The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 03122002 - C15 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA FROM. John Sweeten, County Administrator '"�`` COSTA DATE: !March 12, 2002 _� , COUNTY SUBJECT: SB 1 343 (Tvrlakson) -Sponsor SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECO MMENDAT'ION 3): SPONSOR SB 1343 (Torlakson), which would ensure that Contra Costa County is not retroactively penalized for a state calculation error in establishing the County's revenue maintenance of effort requirement under the'Trial Court Funding Act of 1997, ACK ROU /REAS S FOR R 0.OMM N TIO The County's 2002 Legislative Program includes the following platform position. Sponsor legislation to return the County's trial court maintenance of effort to the level it was prior to the enactment of SB 815, which penalized Contra Costa County for a Stale calculation error in the maintenance effort requirements of Contra Costa County and another county. The Lockyear-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act of 1997 provided for state assumption of trial court operation 'funding and capped the counties' future contribution to trial court funding in accordance to Government Code 772031 (b) (2). When Centra Costa County first received .its revenue figures from the state, they did not reconcile with the County"s own numbers. These differences were pointed out to the state, but the County was told that there were many factors that could cause the County's numbers to differ from the state. Since then, the County has been paying the required remittances as established by the state. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: � REccomu1vwAT OF ct3uwry ADMINISTRATOR—RECOMMENDATION OF BO EE PROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S)- � arAPPROVED'ASRECSENACTION _ � OTHBR VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A ?UNANIMOUS(ASSENT Nave ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: ,NOES. ACTION TAKENAND ENTERED ABSENT- ABSTAIN: ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Sara Hoffman,3354090 ATTESTED March 12, 2JI02 JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS cc; CAOANC?COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Julle , —A' Anon N Win,County CounselBY, DEPUTY County Lobbyist BACKGROUNQIREASONftS) FOR RFGOMMENOATION (cont'd) Last year, SB 815 (Chesboro) retroactively reduced Del Norte County's revenue maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement and increased Centra Costa County's MOE by a like amount. This new revenue MOE better approximates Contra Costa County's original figures. The County does not dispute the new revenue requirement. However, SB 815 also includes a retroactivity clause for Contra Costa County, which would obligate the County to pay an°estimated $725,000 - $885,000 in retroactive payments. SB 1343 would ensure that Contra Costa County is not retroactively penalized for a state calculation error in establishing the County's revenue MOE. This is only equitable, especially since the Trial Court Funding Act provided that apart from the appeal process provided in the law, the time period for which has passed, "county remittances shall not be increased in subsequent years." SENATE BILL No. 1343 Introduced by Senator Torlakson' February 4, 2002 An act to amend Sections 77201 and 77201.1 of the Government Code,relating to trial court funding. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEUS DIGEST SB 1343, as introduced,Torlakson. Trial court funding. The Brown-Presley Trial Court Funding Act ,provides for the remittance to the state by the counties of specified amounts based on fine and forfeiture revenue remitted to the state inthe1994-95 fiscal year, for purposes of trial court funding. This bill`would revise the amounts to be remitted to the state by Contra Costa County pursuant to these:.provisions,'as specified. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program:'no. The people of the State of California do enact'as fellows: 1 SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares the 2 following: 3 (a) The Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act of 1997 4 (Chapter 850"of the Statutes of 1997)provided for assumption by 5 the state of trial court operation costs and capped the counties' 6 future contributions to trial'court funding. 7 (b) Paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 77201 of the 8 Government Code requires counties to pay to the state an amount 9 representing the amount a county remitted to the state in fine, 10 penalty, and forfeiture revenues during the 1994--95 fiscal year. 99 SB 1343 —2- 1 21 (c)'The amount of these required remittances were calculated 2" for each county by the state. 3 (d) The state's calculation of revenue figures for Contra Costa 4 County understates whatthe county actually' owed. While the 5 county informed the state of error,the state chose not to make any 6 changes to the schedule of remittances. 7 (e)' The state also mistakenly overestimated revenue 8 requirements for Del Norte County. 