Trial Court Budget Advisory Committee 2014 Meetings

 Item 5: Budget Cost Priorities (BCP) for 2015-2016

- Part 1
- Part 2

Post-meeting summary: A motion was made and approved unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Court Information Technology Management Forum (CITMF) of an increase in $6,868,480 in 2013–2014 to the Telecommunications program’s Judicial Council-approved allocation of $8,740,000. The total recommended budget of $15,608,480 is recommended to be used as follows:

• $3,750,000 for managed network security services for 57 courts;

• $2,100,000 for the master maintenance agreement for 58 courts; and

• $9,758,480 for technology refresh projects for 13 courts with program savings used to provide a new LAN/WAN infrastructure at Alpine Superior Court and prioritize the core technology refresh at Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego Superior Courts.

Zlatko Theodorovic indicated that the recommendation would be presented to the Judicial Council members by way of circulating order so that the item can be addressed without the need to wait for the next formal council meeting.

Item 2: Judicial Council Request Related to Court Interpreter Funding and Reimbursement
Post-meeting summary: This is an information only item at this time. Judge Earl stated that a subcommittee will be formed quickly to develop recommendations for the entire advisory committee, as directed by the Judicial Council, to be presented to the council at its April meeting. Members were asked to let her know if they were interested in participating in the subcommittee.

Item 3: Workload-Based Allocation and Funding Methodology
--New Preliminary Allocation

Adjustment Estimates
--Including Cluster 1 Courts in the

Reallocation of Historical Base Funding (action item)
*Attachment 3A—Updated WAFM Allocation
Adjustment Scenario (p. 25-26)
*Attachment 3B—Recommendation (p. 27)

Post-meeting summary: A motion was made and approved unanimously to recommend that the Judicial Council approve that starting in 2014–2015, Workload-Based Allocation Funding Model (WAFM) cluster 1 courts no longer be exempt from having their historical base funding reallocated using WAFM.

Item 3: Allocation of Domestic Violence—Family Law Interpreter Program Funding (action item)

Part 1: Public Comment and Discussion
Part 2: Presentation

Item 5: Recommendations of the Funding Methodology Subcommittee (action item)

Item 6: Preliminary Recommendations of the Revenue and Expenditure Subcommittee (discussion item)

Part 1: Recommendations 2-9
Part 2: Recommendations 1 and 10 (Telecommunications Support)
Part 3: Recommendations 11-12 (Statewide IT projects and programs)