1524-S AMH .... H2283.2

SHB 1524 - H AMD 000306 ADOPTED 3-26-93

By Representative Locke

    On page 2, after line 1, insert the following:

     "Sec. 102.  1992 c 232  s 113 (uncodified) is amended to read as follows:

    FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE COURTS

General Fund Appropriation........................ $ ((27,687,000))

27,921,000

Public Safety and Education Account Appropriation. $... 26,352,000

Judicial Information System Account Appropriation. $...... 200,000

Drug Enforcement and Education Account

    Appropriation................................. $...... 850,000

           TOTAL APPROPRIATION.................... $ ((55,089,000))

55,323,000

    The appropriations in this section are subject to the following conditions and limitations:

    (1) $((20,850,000)) 21,084,000 of the general fund appropriation is provided solely for the superior court judges program.  Of this amount, a maximum of $150,000 may be used to reimburse county superior courts for superior court judges temporarily assigned to other counties that are experiencing large and sudden surges in criminal filings.  Reimbursement shall be limited to per diem and travel expenses of assigned judges.

    (2) $1,744,000 of the public safety and education account appropriation is provided solely to install the district court information system (DISCIS) at forty-two district court sites.  When providing equipment upgrades to an existing site, an equal amount of local matching funds shall be provided by the local jurisdictions.

    (3) $217,000 of the public safety and education account appropriation is provided solely to contract with the state board for community college education to pay for court interpreter training classes in at least six community colleges for a total of at least 200 financially needy students, who shall be charged reduced tuition based on level of need.  Other students may be served by charging the full tuition needed to recover costs.

    (4) $688,000 of the general fund appropriation is provided solely to implement chapter 127, Laws of 1991 (Second Substitute Senate Bill No. 5127, foster care citizen review).

    (5) $6,507,000 of the public safety and education account appropriation and $850,000 of the drug enforcement and education account appropriation are provided solely for the continuation of treatment-alternatives-to-street-crimes (TASC) programs in Pierce, Snohomish, Clark, King, Spokane, and Yakima counties.

    (6) In implementing the cost reduction measures required by this act, the administrator for the courts may enter into agreements with other judicial agencies to make efficient and effective use of available financial resources within the judicial branch.

    (7) $345,000 of the general fund--state appropriation is provided solely for implementation of Substitute House Bill No. 2459.  The amount provided in this subsection is contingent on enactment of Substitute House Bill No. 2459 (superior court judges) and House Bill No. 2887 or 2997 (appellate court filing fees).  If neither House Bill No. 2887 or 2997 is enacted by June 30, 1992, the amount provided in this subsection shall lapse.

    (8) $10,000 of the general fund appropriation is provided solely for the jury source list task force to continue to develop methodology and standards for merging the list of registered voters with the list of licensed drivers and identicard holders to form an expanded jury source list for use in the state.  The task force shall include the department of information services.  By November 2, 1992, the task force shall report its recommendations to the supreme court and the appropriate committees of the legislature.  However, if Substitute House Bill No. 2945 is enacted by June 30, 1992, the amount provided in this subsection is provided solely to implement the bill."

    Renumber the remaining sections consecutively and correct internal references accordingly.

EFFECT:  Increases the general fund state appropriation to the Office of the Administrator for the Courts by $234,000.  The increase is needed to reimburse counties for higher than anticipated arbitration costs in managing their superior court caseloads.

                            --- END ---