9 (f) ''Since the establishment of its revenue maintenance of 10 effort, Contra Costa County has remitted its revenue maintenance 11 of effort faithfully in accordance with the Trial Court Funding Act. 12 (g) Chapter 671 of the Statutes of 2000 retroactively reduced 13 Del Norte County's revenue maintenance of effort requirement, 14 Furthermore,in order to maintain:a revenue neutral impact on state 15 funds, that statute increased Contra Costa County's revenue 16 requirement'by an amount equal to Del Norte County's reduction. 17 (h) Contra Costa County does not dispute the new revenue 18 maintenance of effort amount fine and forfeiture of six million one 19 hundred thirty-eight thousand seven hundred forty-two dollars 20 (86,138,742), since it more closely approximates the county's 21 original revenue estimate. 22 (i) Chapter 671 of the Statutes of 2004 further included a 23 retroactivity clause for Contra Costa County, which would 24 obligate the Contra Costa County to an estimated revenue payment 25 amount of between seven hundred forty-two thousand dollars 26 ($742,000) and eight hundred eighty-five thousand dollars 27 ($885,000). 28 6) This retroactive payment requirement was established 29 despite the express statement in the Trial Court funding Act, 30 embodied in paragraph(3)of subdivision(b)of Section 77201 of 31 the Government Cade,that apart from the appeal process provided 32 in the law, the time period for which has passed, "county 33 remittances shall'not be increased in subsequent years. 34 (k) Contra Costa County should not be retroactively penalized 35 for a state calculation error in establishing the county's revenue 36 maintenance of effort. 37 SEC. 2, Section 77201 of the Government Code is amended 38 to read: 39 77201. (a) Commencing on July 1, 1997,no county shall be 40 responsible for funding court operations, as defined in Section' 99 -3— SB 1343 1 77003';and Rule 810 of the California Rules of Court as it read on 2 July 1, 1996, 3 (b) In the 1997-98 fiscal year, each county,shall remit to the 4 state in installments due on January 1,April 1, and June 30 the 5 amounts specified in paragraphs(1) and(2), as follows: f (1) Except as otherwise specifically,provided in this section, 7 each county shall remit to the state the amount listed below which 8 is based on an amount expended by the respective county for court 9operations during the 1994-95 fiscal year: 10 11 Jurisdiction Amount 12 Alameda ... .. . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. ... ... $ 42,045,093 13" Alpine. .. . .. . . . . . ... . . . .. ... . ...... 46,044 14 Amador . .. .. .. .. . . . . .. .. . .. .... .. . . .. .. 900,196 15 Butte 2,604,611 16 Calaveras .. . ..... . . .. ... .. .. .... .. ... 420,893 17 Colusa .. .... . . . .. ...... . . .. .. .... .. 309,009 18 Contra Costa . . ... . . . ... .. .. . .. .. . . .... .. 21,634,450 19 Del Norte ... .. . . .. . .. 780,786 20 El Dorado . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. ... .. 3,888,927 21 Fresno . . . . . . . .. . ... 13,355,025 22 Glenn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . 371,607 23 Humboldt . . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . ... ... .. .. 2,437,196 24 Imperial .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,055,173 25 Inyo .... . .. . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . 546,508 26 Kern . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . ... . .. . . 16,669;917 27' Kings ....... . . . . 2,594,901 28 Lake .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . .. . .. .. .. . . . 975,311 29 Lassen . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .... . .. . ... . 517,921 30- Los Angeles .. . . . . . . .. .. ..... . . ... . 291,872,379 31 Madera . . . . ... .. . . . . . . .. .. . ..... .. 1,242,968' 32 Marin .. ... .. .. .. . . .. . . . . ... .. .. .. . ... . . 6,837,518 33 Mariposa . ... .. . .. . .. .. . . .... ... . .. .. 177,880 34 Mendocino ..... . .. . . ... .. .. . 1,739,605 35 Merced . . . . .. .. . . .. .. .. . . .. . .. ...... .. .. 1,363,409 36 Modoc . . .. .. .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . .... ... .. . .. 114,249' 37 Mono . . .. ... . .. . . . .. 271,021 38' Monterey . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. ... .. .. . . ... . 5,739,655 39' Napa-.. . ... .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. .. 2,866,986 40 Nevada . . . . .. .. . . .. . . . .. .. . . .. .. .. . . .. . . 815,130 99 S$>1343 —4- 1 Orange .. ...... .. ... 75,567,372 2 Placer . .. .. .. . . . 6,450,175 3 Plurnas .. . . .... .... .. ... .. . . .... ... .. 413,368 4 Riverside .. ....... .......... .. . 32,524,412 5 Sacramento ... ... . .. ............... 40,692,954 6San Benito . .... . ... .. ... ..... ...... . 460,552 7 San Bernardino . . . . ... ... . . .. .. .. .. ..... 31,515,134 8 San Diego . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . .. . .. 77,637,9004 9' San Francisco .. . .. . . ... . . . . .. . .. .. . .. 31,142,353 10 San Joaquin . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. .. .. 9,102,834 11 San Luis Obispo . . . . . . . .. .... .. . . . . . . .. . . 