Transcript 2009 Symposium NCSC Presentation

Court Funding: From Crisis
to Stability
National Foundation for Judicial Excellence
Fifth Annual Judicial Symposium
Robert N. Baldwin
Executive Vice President And General Counsel
National Center for State Courts
Basic Message
State and Local Revenue
will be Severely
Constrained at Least
through 2010 and most
likely 2011
2
Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
3
Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
4
What is the status of
state court budgets?
5
Source: COSCA Budget Survey June 12, 2009
6
7
Special Programs that are likely to be eliminated or reduced
because of budget cuts—Percentage of States
8
How will the federal stimulus package
affect court budgets?
Source: COSCA Budget Survey June 12, 2009
9
Statement of the Problem
Particularly difficult for states to
recover from current fiscal
situation
 Housing markets slow to recover
 Depressed consumption and sales taxes
 Property tax revenues affected
 Unemployment deteriorates income tax
revenues and creates further downward
pressure on sales tax revenues
10
Statement of the Problem
Primary actions state can take
during fiscal crisis:
 Draw down reserves (rainy day funds)
 Cut expenditures (can slow economy)
 Raise taxes (can slow economy)
11
Statement of the Problem
States have implemented or are
considering cuts that will affect:
 Low income children/families health
insurance or access to health care
 Programs for elderly and disabled
 K-12 and early education
 Public colleges and universities
 State workforce
12
Statement of the Problem
Can Courts
Avoid Cuts?
13
The Current Fiscal Crisis –
How is it different?
 Appears that it will get worse for next several
years
 Structural deficits in state budgets
 Demographic shifts (fewer workers, more
retirees)
 Rising health , education and transportation costs
 Both state and local governments are being hurt
severely
 Merely relying on cutbacks may not be adequate
 Tax increases and fee increases used last
recession. May not be available
 Accounting tricks already used
14
The Good News
• Courts are being significantly
shielded from the worst of the
budget impacts in most states.
• Federal stimulus will lessen
reduction in court budgets—for
now
15
State Strategies from Last Recession
94%
88%
59%
Cut Spending
Increase Revenue
Enhanced Efficiency
16
How are Court’s responding
this recession?
A. 50% will not be filling judicial
vacancies
B. Will not be recalling retired judge
to sit
C. Reducing hours of operations
D. Limiting weekly hours worked
E. Implementing hiring freezes
F. Implementing voluntary
furloughs
17
How are Court’s responding
this recession? (cont.)
G. Restricting travel
H. Deferring pay raises
I. Reducing employer contributions to
health benefits
J. Creating mandatory furloughs
K. Cutting funding to special services
and programs e.g. ADR, Problem
Solving Courts
18
How are Court’s responding
this recession? (cont.)
L. New or additional technology
M. New emphasis on collection of fines
and costs
-
Private collection agencies
N. Increase in fees
- May not work because this has already
been done
19
Impact of cuts
A. Increased backlogs in civil, criminal and
family/juvenile cases
B. Reduction in service to public
C. Diminished record keeping
D. Limited access to the courts
Reduction in hours of operations
Increased filing fees
E. Diversion of resources from civil to meet
constitutional and statutory mandates in
criminal, juvenile and family matters
F. Possible reduction in jury trials
G. Jurors seeking recusal for financial hardships
H. Voluntary Judicial pay cuts
20
Elements of Budgeting Strategies
Focus on overall mission of the courts –
“constitutional necessity”
“core function of government”
A. Budget Justification
 Relate needs to mission and goals
 Develop a cost accounting mentality
 Evaluate alternatives
 Present budget requirements as part of the
justice system
 Include particular costs of statutory and
constitutional requirements
 Cite all applicable legal provisions
21
Elements of Budgeting Strategies
B. Accountability Measures
 Develop analytical data to indicate performance
and shortfalls (CourTools)
 Define areas where lack of funds will affect the
programs
C. Inherent Powers – can this be used?
22
Strategies Administrators May
Consider for Responding to the
Fiscal Crisis
-
Judicial independence is enhanced by increased
managerial credibility and entrepreneurial court
management
-
Fiscal crisis requires prioritization of court services,
strategic panning and agile management
-
Court should accept fair share of budget cutbacks,
but could seek freedom in return e.g. lump sum
budgets
23
Strategies Administrators May
Consider for Responding to the
Fiscal Crisis
-
Leverage technologies based upon return on
investment and cost avoidance strategies
-
Establish partnership and ongoing dialogue with
funding bodies
-
Create a Performance Measurement System
-
Exempt mandated expenditures from basic budget
reductions e.g. salaries of judges
24
Strategies Administrators May
Consider for Responding to the
Fiscal Crisis
-
Shift non-court costs out of the court budget, e.g.
indigent defense costs
-
Outsource specialized functions and staff intensive
operations e.g. collections
-
Enhance judicial collections


