HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1989.05.25 - 17057E. Oi.sen, District #17
Michael D. tvidCianoch bistrict #11
Donn L. Wolf
District 427
Edwrence R. Pernick, Djstrict #2:0
Donald W. Jensen
District #22
April 13, 1989
MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTION #89102
BY: JOHN E. OLSEN, DONALD W. JENSEN, PONN L. WOLF, LAWRENCE R. PERNICK AND
MICHAEL D. McCULLOCH, OAKLAND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RE: DISTRICT COURT - INCREASED PERCENTAGE OF ORDINANCE FINES
RETAINED BY THE 52ND DISTRICT COURT
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
WHEREAS, Oakland County is the control unit for the 52nd
District Court and, as such, is responsible for funding the
court's operations; and
WHEREAS, each year Oakland County must cover the shortfall
in 52nd District Court revenues for operation of the court and,
in 1988, expenses for the 52nd District Court exceeded revenues
by $483,189.00 which Oakland County covered in its 1988-89
budget; and
WHEREAS, it is projected in 1989 the 52nd District Court
will operate at a deficit of $874,713.00 which Oakland County
must cover in its 1989 budget;
WHEREAS, Oakland County appropriations for the 52nd District
Court constitute "double taxation" for communities outside of the
52nd District in that their local taxes support their own
district court while their county taxes support the 52nd District
Court; and
WHEREAS, the 52nd District Court is required by MCLA
600.8379; MSA 27A.8379 to pay over 1/3 of ordinance fines it
collects to the political subdivision in which the violation
occurred; and
WHEREAS, if Oakland County were permitted to retain a higher
percentage of ordinance fines, there would be little or no county
appropriation necessary for operation of the 52nd District Court;
and
WHEREAS, for each 1% increase in ordinance fines retained by
Oakland County, an additional $29,647.72 is available to defray
operating expenses of the 52nd District Court, based on the total
amount of ordinance fines collected in 1988.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board
of Commissioners urges the State of Michigan legislature to amend
MCLA 600.8379; MSA 27A.8379 to increase the percentage of
ordinance fines retained by Oakland County, as control unit for
the 52nd District Court, to not less than 90%.
Mr. Chairperson, I move the adoption of the foregoing
resolution. / . /
FISCAL REPORT #89102 May 25, 1989
BY: FINANCE COMMITTEE
IN RE: MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTION #89102, DISTRICT COURT - INCREASED
PERCENTAGE OF ORDINANCE FINES RETAINED BY THE 52ND DISTRICT
COURT
TO THE OAKIAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen.:
Pursuant to Rule XI-G of this board, the Finance Committee has
reviewed Miscellaneous Resolution #89102 and finds:
1) The 52nd District Court as required by MCLA 600.8379;
NSA 27A.8379 distributes one-third of ordinance fines it
collects to the political subdivision in which the
violation occurs and two-thirds is retained by the
County,
2) In 1988, the County received $3,920,277 in revenues of
which $1,976,515 was derived from ordinance fines and
costs. Expenditures totalled $4,403,466. The differ-
ence between total revenue and expenditures was $483,189
in 1988,
3) The 1989 revenue estimate is $4,357,832 ($2,197,402 in
Ordinance Fines and Costs); expenditure estimate is
$4,870,026, a difference of $512,194.