6,840,067 12 San Mateo . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. .. . . 20,383,643 13 Santa Barbara .... ... . . .. . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . . 10,604,431 14 Santa Clara ... ... .. ... .. . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . .. 49,876,177 15 Santa'Cruz . .. . . . . ... . .. .. , 6,449,104 16 Shasta . 3,369,017 17` Sierra . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . 40,477 18 Siskiyou .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .... . .. . . . 478,144 19 Solano . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .... . . .. 10,780,179 20 Sonoma .. .. . . . . .. . . . .... .. .. 9,273,174 21 Stanislaus . .... . ... . .. .. . .. . ... .. . ..... .. 8,320,727 22 Sutter . ...... . . ... ... .. .. .. . .. .. .... . . 1,718,287 23 Tehama . .. .. .... .. . .. ... . . .... 1,352,370 24 Trinity .. . ... . . . . .. .. . .. ... . .. ..... . .. 620,990 25 Tulare . . . . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. ... 6,981,681 26 Tuolumne . . . .. 1,080,723 27 "Ventura . . .. ... . .... .. . . . . . .. ... ... .. 16,721,157 28 Yolo .. . . . . ... . . .. .. .. . . .. . . . .. .. . .. ... 2,564,985 29 Yuba, . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. .. 842,240 30' 31 (2) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section., 32 eachcounty shall also►remit to the state the amount listed below 33 which' is based on an amount of fine and forfeiture revenue 34 remitted to the state pursuant to Sections 27361'and 76000 of this 35 code,Sections 1463.001 and 1464 of the Penal Code,and Sections 36 .42007, 4200"7.1, and 42008 of the Vehicle Cade during the 37 ;1994-�95 fiscal year: 38 99 1 - —5— SB 1343 1 Jurisdiction Amount 2 Alameda $12,769,882 3 Alpine... .. .. .....:. ... . . . . ..: .. .:..... . 58,757 4 Amador . . ... .. . .. ... .. .. .. .. 377,005 5 Butte . .. . .. . . .. . 1,437,671 6 Calaveras . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . 418,558 7 Colusa . . . . . ... . . . .. . . . .. .. . . .. . .... . 485,040 8 Contra Costa .. . . . .. . .. . .. ... . ... . . .. .. .. 6;138,?4 5,646,329 10 Del Norte . . . . . . ... . .. . . . . .. .. .. .. .. . . 235,438 11 El Dorado .. .... .. 1,217,093 12 Fresno ..... .. . .... . .. .... ...... .. .. 4,505,786 13 Glenn . ... . .... ... . ... .. .. 455,389 14 Humboldt . . . . .... .. . . . .. . . .... . . .. .. .. . . 1,161,745 15 Imperial . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . .. .. . . .. .. .. . . 1,350,760 16 Inyo . . . .. . . . . . .. ... .. . .. .. .. .. . . 878,321 17' Kern . . . . . .. . ... . .. . . . . ... .. .. .. . . . .. 6,688,247 18 Kings . . . .. . .. .. .. . . . .. .... ... . .. . .. . . . . 1,115,601 13 Lake :. . .. .. . ... . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . 424,070 20 Lassen .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. 513,445 21 Los Angeles . .. . .. . . .. . . . .. ... . ... .. . .... 89,771,310 22 Madera .. ... . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 1,207,998 23 Marin . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . ... . . . . 2,700.;045 24 Mariposa . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . 135,457 25 Mendocino . . . ... . . . . . . . . .... . . . .. 948,837 26' Merced .. . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. .. . . 2,093,355 27 Modoc . . ........... .. . .. . . . .. .. . . .... 122,156 28 Mono 415,136 29 Monterey . ... ............ .. .. 3,855,457 30 Napa`. ... .. .. ...... .. ... . .. .. .... .. . . 874,219 31' Nevada . .. .... . . .. . . . . ... . .. .. ... . .. .. 1,378,796 32 Orange . . .. ... ... .. . . . .. . . .. . . .... .. . .. . 24,830,542 33 Placer_.. . . . . .. . .. . . .... . ... .. .. . .. . 2,182,230 34 Pluma.s . . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . 225,080 35 Riverside .. .: . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. .. 13,328,445 36 Sacramento . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . 7,548,829 37 San Benito . .. . . ... .. . . . . . . .... .. .. .... . . 346,451 38 San Bernardino . . . . .. ... . .. . . .. . . . . 11,694,120 39, San Diego.. . .. .. . .. .. .. .... .. .. . . 21,410,586 49 SB 1343 —6- 1 6-1 San Francisco . .. . .. 5,925,950 2 San Joaquin .. ... ., 4,753,688 3 San Luis Obispo . .. ... . .. ....... . ... 2,573,968 4 San Mateo ... .... ... . . ... .: . ..... 7,124,638 5; Santa Barbara . . . 4,094,28,8 6 Santa Clara. .. .. . . . .. . 15,561,9883 7 Santa Cruz . . .. . .. . . . . . . ... . .. . .. . .. .. 2,267,327 8, Shasta . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 1,198,773 } Sierra . . .. . .. . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,778 10 Siskiyou .. . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801,329 11 Solaro .. .... . .. . .. .. . .. .. . . ... .. . . . . . . 3,757,059 12 Sonoma . . . .. .. .. .. ... . ... ........ 2,851,883 13 Stanisiaus .. . .. .. . . .. . . . . .. . :. . .. .. .... .. 2,669,045 14 Sutter .... . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. .. 802,574 15 Tehama . . .. . . .... . . 