Bill Summary – FastDemocracy

The Florida Senate
                      BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
                  (This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.)
                             Prepared By: The Professional Staff of the Committee on Fiscal Policy
BILL:                SB 570
INTRODUCER:          Senators Burgess and Grall
SUBJECT:             Alternative Headquarters for District Court of Appeal Judges
DATE:                February 13, 2024              REVISED:
             ANALYST                      STAFF DIRECTOR                 REFERENCE                                 ACTION
1. Davis                                Cibula                                JU              Favorable
2. Kolich                               Harkness                              ACJ             Favorable
3. Davis                                Yeatman                               FP              Favorable
    I.     Summary:
           SB 570 permits an eligible district court of appeal judge to designate an alternate official
           headquarters in a county that is adjacent to his or her county of residence that is within the
           judicial district. Current law only permits an official headquarters designation within the judge’s
           county of residence.
           The bill also establishes limits for travel reimbursements for court business. Although a judge
           who establishes an official headquarters in a county that is adjacent to his or her county of
           residence may need to travel further to the district court, the bill does not allow the judge to
           recover more travel expenses than if the judge established a headquarters in his home county.
           The bill is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on the State Courts System. See
           Section V. Fiscal Impact Statement.
           The bill is effective July 1, 2024.
    II.    Present Situation:
           Current law allows a district court of appeal judge who permanently resides more than 50 miles
           from the district court of appeal courthouse to which he or she is assigned, to be eligible for the
           designation of a county courthouse or other appropriate facility in his or her county of residence
           as his or her alternate official headquarters, for the purpose of computing per diem and travel
           expenses.1
           This designation of an alternate official headquarters allows the judge to be paid for mileage and
           subsistence for travel incurred on court business between the alternate headquarters and the
1
    Section 35.051, F.S.
BILL:    SB 570                                                                                          Page 2
           district court of appeal headquarters or branch headquarters. However, the payment of
           subsistence and reimbursement for travel expenses between the alternate official headquarters
           and the district court of appeal headquarters or branch headquarters may be made only to the
           extent that appropriated funds are available as determined by the Chief Justice.2
III.       Effect of Proposed Changes:
           The bill amends existing law to permit an eligible district court of appeal judge to designate a
           courthouse or other appropriate facility in a county adjacent to his or her county of residence
           within the district as his or her alternate official headquarters. By permitting this additional
           alternate official headquarters, a judge may choose an appropriate facility that is actually closer
           to, or more accessible, than a courthouse or facility in the judge’s home county.
           The bill also provides that if the judge’s designated official headquarters is located in a county
           adjacent to his or her county of residence, travel reimbursement will be limited to the lesser of:
            The amount for travel between the judge’s official headquarters and the headquarters or
               branch headquarters of the appellate district; or
            The amount authorized for travel between an official headquarters maintained in the judge’s
               county of residence and the headquarters or branch headquarters of the appellate district.
           The bill does not expand eligibility for alternate official headquarters but will provide additional
           flexibility for judges, who live more than 50 miles from the court’s headquarters or branch
           headquarters, in determining an alternate official headquarters.
           The bill takes effect July 1, 2024.
IV.        Constitutional Issues:
           A.       Municipality/County Mandates Restrictions:
                    None.
           B.       Public Records/Open Meetings Issues:
                    None.
           C.       Trust Funds Restrictions:
                    None.
           D.       State Tax or Fee Increases:
                    None.
           E.       Other Constitutional Issues:
                    None identified.
2
    Section 35.051(1)(c), F.S.
 BILL:   SB 570                                                                                                                         Page 3
  V.      Fiscal Impact Statement:
          A.       Tax/Fee Issues:
                   None.
          B.       Private Sector Impact:
                   None.
          C.       Government Sector Impact:
                   According to the Office of the State Courts Administrator, the bill is anticipated to have a
                   minimal fiscal impact on expenditures of the State Courts System and may result in a cost
                   savings if a shorter travel distance is achieved by designation of an alternate official
                   headquarters in an adjacent county.3
 VI.      Technical Deficiencies:
          None.
VII.      Related Issues:
          None.
VIII.     Statutes Affected:
          This bill substantially amends section 35.051 of the Florida Statutes.
 IX.      Additional Information:
          A.       Committee Substitute – Statement of Changes:
                   (Summarizing differences between the Committee Substitute and the prior version of the bill.)
                   None.
          B.       Amendments:
                   None.
           This Senate Bill Analysis does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill’s introducer or the Florida Senate.
 3
  Office of the State Courts Administrator, 2024 Judicial Impact Statement for SB 570,
 https://abar.laspbs.state.fl.us/ABAR/Attachment.aspx?ID=35281.
Statutes affected: 
S 570 Filed: 35.051