Loading
In whom would you trust the handling of money more — the state judiciary or county clerks (who also serve as county comptrollers and county auditors)?
In whom would you trust the keeping of public court records more — the state judiciary or county clerks (who also serve as court recorders)?
It's not even close.
There's a nasty intergovernmental fight and power struggle going on in Tallahassee between the judiciary and county clerks.
It's about money and control. The judges want more of both. But rather than admit that, they're cloaking their efforts in the black robes of accusing the clerks of being unaccountable and inefficient.
The shot heard 'round the Capitol was House Bill 1121, sponsored by Fort Lauderdale Rep. Ellyn Bogdanoff.
All you can do is shake your cynical head when you read the proposed legislation. What hooey. Here's Section 1 of HB 1121:
“... To enable greater access to justice and bring appropriate efficiencies to the administration of justice ... In this time of curtailed state resources, it is the further intent of the Legislature to eliminate bureaucracy and the duplication of effort by providing additional legislative and judicial oversight of the provision of court-related services.”
When you cut to the quick, the state judiciary is sick and tired of not having the money it says it needs, is sick and tired of the Legislature controlling the courts' funding and doesn't like the fact the 67 lowly county clerks of courts touch so much of the judicial system's money and are so involved in the management of the court system. Although the judges would never admit it publicly, it also really frosts them that the clerks are the keepers' of court records.
On the latter point, it's common knowledge among the state's clerks that the judges believe court records belong to the courts; the clerks, on the other hand, take the position that court records belong to the public. Reporters can tell you first hand: Have you ever tried to get access to public records through a judge? Good luck if you even get a returned phone call.
When we called Chief Justice Peggy Quince's office to interview her on her position on this legislation (we were told she's a leading proponent), her clerk referred us to the state Supreme Court's media officer, who pushed our request to the Sixth Circuit's public information officer in Pinellas County, who sent us an e-mail with a Power Point presentation showing the judiciary's stance on this issue. He did offer up Chief Judge Robert Morris for an interview. Sorry, Floridians want to hear the chief justice.
This is what “access” means in the judiciary: Talk to the press? Get real.
The judiciary takes a similar approach to the public when it comes to court records. Say, for instance, all records management for court cases fall under the domain of the judiciary. Now imagine the unimaginable: A chief circuit judge is accused of some heinous murder related to a multimillion-dollar blackmail and embezzlement of court funds.
The point here is checks and balances. It just seems obvious that the public is best served when court records fall under the domain of an agency that doesn't have an emotional, professional or monetary stake in the handling of court records. Keeping records management under the clerks creates a sense of comfort and justice for those who go through that system. Checks and balances.
It's all about collections
Let's talk money. Annual expenditures for the state judiciary totaled $477 million for fiscal 2007-08. The state clerks, meanwhile, spent $448 million.
Most of that money for both governmental units comes from the clerks' collection of fees in the day-to-day operations of the courts. So when you hear that the state judiciary wants to take over the collection all fines, fees service charges and court costs and take that function away from the clerks, who by the way have been doing that since the 1800s, if you're a legislator you really have to scratch your head and imagine:
Who's going to be better at collections — a bureaucracy headed by judges or a bureaucracy headed by clerks who have been in the collections business for two centuries? Think about this: If this bill passes, are all of those clerks' employees just going to wake up one morning and keep operating smoothly and efficiently under altogether new leadership? Can you imagine the ugliness and fingerpointing that inevitably would occur when one government bureaucracy is required to hand over its responsibilities (unwillingly) to another?
A spokesman for the Florida Association of Court Clerks told us last week judicial representatives reported to lawmakers the courts would be able to achieve $200 million in savings if they're given responsibility over the tasks listed in the box at left.
“That means they don't understand what the clerks' offices do,” the spokesman told us.
Surely, you can see one of the outcomes of this legislation would be bigger bureaucracies in the courts. Small example: The Sarasota County clerk's office employs a CPA and has its own internal auditing staff that monitors the clerk's handling of taxpayer dollars in the clerk's office and throughout Sarasota County. Even if the courts took over many of the clerk's court functions, clerks still would need their CPAs and auditors — and the judiciary would need their sets of CPAs and auditors as well.
Accountability
Talk to a county clerk about the judiciary's accusation of clerks lacking accountability and efficiency, and you'll see their necks visibly strain. Look at the box above, it's a sampling of what each clerk must take to prove he is acting efficiently and checking and being checked to show accountability to taxpayers.
OK, not every state clerk is a paragon of efficiency. It's a government bureaucracy, which by definition has inefficiencies. And while the judiciary is right — that it would be worthwhile for some blue-ribbon group similar to the Tax and Budget Reform Commission to examine the courts and clerks' operations for improvements, the judicial power grab in HB 1211 isn't the way to go. Kill it.
The Legislature mandates that each county clerk's office must collect certain percentages of court fines and fees each fiscal year. The following table shows the percentage of collections achieved by the Sarasota County Clerk of Courts in fiscal 2007-08. It met or exceeded all of the state mandates in each of the past two years.