761,188 16 Trinity .. . . ...... ..... .. .. .... ... . .. .. 137,087 17 Tulare . ... . .. ... .. ... .. .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. 2,299,167 18 Tuolumne .. .. . .. .. . .. .. ... . . ..... 440,496 19 Ventura .. . .. ...... .. ......... ..... .. 6,129,411 20 wo . ... ... . :.. .... .. ... .. . . 1,516,065 21 Yuba ., ... . ..... ....... .. . . .. .. . .. 402,477 22, 23 (3) The installment due on January 1 shall be for 25 percent of 24 the amounts specified in paragraphs(1)and(2). The installments 25 due on April 1 and June 30 shall be prorated uniformly to reflect 26 any adjustments made by the Department of Finance, as provided 27 in this section.If no adjustment is made by April 1, 1998,the April 28 1, 1998, installment shall be for 15 percent of the amounts 29 specified in paragraphs (1) and (2). If no adjustment is made by 30 June 30, 1998, the June 30, 1998, installment shall be for the 31 balance of the amounts specified in paragraphs(1)and(2). 32 (4) Except,as otherwise specifically provided in this section, 33 county remittances specified in paragraphs(1)and(2)shall not be 34 increased in subsequent years. 35 (5) Any change in statute or rule of court that either reduces the 36 bail schedule or redirects or reduces a county's portion of fee,fine, 37 and forfeiture`revenue to an amount that is less than(A)the fees, 38 fines,and forfeitures retained by that county and(B)the county's 39 portion' of fines and: forfeitures transmitted to the state in the 40 1994-95 fiscal year, shall reduce that county's remittance 9 - 7— SB 1343 1 specified in paragraph(2)of this subdivision by an equal amount. 2 Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit judicial:sentencing 3 discretion. 4 (c) The Department of Finance shall adjust the amount 5 specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) that a county is 6 'required to submit to the state,pursuant to the following: 7 (1) A county shall submit a declaration to the Department of 8 Finance, no later than February 15, 1998, that the amount it is 9 required to 'submit to the state"pursuant to paragraph (1) of 10 subdivision (b) either includes or does not include the costs for 11 local judicial'benefits which are court operation costs as defined 12 in Section 77003 and Rule 810 of the California Rules of Court. 13 ;The trial courts in a county that submits such a declaration shall be 14 given a copy of the declaration and the opportunity to comment on 15 the validity of the statements in the declaration. The Department 16 of Finance shall verify the facts in the county's declaration and 17 comments,if any. Upon verification that the amount the county is 18 required to submit to the state includes the costs of local judicial 19 'benefits,the department shall reduce on or before June 30, 1998, 20 .the amount the county is required to submit to the state pursuant 21 to paragraph(1)of subdivision(b)by an amount equal to the cost 22 of these judicial benefits,in which case the county shall continue 23 to be responsible for the cost of those benefits. If a county 24 'disagrees with the Department of Finance's failure to verify the 25 facts in the county's declaration and reduce the amount the county 26 is required to submit to the state pursuant to paragraph (l) of 27 subdivision(b),the county may request that the Controller conduct 28 an audit to verify the facts in the county's declaration. The 29 Controller shall conduct the requested audit which shall be at the 30 ,requesting county's expense. If the Controller's'audit verifies the 31 facts in the county's declaration, the department shall reduce the 32 amount the county is required to'submit to the state pursuant to 33 paragraph(1)of subdivision(b)by an amount equal to the amount 34 verified by the Controller's audit and the state shall reimburse the 35 requesting county for the cost of the audit. 36 (d) The Department of Finance shall adjust the amount 37 specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 772€11.1 38 that a county is required to submit to the state, pursuant to the 39 following procedures: 99 SB '1343 —8- 1 -8-1 (1) A county may submit a declaration to the Department of 2 'Finance,no later than February 15, 1998,that declares that(A)the 3 county incorrectly reported county costs as court operations costs 4 as defined in Section 77003 in the 1994-95 fiscal year, and that 5 `'incorrect report resulted in the amount the county is required to 6 :submit to the state pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) 7 'being too high,(B)the amount the county is required to submit to 8 the state pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) includes 9 'amounts that were specifically appropriated, funded, and 10 expended by a county or city and county during the 1994-95 fiscal 11 year to fund extraordinary one-time expenditures for court 12 operation casts,or(C)the amount the county is required to submit 13 to the state pursuant to paragraph(1)of subdivision(b)includes 14 expenses that were'funded from grants or subventions from any 15 source, for court