 44,988,005 109,838,834 130,867 29,478,504 4,547,446 1,863,659 19,790,839 72,446,180 11,385,472 10,710,858 2.7% 0.6% -0.7% 2.2% 0% 41.2% 2.2% 6.5% 2.3% 6.2% 0.8% -39.2% C00A00 - Judiciary 36 Total Expenditures $ 279,810,224 $ 297,593,565 $ 310,039,856 10.8% $ 318,989,757 2.9% General Fund Special Fund Federal Fund $ 263,788,042 13,608,680 2,413,502 $ 275,006,252 20,672,139 1,915,174 $ 275,006,252 33,118,430 1,915,174 4.3% 143.4% -20.6% $ 282,576,405 33,705,432 2,707,920 2.8% 1.8% 41.4% Total Appropriations $ 279,810,224 $ 297,593,565 $ 310,039,856 10.8% $ 318,989,757 2.9% Note: The fiscal 2004 appropriation does not include deficiencies, and the fiscal 2005 allowance does not reflect contingent reductions. Appendix 3