Introduced
by
The executive recommendation for the FY 2001-2002 Judiciary budget. This appropriates $245.1 million in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), an increase of 5.0 percent compared to the current year’s $233.3 million, the amount enacted in 2000. Of this, $181.7 million will come from the General Fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the current year’s $170.3 million, an increase of 6.7 percent. The funding includes $10 million to pay for increases in judicial salaries, which were included with legislative and executive branch pay increases allowed to go into effect by the legislature under the State Officers Compensation Commission (SOCC) process.
Referred to the Committee on Appropriations
Substitute offered
To adopt a version of the bill recommended by the committee which reported it to the full Senate.
The substitute failed by voice vote
Passed in the Senate 33 to 1 (details)
To adopt a Senate version for the FY 2001-2002 Judiciary budget. This appropriates $247.7 million in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), , an increase of 6.1 percent compared to the current year’s $233.3 million, the amount enacted in 2000. Of this, $184.3 million will come from the General Fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the current year’s $170.3 million, an increase of 8.2 percent. The funding includes $10 million to pay for increases in judicial salaries, which were included with legislative and executive branch pay increases allowed to go into effect by the legislature under the State Officers Compensation Commission (SOCC) process.
Substitute offered
To adopt a version of the bill recommended by the committee which reported it to the full House.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require a set amount of spending on the Wayne county drug treatment courts, rather than a discretionary amount.
The amendment failed 43 to 59 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require budgets for the attorney grievance board and attorney discipline board to be placed on a separate line item in the budget, which would make the amounts spent on those programs more visible.
The amendment failed 50 to 55 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require a set amount of spending on the mental health treatment court program, rather than a discretionary amount.
The amendment failed 49 to 54 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To appropriate more for the state court administrative office.
The amendment failed 50 to 54 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To appropriate less on the judicial technology improvement fund.
The amendment failed 43 to 57 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require the state court administrators office to investigate and report to the legislature any potential cost savings that may be realized by diverting cases from criminal courts to drug treatment courts and mental health treatment courts.
The amendment failed 49 to 53 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To appropriate more for a guardianship ombudsman.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Passed in the House 102 to 3 (details)
To adopt a House version for the FY 2001-2002 Judiciary budget. This appropriates $247.1 million in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), , an increase of 5.9 percent compared to the current year’s $233.3 million, the amount enacted in 2000. Of this, $183.7 million will come from the General Fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the current year’s $170.3 million, an increase of 7.8 percent. The funding includes $10 million to pay for increases in judicial salaries, which were included with legislative and executive branch pay increases allowed to go into effect by the legislature under the State Officers Compensation Commission (SOCC) process.
Failed in the Senate 0 to 35 (details)
To not concur with a House-passed version of the bill, and sent it to a House-Senate conference committee to work out the differences.
Received
Passed in the Senate 35 to 0 (details)
To adopt a House-Senate conference report for the FY 2001-2002 Judiciary budget. This appropriates $243.2 million in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), an increase of 4.2 percent compared to the current year’s $233.3 million, the amount enacted in 2000. Of this, $179.8 million will come from the General Fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), an increase of 5.5 percent compared to the current year’s $170.3 million. The funding includes $10 million to pay for increases in judicial salaries, which were included with legislative and executive branch pay increases allowed to go into effect by the legislature under the State Officers Compensation Commission (SOCC) process.
Passed in the House 104 to 2 (details)
To adopt a House-Senate conference report for the FY 2001-2002 Judiciary budget. This appropriates $246 million in gross spending (funded from all sources, including state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars), compared to the current year's $236.9 million, an increase of to adopt a House-Senate conference report for the FY 2001-2002 Judiciary budget. This appropriates $243.2 million in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), an increase of 4.2 percent compared to the current year’s $233.3 million, the amount enacted in 2000. Of this, $179.8 million will come from the General Fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), an increase of 5.5 percent compared to the current year’s $170.3 million. The funding includes $10 million to pay for increases in judicial salaries, which were included with legislative and executive branch pay increases allowed to go into effect by the legislature under the State Officers Compensation Commission (SOCC) process.