operation costs that could not have been funded 16 without those grants or subventions being available. A county 17 submitting that declaration shall concurrently transmit a copy of 18 the declaration to the trial courts of that county.The trial courts in 19 a county that submits that declaration shall have the opportunity' 20 to comment to the Department of Finance on the validity of the 21 statements in the declaration. Upon receipt of the declaration:.and 22 comments,if any, the Department of Finance shall determine and 23 certify which costs:.identified in the county's declaration were 24 incorrectly reported as court operation costs or were expended for 25 'extraordinary one-time expenditures or funded from grants or 26 subventions in the 1994-95 fiscal year. The Department of 27 Finance shall reduce the amount a county must submit to the state 28 pursuant to paragraph(1)of subdivision(b)of Section 77201.1 by 29 an amount equal to the amount the department certifies was 30 incorrectly reported as court operations costs or were expended for 31 extraordinary one-time expense or funded from grants or 32 subventions in the 1994-95 fiscal year.If a county disagrees with 33 the Department of Finance's failure to verify the facts in the 34 county's declaration and reduce the amount the county is required 35 to submit to the state pursuant to paragraph(1)of subdivision(b) 36 of Section 77201.1, the county may request that the Controller 37 conduct an audit to verify the facts in the county's declaration.The 38 Controller shall conduct the requested audit,which shall be at the 39 requesting;county's expense. If the Controller's audit verifies.the '> 40 facts in the county's declaration, the department shall reduce'the s -9— SB 1343 1 amount the county is required to'submit to the state pursuant to 2 paragraph(1)of subdivision (b)of Section 77201.1 by an amount 3 'equal to the amount verified by the Controller's audit and the state 4 shall reimburse the requesting county for the cast of the audit. A 5 county shall provide, at no charge to the court, any service for 6 which the amount in paragraph(1)of subdivision(b)'of Section 777201.1 was adjusted downward, if the county is required to 8 ;provide that service at no cost to the court by any other provision 9 of law. 10 (2) A court may;submit a declaration to the Department of 11 Finance,no later than February 15, 1998,that the county failed to 12 report county costs as court operations casts as defined'in Section 13 77003 in the 1994-95 fiscal year,and that this failure resulted in 14 the amount the county is required to submit to the state pursuant 15 to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) being too low. A court 16 submitting that declaration'shall concurrently transmit a copy of 17 the declaration to the county. A county shall have the opportunity 18 to comment to the Department of Finance on the validity of 19 statements in the declaration and comments,if any.Upon receipt 20 of the declaration,the Department of Finance shall determine and 21 certify which costs identified in the court's declaration should have 22 been reported by the county as court' operation costs in the 23 1994-95 fiscal year and whether this failure resulted in the amount 24 the county is required to submit to the state pursuant to paragraph 25 (l)of subdivision(b)being too low. The Department'of Finance 26 shall notify the county, the trial courts in the county, and the 27 Judicial Council of its certification and decision. Within 30 days, 28 the county shall either notify the Department'of Finance, trial 29 courts in the county,and the Judicial Council that the county shall 30 ..assume responsibility for the costs the county has failed to report, 31 or that the department shall increase the amount the county is 32 required to submit to the state pursuant to:paragraph (1) of 33 subdivision ( ) of Section 77201.1 by an amount equal to the 34 amount certified by the department.A county shall not be required 35 to continue to provide services for which the amount in paragraph 36 °(1)of subdivision(b)of Section 77201.1 was adjusted upward. 37 (e) The Legislature hereby finds and declares that to ensure an 38 orderly transition to state trial court funding, it is necessary to 39 delay the adjustments to county obligation payments provided'for 40 by Article 3 (commencing with Section 77200)of Chapter 13 of 99 SB 1343 —10— I - 10-1 Title 8,as added by Chapter 850 of the Statutes of 1997,until the 2 1998-99 fiscal year. The Legislature also finds and declares that 3 since increase adjustments to the county obligation amounts will 4 not take effect in the 1997-98 fiscal year,county charges for those 5 services related to the increase adjustments shall not occur in the 6 1997--98 fiscal year. It is recognized that the counties have an 7 'obligation to provide,and the trial courts have an obligation to pay, 8 for services provided by the county pursuant to Section 7721:2. In 9 the 1997-98°fiscal year, the counties shall charge for, and the 10 courts shall pay,these obligations consistent with paragraphs(1) 11 and(2)of this subdivision'. 