4) The attached schedules reflect County revenue derived
from Ordinance Fines and Costs at various percentage
distributions,
5) For each 1% increase of revenue from Ordinance Fines and
Costs retained by the county in 1989, an esimated
$32,961 additional revenue will be realized by the
county.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
frdcinc%
100,0% 60.0% 66.6% 70.0% 80.0%
1983 $1,204,674 $722,804 $803,116
1984 $1,332,848 $799,709 $888,565
1985 $1,369,774 $821,864 $913,183
1986 $1,528,910 $917,346 $1,019,273
1987 $2,360,281 $1,416,169 $1,573,521
1988 $2,964,772 $1,778,863 $1,976,515
1989* $3,296,103 01,977,662 $2,197,402
1990* $3,444,428 $2,066,657 $2,296,285
SCHEDULE A
FINES AND COSTS
$843,272
$932,994
$958,842
$1,070,237
$1,652,197
$2,075,340
$2,307,272
$2,411,100
$963,739
$1,066,278
$1,095,819
$1,223,128
$1,888,225
$2,371,818
$2,636,882
$2,755,542
90.0%
$1,084,207
$1,199,563
$1,232,797
$1,376,019
$2,124,253
$2,668,295
$2,966,493
$3,099,985
*PROJECTED
PREPARED BY BUDGET DIVISION
5/12/89 LCF
SCHEDULE B
DISTRICT COURT REVENUE HISTORY 1983-1990 (2/3:1/3 SPLIT)
SALARY STANDARDIZATION MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL VARIANCE
PAYMENT REVENUE
YEAR AMENDED ACTUAL AMENDED ACTUAL AMENDED ACTUAL OVER/(UNDER)
BUDGET REALIZED BUDGET REALIZED BUDGET REALIZED ACTUAL/BUDGET
1983 $92,925 $92,747 $1,967,825 $2,011,490 $2,060,750 $2,104,237 $43,487 2.07%
1984 $102,555 $98,505 $2,056,765 $2,192,556 $2,159,320 $2,291,061 $131,741 5.75%
1985 $103,635 $103,635 $1,535,060 $1,854,593 $1,638,695 $1,958,228 $319,533 16.32%
1986 $139,900 $141,683 $2,080,000 $2,343,862 $2,219,900 $2,485,545 $265,645 10.69%
1987 0185,600 $203,390 $2,520,800 $3,026,113 $2,706,400 $3,229,503 $523,103 16.20%
1988 $281,200 $284,700 $3,409,702 $3,635,577 $3,690,902 $3,920,277 $229,375 5,85%
1989* $338,200 $338,200 $3,599,388 $4,019,632 $3,937,588 $4,357,832 $420,244 9.64%
1990* $353,419 $4,200,515 $4,553,934
*PROJECTION
REVENUE AS PERCENTAGE OF EXPENDITURES
1990* $5,165,145 $4,553,934 $(611,211)
1989* $4,870,026 $4,357,832 0(512,194)
1988 $4,403,466 $3,920,277 0(483,189)
1987 $3,852,110 $3,229,503 0(622,607)
1986 $3,672,085 $2,485,545 $(1,186,540)
1985 $3,367,768 $1,958,228 $(1,409,540)
1984 03,244,170 $2,291,061 $(953,109)
1983 $3,121,124 $2,104,237 $(1,016,887)
PREPARED BY BUDGET DIVISION
5/12/89
88.17%
89,48%
89.03%
83.84%
67.69%
58.15%
70.62%
67.42%
$92,925
$102,555
$103,635
$139,900
$185,600
$281,200
$338,200
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989*
1990*
SCHEDULE C
DISTRICT COURT REVENUE HISTORY ADJUSTED 1983-1990 (ADJUSTED FOR 90/10 SPLIT)
SALARY STANDARDIZATION MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL VARIANCE
PAYMENT REVENUE
OVER/(UNDER) YEAR AMENDED ACTUAL AMENDED ADJUSTED AMENDED ADJUSTED
BUDGET REALIZED BUDGET REALIZED BUDGET TOTAL
$417,325 20.25%
$541,244 25.07%
$742,782 45.33%
$764,074 34.42%
$1,073,835 39.58%
$1,205,855 32.67%
$1,189,334 30,20%
$92,747
$98,505
$103,635
$141,683
$203,390
$284,700
$338,200
$353,419
$1,967,825 $2,385,328
$2,056,765 $2,602,059
$1,535,050 $2,277,842
$2,080,000 $2,842,291
$2,520,800 $3,576,845
$3,409,702 $4,512,057
$3,599,388 $4,788,722
$5,004,214
$2,060,750 $2,478,075
$2,159,320 $2,700,564
$1,538,595 $2,381,477
$2,219,900 $2,983,974
$2,706,400 $3,780,235
$3,690,902 $4,895,757
$3,937,588 $5,125,922
$5,357,633
*PROJECTION
. REVENUE AS PERCENTAGE OF EXPENDITURES
1990* $5,165,146 $5,357,533 $192,487 103.73%
1989* $4,870,026 $5,126,922 $256,896 105.28%
1988 $4,403,456 $4,896,757 $493,291 111.20%
1987 $3,852,110 $3,780,235 $(71,875) 98.13%
1986 $3,672,085 $2,983,974 $(688,111) 81.25%
1985 $3,367,758 $2,381,477 $(986,291) 70.71%
1984 $3,244,170 $2,700,564 $(543,606) 83.24%
1983 $3,121,124 $2,478,075 $(643,049) 79.40%
• PREPARED BY BUDGET DIVISION
5/12/89
SCHEDULE D
DISTRICT COURT REVENUE HISTORY ADJUSTED 1983-1990 (ADJUSTED FOR 80/20 SPLIT)
