Below are edited notes taken during the meeting of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Judiciary and Public Safety held on Friday, February 3, 2012.  It is not a complete transcript of the meeting.  Those presenting to the subcommittee are in bold type.

State Supreme Court Chief Justice Steven Taylor: This year if we can operate with what we had last year, we’ll be okay. Our operation is such that if we can keep things the way we have them now, we’re still going to be okay. Three years ago we got $20M and two years ago it was $16M and then this year it’s $7M in appropriated dollars. The judges of the district courts are doing a magnificent job in seeing after collections of court costs and fees. We’ve introduced credit card system for such costs which makes it easier. We have a warrant collection program that lets a private company collect past due court costs which frees up sheriff’s deputies. The judges and court clerks get credit for the fact that the collections are going well.

Supreme Court and Court of Appeals can survive on standstill plus some small adjustments. The Uniform Case Management System – we are working on that now. There was a long design process. We’re operating on a Model-T kind of operation now. It’s akin to building a house and right now we’re pouring the footings and the slab.

The courts are operating well and efficiently. The judges are working hard. They are sacrificing a more lucrative life practicing law.

I would say that caseloads are all manageable. Some are down, some are up. I don’t think we have any critical situations in any of the 77-counties.  When we do have a county that has a high caseload or there’s a vacancy due to a resignation, we move judges around. We view the judges as state judges and if we need a Cleveland County judge to go to Holdenville, we do that. Same for court reporters. That’s how you keep from hiring more court reporters and judges.

The Court of Criminal Appeals is turning cases around faster than they ever have before. The Court of Civil Appeals is moving cases through as well.

Lerblance: there’s been a lot of news about pay for statewide officials which is based on judges pay.  Is the Court planning on these increases? Taylor: we put those numbers in there so you would know what the cost would be if you let the raises go through. We didn’t put them there in an advocacy role. We respect the system and the process and we did not ask for a raise. The Board of Judicial Compensation made its report and then you under the law review and dispose of it. I’m not going to put my office in the role of lobbyist or advocate. It is important that you keep in mind that the quality of the judiciary depends on attracting young lawyers to the profession. You want the best and brightest and competing with jobs that offer a lot more money. But I’m not in this for the money. I would have a whole lot better financial life if I was a private lawyer the last 28-years.  I’ve had conversations with  Bingman and Steele in the last two weeks and I thank them for having the conversations.

Lerblance: your revolving funds have decreased, was that money used for ongoing costs? Taylor: yes, that was part of the deal made in the budget last year.  That’s how we went from $20M two years ago to $7.6M now. The difference came from revolving funds. District courts cost $60M to run, but they are, in a huge way, mostly self-sustaining.

Taylor: the judges are entitled to a pay raise, but then so are a lot of state workers. But I know the reality of the economy and the state budget.

Shortey: what is the time frame for the uniform Case Management System? Vice-Chief Tom Colbert: I think the first county will roll out later this year.  We’ll have seven counties out by 2013 and all 77 counties by the end of 2014. Taylor: I’m hoping that when we finish this, we will have money left over. And when that happens, my advice would be to reduce the $25 court fee that was imposed to pay for it. Or you could continue that fee and reduce the state appropriations for the District courts. Shortey: I appreciate that we’re doing this without incurring any debt. Taylor: no debt and it’s the people using the courts that are paying for it.

Shortey: why shouldn’t we consider legislation to have term limits for Supreme Court Justices? Taylor: speaking only for myself and not the Court, when you are running an organization and you’re hoping you’re going to have the best people, you want the ones at the top of their game. I worry that term limits take someone who is at the top of their game and show them the door. I’ve been a judge for 28-years; 21 as a trial judge and seven on the Supreme Court. I thought I was a good trial judge in my 10^th year, but I was a far better judge in my 18^th year. Judging is a craft, an art. It’s a thing of beauty. It’s something you learn from sitting in the courtroom. It takes years to get that feeling.

Lerblance: in the event the Court of Criminal Appeals were abolished, how would that affect your turnaround time? Taylor: it would have a significant effect. Colbert: it would put Civil cases on the back burner because the criminal cases have to come first.  We have the best system in the country along with Texas.

Court of Criminal Appeals Presiding Judge Arlene Johnson: Our story is very different from that you’ve heard from the Supreme Court. We are a court of last resort with exclusive jurisdiction in criminal cases. There is appeal to the US Supreme Court. What happens frequently is review by federal courts. Our work is in many ways the face of this state. We have to be right and we have to be timely.

In the late 80s or early 90s the state was sued because of the delay on the Criminal Court of Appeals. It was settled, but we make sure that never happens again. In FY2011 we handled 2,800 matters. Of those, fully a thousand are no-brainers: motions to extend deadlines, etc. But they have to be processed through our staff so they certainly take staff time. We did 600 orders which frequently involve significant issues. We also had 1,231 appeals. We do this with five judges and 23 FTE. 95% of our budget is salary and related expenses. When you look at a salary, you have to add 27% for benefits, retirement and so on.