12 (1) For the 1997-98 fiscal year, a county;shall reduce the 13 ''charges to a court for those services for which the amount in. 14 paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 772011.1 is adjusted 15 upward,by an amount equal to the lesser of the following: 16 (A) The amount of the increase adjustment certified by the 17 department pursuant to paragraph (2)of subdivision(d). 18 (B) ,The difference between the actual amount charged and paid 19 for from the trial court operations fund, and the amount charged 20 in the 1994-95 fiscal year: 21 (2) For the 1997-98 fiscal year, any funds paid out of the trial 22 court operations fund established pursuant to Section 770019 23 during the 1997-98 fiscal year to pay for those services for which 24 there was an upward'adjustment,shall be returned to the trial court 25 operations fund in the amount equal to the lesser of the following: 26 (A) The amount of the increase adjustment certified by the 27 department pursuant to paragraph(2)of subdivision(d). 28 (B) The difference between the actual amount charged and paid 29 for from the trial court operations fund, and the amount charged' 30 in the 1994-95 fiscal year. 31 (3) The Judicial Council shall reduce the allocation to the 32 courts by an amount equal to the amount of any increase 33 adjustment certified by the Department of Finance, if the cost of 34 those services was used in determining the Judicial Council's 35 allocation of funding for the 1997-98 fiscal year, 36 " (4) In the event the charges are :not reduced as provided in 37 paragraph (1) or the funds are not returned to the trial court 38 operations fund as provided in paragraph (2), the trial court 39 operations fund shall be refunded for the 1998--99 fiscal year. 40 Funds provided to the trial'court operations fund pursuant to this �s --- 11— SB 1343 1 paragraph shall be available to the trial courts to meet financial 2 obligations incurred during the 1997-98 fiscal year.To the extent 3 that a trial court receives total resources for trial court funding 4 from the county and the state for the 1997-9 fiscal year that 5 exceeded the amount of the allocation approved by the Judicial b Council by November 30, 1997,these amounts shall be available 7 for expenditure in the 1998---99 fiscal year and the Judicial Council 8 shall reduce the 1998-99 fiscal year allocation of the court by an 9 equal amount. 10 (f) Nothing in this section is intended to relieve a county of the 11 responsibility to provide necessary and suitable court facilities 12 pursuant to Section 68073 13 (g) Nothing in this section is intended to relieve a county of the 14 responsibility for justice-related expenses not included in Section 15 77003 'which are otherwise required of the county by law, 16 including,but not limited to,indigent defense representation and 17 investigation,and paymentof youth authority charges: 18 (h) The Department of Finance shall:notify'the county, trial 19 courts in the county,and Judicial Council of the final decision and 20 resulting adjustment. 21 (i) On or before February 15, 1998, each county shall submit' 22 to the Department of Finance a report of the mount it expended 23 for trial court operations as defined in Section 77003 and Rule`810 24 of the California Rules of Court as it read on July 1, 1996,between 25 the start of the 1997=98 fiscal year and the effective date of this 26 section. The department shall reduce the amount a county is 27 required to remit to the 'state pursuant to paragraph (1) of 28 subdivision(b)in the 1997=98 fiscal year by an amount equal to 29 the amount a county expended for court operation costs between 30 the start of the 1997-98 fiscal year and the effective date of this 31 section.The department shall also reduce the amount a county is 32 required to remit to the state pursuant to paragraph (2)' of 33 subdivision(b)in the 1997-98 fiscal year by an amount equal to 34 the amount of fine and forfeiture revenue that a county remitted to 35 the state between the start'of the 1997-98 fiscal year and the 36 effective date of this section. The department shall notify the 37 county,the trial courts of the county, and the Judicial Council of 38 the amount it has reduced a county's obligation to remit to the state 39 pursuant to this subdivision. 99" SB1343 —12 1 SEC. 3. Section 77201.1 of the Government Code is amended 2 to read: 3 77201.E (a) Commencing on July 1, 1997, no county shall 4 be responsible for funding court-operations,as defined in Section 5 77003 and Rule 810 of the California Rules of Court as it read on 6' July 1, 1996: 7 (b) Commencing in the 1999-2000 fiscal year,and each fiscal 8 year thereafter, each county shall remit to the state in four equal 9 installments due on October 1,January 1,April'1, and May 1,the 10 amounts specified in paragraphs(1)- , (2), and 3,as follows; 11 (1) 'Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section, 12 each county shall remit to the state the amount listed below which: 13 is basedd on an amount expended by the respective county for court 14 operations during the 1994-95 fiscal year: 15 16' Jurisdiction Amount 17 Alameda . . ..... .