SALARY STANDARDIZATION MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL VARIANCE
PAYMENT REVENUE
YEAR AMENDED ACTUAL AMENDED ADJUSTED AMENDED ADJUSTED OVER/(UNDER)
BUDGET REALIZED BUDGET REALIZED BUDGET TOTAL
1983 $92,925 $92,747 $1,967,825 $2,264,860 $2,060,750 $2,357,607 0296,857 14.41%
1984 $102,555 $96,505 $2,056,765 $2,468,884 $2,159,320 $2,567,389 $408,069 18.90%
1985 $103,635 $103,635 $1,535,060 $2,140,865 $1,638,695 $2,244,500 $605,805 36.97%
1986 $139,900 $141,683 $2,080,000 $2,689,401 $2,219,900 $2,831,084 $611,184 27.53%
1987 $185,600 $203,390 $2,520,800 $3,544,207 $2,706,400 $3,747,597 $1,041,197 38.47%
1988 0281,200 $284,700 $3,409,702 $4,315,580 $3,690,902 $4,600,280 $909,378 24.64%
1989* $338,200 $338,200 $3,599,388 $4,459,112 $3,937,588 $4,797,312 $859,724 21.83%
1990* $353,419 $4,659,772 $5,013,191
*PROJECTION
REVENUE AS PERCENTAGE OF EXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE REVENUE DIFFERENCE
1990* 05,165,146 $5,013,191 0(151,955)
1989* $4,870,026 $4,797,372 0(72,654)
1988 $4,403,466 $4,600,280 $196,814
1987 $3,852,110 $3,757,597 0(94,513)
1986 $3,672,085 $2,831,084 0(841,001)
1985 $3,367,768 $2,244,500 0(1,123,268)
1964 $3,244,170 $2,567,389 0(676,781)
1983 $3,121,124 $2,357,607 $(763,517)
97.06%
98.51%
104.47%
97.55%
77.10%
66.65%
79.14%
75.54%
COMMENTS:
(1) THERE ARE THIRTEEN (13) MONTHS REVENUE REPORTED IN THE 1987
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR "MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE" DUE TO A REPORTING
CHANGE. REVENUE FOR 1987 HAS BEEN ADJUSTED TO TWELVE(12)
MONTHS FOR BOTH "HISTORY OF REVENUE" AND "REVENUE AS A
PERCENTAGE OF EXPENDITURES" COMPARISONS.
(2) THE PROJECTION FOR 1989 REVENUE IS A STRAIGHT LINE CALCULATION
USING THE FIRST THREE (3) MONTHS OF 1989 ACTUAL AS THE BASIS.
THE PROJECTION FOR 1989 EXPENDITURES IS THE CURRENT AMENDED
BUDGET APPROPRIATION.
(3) A 4.5% INFLATIONARY FACTOR WAS USED TO CALCULATE THE 1990
PROJECTION FIGURES FOR EXPENDITURES. THIS PERCENTAGE (4.5%)
WAS ALSO USED TO PROJECT REVENUES FOR COMPARISON PURPOSES;
REVENUES ARE NOT DIRECTLY CORRELATED WITH INFLATION BUT
WITH SPECIFIC VARIABLES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH REVENUE SOURCE.
PREPARED BY BUDGET DIVISION
5/11/89 LCF
REPORT #89102
BY:
IN RE:
PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE
Richard D. Kuhn, Jr., Chairperson
Miscellaneous Resolution #89102, District Court - Increased
Percentage of Ordinance Fines Retained by 52nd District Court
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Public Services Committee, having reviewed Miscellaneous
Resolution #89102, "District Court - Increased Percentage of Ordinance Fines
Retained by the 52nd District Court," reports with the recommendation that
said resolution be adopted.
Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Public Services Committee,
I move acceptance of the foregoing Report.
PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE
may Li,
BY: GOVERNMENT & TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE-
Richard G. Skarritt, Chairperson
RE: Miscellaneous Resolution #89102, District Court-
Increased Percentage of Ordinance Fines Retained by the
52nd District Court
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen;
The Government & Transportation Committee, having reviewed the
above referenced resolution, reports with the recommendation that the
resolution be adopted with the following amendments: change
paragraphs (c), (d) and (f) of the amendments to read,
(c) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d), in
districts of the first and second class, 1/3 of all fines and
costs, other than those imposed for the violation of a penal law
of this state or ordered in a civil infraction action for the
violation of a law of this state, shall be paid to the political
subdivision whose law was violated and 2/3 shall be paid to the
county in which the political subdivision is located.