-
Outsource to private sector collectors
Tax intercept programs
Leverage opportunities for Process Re-engineering and
Restructuring
25
Service Redesign
-
What does a court do when all other
remedies for budget cuts fail to solve the
problem?
-
Best Practices for Redesigning the way
courts deliver services
26
Some Baseline Concepts
 Think in terms of services for stakeholders
instead of functions that courts perform.
Example: Payment of traffic fines online instead of traffic
citation case processing.
 Think in terms of external stakeholders
instead of internal staff.
 Think in terms of redesigning business
process to deliver more with less
instead of maintaining current business
processes while delivering less with less.
27
Typical Current Strategies






Reduce court hours
Reduce court locations
Reduce therapeutic courts
Reduce non-constitutional services
Reduce staff
Reduce pay
Reduce external services to
stakeholders!
28
Low-hanging Fruit for Redesign





Automation of processes
Centralization of processes
Changes in court organization
Standardization of processes
Outsourcing processes
Reduce the cost of existing services
29
Automated Services
 Electronic filing & docketing of
documents and motions
 Electronic payments
 Electronic Document Management
System
 Litigant self-help
 Notifications
 Creation of the official court record
 Integrated Case Management System
 Provision of the record on appeal
30
Centralized Processes







Filing
Payments
Collections
Document access
Data queries
Jury services (partial)
Interpreters (partial)
31
Changes in Court Organization
- Consolidation of courts
- Changes in venue requirements or
jurisdictional lines
- Greater flexibility in assigning
judges and court personnel across
jurisdictional lines
32
Standardized Services
 Every administrative process statewide?
 Every technology statewide?
 External interfaces only
 Services only
 Applications, Systems, Infrastructure
33
Outsourced Services
 Technology infrastructure
 Network
 Servers
 Email
 Security
 Collections
 E-filing
 Data entry
34
The Pot of Gold
 Happier customers, because
they get improved services
 Happier staff, because
they get improved jobs and pay
 Happier society,
because it gets a court system with
renewed institutional viability and
improved efficiencies.
35
Separate Branches,
Shared Responsibility
 Public wants all three branches of
government to play a big role in
addressing significant justice problem
 90% think it is important for heads of
the three branches to meet regularly
on justice system issues
 Public thinks courts should be
provided enough money to function
properly
36
Separate Branches,
Shared Responsibility (cont.)
 Over 80% oppose raising filing fees
 85% oppose cessation of jury trials
 71% say state Supreme Court
should have the final say in deciding
controversial issues
 74% of well informed categories
express confidence in the courts
compared to 65% confidence in the
legislatures and 66% in the governor
37
What is NCSC Doing?
1. Periodically survey court
administrators to track budgets,
shortfalls and strategies
2. Budget Resource Center
Interactive maps where you can see state
specific activity and learn from other
states
38
What is NCSC Doing?
3. SJI Grant to track shortfalls and
identify the principles by which
courts should be funded
- Funding Guidelines or Principles
- Collecting best practices
- Providing technical assistance – SWAT
team with court connection network
4. Developing Redesign Methodologies
- High Performance Courts
39