Mandated '07 Actual '08 Actual
Court category collections collections collections
Criminal-Circuit 9% 15% 13%
Criminal-County 40% 41% 40%
Criminal-Juvenile delinquency 9% 46% 46%
Criminal-Traffic 40% 72% 73%
Civil-Circuit 90% 98% 99%
Civil-County 90% 99% 97%
Civil-Traffic 90% 91% 90%
Civil-Probate 90% 96% 96%
Civil-Family 75% 94% 96%
Source: Sarasota County Clerk of Courts
After the Florida judiciary, under the auspices of the Florida Supreme Court, presented its case for removing court duties from the state's clerks of court, the state clerk's association compiled the following response:
FUNDING
COURT VIEW: Clerk budget grew by 33%
CLERKS' VIEW: Clerk spending grew by 21.7%
COURT VIEW: Court budget grew by 13%
CLERKS' VIEW: Court spending grew by 22.7%
COURT VIEW: No information provided
CLERKS' VIEW: Clerk budget w/ facility costs grew 26.5%
COURT VIEW: No information provided
CLERKS' VIEW: Court budget w/ facility costs grew 38.5%
COURT VIEW: Clerks receive a bigger piece of the budget pie
CLERKS' VIEW: The Clerk doesn't receive any piece of the “budget pie”; the Clerk collects fines and fees. The Legislature sets the fees, and allows the Clerk to use a portion to offset the costs set forth in law.
COURT VIEW: Clerks keep all the money they collect
CLERKS' VIEW: In 2008, Clerks statewide collected and sent $406.5 million to the State and local governments. Any monies kept by the Clerks funded the required duties set out in statute. Unspent dollars are required to be sent to the state at the end of the year.
COURT VIEW: Clerks are not subject to budget cuts
CLERKS' VIEW: The funding mechanism adopted by the Legislature to fund the office of the Clerk requires the Clerk's expenses to adjust to actual revenues collected. This requires expenses to be
cut when revenues fall.
COURT VIEW: Clerk's have more budget flexibility than other budgets
CLERKS' VIEW: The model prohibits the use of revenues collected for fines and fees to be used for technology improvements and requires that information technology costs be paid through a revenue source that has been severely impacted by the down turn in the housing market. Many offices may be forced to turn software products off and return to manual processes unless some restrictions are modified to allow for the use of revenues earned and collected by the Clerk to be used to maintain technological investments.
ACCOUNTABILITY
COURT VIEW: There is no oversight of the Clerk's budget; clerks are not accountable.
CLERKS' VIEW: Mandated reporting required, incuding:
• F.S. 28.35 — Collections quarterly report; timeliness semi-annual report; fiscal management measures status report; cases semi-annual report; juror quarterly payroll, meals and lodging statement; SB1790 quarterly detail revenue reporting; certified budget from CCOC and state; court revenue/expenditure tracking.
• F.S. 28.246(1) — payment of court-related fees, charges, costs, fines and other monetary penalties.
• F.S. 218.39(2) — Chapter 10.550, rules of the auditor general local government entity audits; mandated audits, external independent audit.
• F.S. 28.35 —Department of Financial Services budget review.
• OMB Circular A-87 — Child-support audit.
• Self-Imposed Audits — evidence audits, cash count audits; information and public education; liaison committees, workshops, education; risk-based internal controls framework.
EFFICIENCY
COURT VIEW: Clerks do not provide the judicial branch with access to accurate court case data.
CLERKS' VIEW: Clerks maintain case management systems that have been tied together to create a statewide system known as the Comprehensive Case Information System (CCIS). All levels of law enforcement use this information along with many other state agencies.
• Technology / eProducts — Including CourtView, E-docket, court search, ClerkNet & Case Watch Feature, Judge Sign, Web Access.
• Business Processes and Services — Including strategic planning, project portfolio, project planning methodology.
These are the clerk's duties House Bill 1121 wants to transfer to the courts:
• (a) Case maintenance.
• (b) Records management.
• (c) Court preparation and attendance.
• (d) Processing the assignment, reopening, and reassignment of cases. • • (e) Processing appeals.
• (f) Collection and distribution of fines, fees, service charges and court costs.
• (g) Processing bond forfeiture payments.
• (h) Payment of jurors and witnesses.
• (i) Payment of expenses for meals or lodging provided to jurors.
• (j) Data collection and reporting.
• (k) Processing jurors.
• (l) Determinations of indigent status.
• (m) Keeping progress dockets.
• (n) Disposal of evidence.
• (o) Pro se assistance.
Our new president should heed the admonition of the late Rev. Adrian Rogers, former three-time president of the Southern Baptist Convention.
— MW
“You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is surely the end of any nation's future.”
Your free article limit has been reached this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited digital access to our award-winning business news.
Join thousands of executives who rely on us for insights spanning Tampa Bay to Naples.