We stand alone. We have no other source of income than the appropriation we get from you. We don’t have fines or fees. We have learned to be very frugal. Our staff has not had raises in five years. In FY2011 we furloughed our staff one day per month for six months. Here’s what we need: 361,000 of new money. That’s 11% higher than last year’s budget. I know that’s not a popular position, but over past 5 fiscal years, we’ve had 9% reduction in our budget. We’ve survived primarily because we’ve had unfilled vacancies. That would cover the judicial raises if they go through. That amount is about $54K of the $361K.

With or without an increase in judicial salaries, we can’t have a standstill budget and continue to perform as we have to perform. The costs – primarily benefits – don’t stand still. So, that’s our story.

Nichols: so if there were no raises for judges or staff, there would still be a need for an increase of $95K? Johnson: yes, that’s right.

Shortey: does the Uniform Case Management System help you? Johnson: that’s a complex question. We had a system that was not connected, but it worked well for us. Now we’ve merged with the Supreme Court system. We might have preferred to keep our own system, but that was costly.

Shortey: would it help if the Criminal Court of Appeals got some of the court cost fees? Vice Presiding Judge David Lewis: That would make some sense. It’s a viable discussion to improve the most efficient court system in the state.

Michael C. Thompson, Department of Public Safety Commissioner: We’ve been cut about $14M over last couple years. FTEs are at 1,351 down from 1,664 three years ago. Down to 36 Driver’s License stations in the state right now. Our trooper strength is as low as it’s been in the last 22 years. Hard to provide level of service needed. Not trying to be alarmist, but at 759 troopers, we need to put money into our Highway Patrol or we will continue to struggle to provide the level of service. Putting troopers at risk by not having a partner. When nearest backup is 45-minutes away, a lot can happen in 45 minutes. We’ve lost 84 troopers to retirement since our last patrol school.

Barrington: What is the cost of an academy? Thompson: it’s $133K per cadet and the largest academy we can do is 75 cadets. That covers everything for a year. So for a 75-cadet school, it’s about $9.75M.

Shortey: I think troopers are an essential function of government. Can you give us an update on efficiencies you’ve achieved? Thompson: In my heart I believe Public Safety is a core function of government as well. We’ve done top-down review. We won’t accept as an answer “it’s what we’ve always done.” We need to tackle communications. DL services are always an issue. We’re looking at a plan we think will help us reduce the size of govt by letting some private folks with an interest in it provide that service. And with the money we’d audit those services.

Lerblance: has permitting process computerization for overweight vehicles started up yet? Thompson: yes. We’re doing about 950 permits per day. We think we need to be over 11-hundred.

Nichols: can you comment on your request for supplemental funding? Thompson: geared totally towards our patrol school. Right now, we have 210 patrol members that could retire right now. In the fall, there will be 26 more. I thought I needed to do something to reverse that trend. The supplemental would be for a patrol school.

Suzanne McClain Atwood District Attorneys Council: State appropriations currently less than half of DAs budgets. We’ve had the third largest cut in terms of % of any agency you oversee. Other big source of revenue is bogus check fees. That’s down because fewer people are writing checks. We expect that trend to continue. Supervision fees are up about $7M over past couple years.

The districts are as varied as the Das themselves. District 2 is furloughing. At least two other districts have had furloughs over the last couple years.

We are requesting reinstatement of funds. Immediate is $1.3M which was most recent loss. It would end furloughs.

Lerblance: is the $40 supervision fee actually working in terms of supervising those on probation or is it just a money-making venture? Atwood: good question. We’re working on getting numbers on that.  28,000 people are on the program that are misdemeanants who were never supervised before. About 10K low-level felons. You all looked at it as a revenue generator. But I agree we need to get the numbers so we can show you the effectiveness of the program.

Stan Florence, OSBI Director: we expect some decreases in federal funding. We rely on that for lab supplies and training lab personnel.  Real critical issue is conducting judicial background checks. That’s creating a backup. Talking w/ judicial nominating Commission to try to streamline that.

Equipment purchases have dropped dramatically. When you try to have staff do more with less, you will eventually get burnout. Worry most about those working crime scenes. We can’t give them the breaks they need. Also the Internet Crimes Against Children division.

Some of the things we’ve cut this year: intelligence office. I have no full-time intelligence operation. There is still intelligence going on, but they all have caseloads. Also reduced oil and gas property crimes division by 75%.

Shortey: How has IT consolidation affected OSBI? Florence: hard to answer. It’s been challenging. A lot of what we do is proprietary.  There is a lot of critical information that needs special care. Federal government requires certain security measures. We think we’re moving in the right direction, but it has been a challenge.

Nichols: your position, how many law enforcement officials do you have under you? Florence: about 350. Nichols: what’s your salary? Florence: $80K Nichols: do you know the last time the OSBI director salary was increased? Florence: I don’t know. Probably when state workers last got a raise. And all my deputies are tied to my salary.