HBA-CBW C.S.H.B. 2300 77(R)BILL ANALYSIS Office of House Bill AnalysisC.S.H.B. 2300 By: Thompson Judicial Affairs 3/23/2001 Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE For many years, the state's creation of district courts has lagged behind the caseload of those courts. In response to this problem, counties have requested that the legislature create statutory county courts and increase the jurisdiction of those courts to attempt to handle the surplus caseloads of the district courts. Since 1991, there have been several bills passed providing funding to statutory county courts and attempting to ensure minimum salaries for judges. All of these bills relied on filing fees and court costs for funding. Last session, state revenue was added to the funding generated by the fees and costs, but the constitutionality of the funding was questioned because the funding was not uniform in every statutory county court. Additional funding is needed from the state to pay for the cost of maintaining county courts. C.S.H.B. 2300 allows the state to retain fees, requires all counties with statutory county courts to charge fees, and requires the state to provide equal funding for each statutory court judge. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the opinion of the Office of House Bill Analysis that this bill does not expressly delegate any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution. ANALYSIS C.S.H.B. 2300 amends the Government Code to require a statutory court judge to be paid a total of $1,000 less than the total annual salary received by a district judge in the county at any time, rather than on August 31, 1999. The bill removes the salary payment exemption for a statutory county court judge who engages in the private practice of law or a judge in whose court additional fees and costs are not collected. The bill deletes existing text stating that the commissioners court sets the salary of each statutory county court judge who engages in the private practice of law or in whose court additional fees and costs are not collected. A county is not required to meet the salary requirements for a particular court if the county increases the salary of each statutory county judge in the county to an amount that is at least $40,000, instead of $28,000, more than the salary the judge was entitled to on May 1 of the year the county initially begins collecting additional court fees and costs (Sec. 25.0005). The bill requires the state to annually compensate each county in an amount that is $52,000 less than the state salary provided for a district judge under the General Appropriations Act, rather than $35,000 for each statutory county court judge in the county who does not engage in the private practice of law. The bill deletes the provision that requires that of each $35,000 paid to a county, $30,000 is required to be paid from funds appropriated from the judicial fund, and $5,000 is required to be paid from funds appropriated from the general revenue fund (Sec. 25.0015). The bill deletes existing text relating to additional court fees and costs collected under certain conditions (Sec. 51.702). The bill deletes the provision that at least 40 percent of the functions that the county judge performs need to be judicial functions to entitle the judge to a supplemental annual salary (Sec. 26.006). The bill requires the county clerk to send $50 of each fee collected to the comptroller at least as frequently as monthly (Sec. 51.702). The bill increases from $40 to $55 the filing fee in each civil case collected by the clerk (Secs. 51.702 and 51.703). The bill prohibits a statutory county court judge from engaging in the private practice of law (Sec. 25.0019). The bill deletes provisions prohibiting judges of a county court at law from engaging in the private practice of law (SECTION 23). The Act takes effect only if proposed House Bill 1884 is enacted and becomes law. EFFECTIVE DATE September 1, 2001. The bill provides that provisions relating to judge's salary, state contribution, and judicial functions of a judge take effect October 1, 2001. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE C.S.H.B. 2300 differs from the original bill to reinstate and modify the provision stating that a county is not required to meet the salary requirements for a particular court if the county increases the salary of each statutory county court judge in the county to at least $40,000 more, rather than $28,000 more, than the judge was entitled to receive on May 1 of the year the county initially begins collecting additional court fees and costs (Sec. 25.0005). The substitute decreases from $1,000 less than the state salary provided for a district judge under the General Appropriations Act to $52,000, less than such a salary the amount of which the state is required to compensate each county for each statutory county court judge in the county without regard to jurisdiction or specified exceptions. The bill requires the county clerk to send $50 of each fee collected to the comptroller at least monthly. The substitute increases from $40 to $55 the filing fees collected by the clerk (Secs. 25.0015, 51.702, and 51.703). The substitute differs from the original bill by providing that the Act takes effect only if proposed House Bill 1884 is enacted and becomes law.