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. $ 22,509,905; 18 Alpine ... . .. . . . . . _ 19 Amador . .... ........ .. ... ...... .. .. . . .. 20 Butte . .. ................. . .. _ 21 Calaveras .. ... .. . .............. .... .. 22 Colusa .. . .. .. 23' Contra Costa .. ... 11,974,535 24` Del Norte .. .... .. .... ..... . .. .. ... ...... 25 El Dorado . .. .. ... , .. .. .. . .. .. .. 26 Fresno. .. . . .. .. .. ... ,. . .. .. .. . 11,222,78 ' 27' Glenn r .. ..... ...... .. .... .. .. . . .. 28 Humboldt 29 Imperial . .. .. . .. . . .. . . . . 30 Inyo' . . .. . .. .. ... 31 Kern .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . . .. ... .. . .. . .. .. .. . . 9,234,511 32 Kings . . . .. ... 33 Lake . .. .. . .. 34 Lassen' . . .. , . .. - 35 Los Angeles .. . . .. ... . . . 175,330,647 36 Madera ............. ........ .. , 37 Marin ........... ....................... 38 Mariposa .. ..... — 39 Mendocino . . . . . . ... . .... .. 40 Merced . 94 -13 SB 1343 1 Modoc> ... 2 Mono ... .... ....... .... ...... .... .. .. .. _ 3 Monterey .. 4,520,911 4 Napa . ... . .. . _ 5 Nevada .. .. .. . . 6 Orange' . .. . . .. . 38,846,003 7 Placer . .... . ... . ... .... . ...... . . . 8 Plumas .. . .. .. . .. . 9 Riverside . . . .. . . .. . . . . ... 17,857,241 ... . . ..... . .. 10 Sacramento .. .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . 20,733,264 11 San Benito . . . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . 12 San Bernardino . . . . .. . ... .. . .. .. 20,227,102 13 San Diego.. . . . . . . .. .. .. . .. . .. . . . . . .. .. .. 43,495,932 14 San Francisco; .. .. . ... 19,295,303 15 San Joaquin . . . ... . 6,543,068 16 San Luis'Obispo . .... .. . . . . . .. .. .. .. ... ... 17 San Mateo 12,181,079 18 Santa Barbara .... ... .. 6,764,792 19 Santa Clara . . . . ..... .... ... .. ...... .... .. 28,689,450 20 Santa Cruz ... .. _ 21 Shasta .. . .. . 22 Sierra . . .. 23 Siskiyou . .. .. .... .. ... . . .. ........ ...... _ 24 Solano . .. 6,242,661 25 Sonoma', . ..... .. . .. . . . . ... .. .... .. ... ... 6,162,466 26 Stanislaus .. . .. . . ... 3,506,297 27 Sutter ... .. . . .. . . . .. .. ... 28 Tehama . . .... . _ 29 Trinity .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. .... — 30 Tulare. .. .. . . . . . . . . .... . — 31 Tuolumne . . . .. . . .. .. . 32 ventara'.. .. ... ... . . .. 9,734,190 33 Yolo ... . .. ... .. .. .. .. ..... .. ... . 34 Yuba .. .. . ... .. .... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. 35 36 (2) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section, 37 each county shall also remit to the state the amount listed below 38 which is based on an amount of fine and forfeiture 'revenue 39 remitted to the Mate pursuant to Sections 27361 and 76000 of this 40 code, Sections 1463.001, 1463.07, and 1464 of the Penal Code, 99 SB 1343 —14- 1 and Sections 42007; 42007.1, and. 42008 of the Vehicle Cade 2 during the 1994-95 fiscal year: 3 4 Jurisdiction Amount 5 Alameda . . . . ... . . $ 9,912,156 6 Alpine'......... ... .. ... .. . . 58,757 7 Amador .. . .. . . . ... . 265,707 8 Butte . .... .... . .. 1,217,052 9 Calaveras .......... . . . .. . . .. .... ...... .. .. 310,331 10 Colusa, . ... .. . . . .. . .. .. 397,468 11 Contra Costa .. . . . .. . . . 4,486,486 12 bel Norte . ... ........ .. .. .. .. . 124,085 13 El Dorado .... .. .. .. ...... 1,028,349 14 Fresno .. .., . .,, 3,695,633 15 Glenn . . ... 360,974 16 Humboldt .. . . ... . ... 1,025,583 17 Imperial . . .. . . ... . .. . . .. 1,144,661 18 Inyo ... . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . 614,920 19 Kern .. . .. .. 5,530,972 20 Kings .. . . . . . .... . . . .. . .. . . . . . . 982,208 21 Lake .... . .. ... . 375,570 22 Lassen .. . . . ...... .. .. 430,163 23 Los Angeles .. .. .. . .... 71,002,129 24 Madera ... . ... . .. . .. .. .. . . 1,042,797 25 Marin . .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. ... 2,111,712 26 Mariposa ... .. 135,457 27 Mendocino . ........ . . .. .. . .... .. .. ..... ... 717,075 28 Merced .. ... 1,733,156 29 Modoc ..., . .. .......... 104,729 30 Mono ....... .. ........ ....... ...... ..... . 415,136 31 Monterey ...... .. .... ... ........ . .. ...... 3,330,125 32 Napa . . .. .. ...... .... . . .. 719,168 33 Nevada . . .. . .... . .. ... .. 1,220,686 34 Orange . . 19,572,810 35Placer' . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ... 1,243,754 36 Plumas . ... . .. . .. 193,772 37 Riverside .. 7,681,744 38 Sacramento 5,937,204 39 San Benito . . . . . . .............. 302,324 99 -15— SB 1343` 1 San Bernardino ... 8,153,193 2" San Diego. 15,166,735 3' San Francisco . . . 4,046,107 4 San Joaquin; ... 3,562,835 5 San Luis Obispo :. .. . . ... . ..:.. .. .... .. 2,036,515 6 San Mateo . .. .. .. . 4,831;497 7 Santa Barbara....:. . . : > . .. ., .. . ._ 3,277;510 8 SantaClara . .... — . ... .. . . .. . 11,597,583 9 Santa Cruz . . . . 1,902,696 10 Shasta . . .. .. . . . . .. . .... . . .. . . . 1,044,700 11' Sierra 42;533, 12 Siskiyou ... 615,581 13 Solano ... .. 2,708,75$ 14 Sonoma 2,315,999 15 Stanislaus .... .......... ... . . ... 1,855;169 16 Sutter 678,681 17 Tehama ... .. 644,303 18 'Trinity .. . .. . . . .. ... . .. . . 137,087 19 Tulare . .. . .. .. 1,840,422 20' Tuolumne 361,665 21 Ventura . ... . . . 4,575,349 22 Yalo . . . . 880,798 23 Yuba .. .. . . 289,325 24 25 (3) For the 1999 2000fiscal year and the 2000---01 fiscal year, ; 26- the annual amount ofine andforfeiture revenue that Contra Costa 27 County shall remit pursuant to paragraph (2) is four'million one 28 hundred sixty-eight thousand one Hundred ninety-four dollars 29 ($4,168,194). Commencing in the 2001--02 fiscal year, Contra 30 Costa County shall remit the annual amount offzne andforfeiture 31` revenue specified in paragraph (2). 32 (4) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section, 33 county remittances specified in paragraphs(I)- ,'(2), and (3) 34; shall not be increased in subsequent years. 35' 36 (5) Except for those counties with a population of 70,000, or ` 37 less,on January 1, 1996,the amount a county is required to remit 38 pursuant to paragraph(1)shall be adjusted by the amount equal to 39 any adjustment resulting from the procedures in subdivisions(c) 40 and(d)of Section 77201 as that section read on Jane 30, 1998, to 99 SB 1343 —16— I the extent a county filed an appeal with the Controller with respect 2 to the findings trade by the Department of Finance.This paragraph 3 shall not be construed to establish a new appeal process beyond 4what was provided by Section 77201,as that section read on June 5 30, 1948. 6 f} 7 (6) Any change in statute or rule of court that either reduces the 8 bail schedule or redirects or reduces a county's portion of fee,'fine, 9 and forfeiture revenue to an amount that is less than(A)the fees, 10 fines,and forfeitures retained by that county;and(B)the county's 11 portion of fines and forfeitures transmitted to the state in the 12 1994- 5 fiscal year, shall reduce that county's remittance 13 specified in paragraph(2)of this subdivision by an equal amount. 14 Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit judicial''sentencing 15 discretion. 16 (c) Nothing in this section is intended to relieve a county of the 17' responsibility to provide necessary and suitable court facilities' 18 pursuant to Section'68073. 19 (d);Nothing in this section is intended'to relieve a county of the 20 responsibility for justice-related expenses not included in Section 21 77003' which are otherwise required of the county by law, 22 including,but not limited to,indigent defense representation and 23 investigation,and payment of youth authority charges. 24 (e) ';County base year remittance requirements specified in 25 paragraph(2)of subdivision(b)incorporate specific reductions to 26 'reflect those' instances where the Department of Finance has 27 determined that a county's remittance to both the General Fund 28 and the Trial Court Trust Fund during the 1994-95 fiscal year 29 exceeded the aggregate aount of state funding from the General 30 Fund and the Trial Court Trust Fund.The amount of the reduction 31 was determined by calculating the difference between the amount 32 the county remitted to the General Fund and the Trial Court Trust 33 "Fund and the aggregate amount of state support from the General 34 Fund and the Trial Court Trust Fund allocated to the county's trial 35 courts. In making its determination of whether a county is entitled 36 to a reduction pursuant to that'paragraph, the Department of 37 Finance subtracted from county revenues remitted to the state,all 38 moneys derived from the fee required by Section 42007.1 of the 39 Vehicle Code and the parking surcharge;required by subdivision 40 (c)of Section 76000. -17— SB 1343 1 (f) Notwithstanding subdivision (e), the Department of 2 Finance shall not reduce a county's base year remittance 3 requirement,as specified in paragraph(2)of subdivision(b),if the 4 county's trial court''funding allocation was modified pursuant to 5 the amendments to the allocation formula set forth in paragraph(4) 6 of subdivision(d)of Section 77200,as amended by Chapter 2 of 7 the Statutes of 1993,to provide a stable level of funding for small 8 county courts in response to reductions in the General Fund 9 support for the trial courts 10 (g) In any fiscalyear in which a county of the first class,pays 11 the employer-paid retirement contribution for court employees,or 12 any other employees of the county who provide a service to the 13 court,and the amounts of hose payments are charged to the budget 14 of the courts, the sum the county is required,to pay to the state 15 pursuant to paragraph(1)of subdivision(b)shall be increased by 16 the actual amount charged to the trial court up to twenty-three 17 million five hundred twenty-seven 'thousand nine hundred 18 forty-nine dollars($23,527,949)in that fiscal year.The county and 19 the trial court shall report to the Controller and the Department of 20' Finance the actual amount charged in that fiscal year: 21' (h) This section shall become''operative on July 1,:1999. t)