(d) In districts of the second class within a county having
a population of more than 1,000,000 but less than 2,000,000, 1/10
of all fines and costs, other than those imposed for the
violation of a penal law of this state or ordered in a civil
infraction action for the violation of a law of this state, shall
be paid to the political subdivision whose law was violated and
9/10 shall be paid to the county in which the political
subdivision is located.
(f) In a district of the third class, if each political
subdivision within the district, by resolution of its governing
body, agrees to a distribution of fines and costs, other than
fines imposed for the violation of a penal law of this state or
ordered in a civil infraction action for the violation of the law
of this state, differently than as provided by this section, the
distribution of those fines and costs among the political
subdivisions of that district shall be as agreed to. An existing
agreement applicable to the distribution of :fines and .costs - -
shall apply with .the same effect to the distribution of civil
fines and costs ordered in civil infraction actions.
NOTE: Underscore denotes proposed amendment(s).
REPORT #89102
Misc. Res. #89102-Page 2
The Government & Transportation Committee further recommends
that the following paragraph be added, "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that copies of this resolution be sent to all Oakland County
Legislators and the County's Legislative Agent."
Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Government & Transportation
Committee, I move the acceptance of the foregoing report.
GOVERNMENT & TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION # Aqinv May 25, 1989
Moved by Jensen supported by Pernick the Finance Committee Report,
Public Services, Government & Transportation Committee Reports be accepted.
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the reports were accepted.
Moved by Jensen supported by Ferrens the resolution be adopted.
Discussion followed.
Moved by Gosling supported by Bishop the resolution be amended in the
proposed wording (after paragraph D of the Act), by adding at the end of the paragraph:
I ; such change to be phased in over a period of four (4) years."
Discussion followed.
Vote on amendment:
AYES: Pappageorge, Rewold, Skarritt, Bishop, Caddell, Chester, Crake,
Gosling, Hobart, Johnson, R. Kuhn, S. Kuhn. (12)
NAYS: Law, McConnell, McCulloch, McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks, Olsen, Pernick,
Price, Wolf, Aaron, Ferrens, Jensen. (13)
A sufficient majority not having voted therefor, the amendment failed.
Moved by McConnell supported by Pappageorge the resolution be amended by inserting
after the next to last WHEREAS paragraph the following, "If a surplus occurs in the future,
then the surplus will be returned to the 52nd District Court."
Discussion followed.
Moved by Pappageorge supported by Crake the amendment be amended (to
clarify . Mrs. McConnell's amendment) by inserting (in paragraph (d) following of all
fines and costs" the words lu plus'any excess of revenues over expenditures". The
paragraph would read: "(d) In districts of the second class within a county having
a population of more than 1,000,000 but less than 2,000,000, 1/10 of all fines and
costs , plus any excess of revenues over expenditures, other than those imposed for
the violation of a penal law of this state or ordered in a civil infraction action
for the violation of a law of this state, shall be paid to the political subdivision
whose law was violated and 9/10 shall be paid to the county in which the political
subdivision is located."
Mrs. McConnell withdrew the wording of her amendment in favor of Mr.
Pappageorge's wording.
Moved by Caddell supported by Oaks the resolution, with amendment, be
referred to Finance Committee to reevaluate it.
AYES: Paprlatieorge, Rewold, Skarritt, Bishop, Caddell, Crake, Gosling,
Hobart, Johnson, R. S. Kuhn. (11)
NAYS: Mc COOfl, McCulloch, McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks, Olsen, Perrick, Price
Aaron Chester, Ferrens, Jensen, Law, (14)
A sufficient majority not having voted therefor, the motion to refer failed.
Vote on amendment:
AYES: Pappageorge, Rewold, Skarritt, Bishop, Caddell, Crake, Gosling,
Hobart, Jensen, Johnson, R. Kuhn, S. Kuhn. (12)
NAYS: McCulloch, McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks, Olsen, Pernick, Price, Wolf,
Aaron, Chester, Ferrens, Law, McConnell. (13)
A sufficient majority not having voted therefor, the amendment failed.
RESOLUTION # 89102 CONTINUED May 25, 1989
Vote on resolution:
AYES: McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks, Olsen, Pernick, Price, Wolf, Aaron, Chester,
Ferrens, Jensen, Law, McConnell, McCulloch. (14)
NAYS: Pappageorge, Rewold, Skarritt, Bishop, Caddell, Crake, Gosling', Hobart,
Johnson, R. Kuhn, S. Kuhn. (11)
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution was adopted.
STATE OF MICHIGAN)
COUNTY OF OAKLAND)
I, Lynn D. Allen, Clerk of the County of Oakland and having a seal, do
hereby certify that I have compared the annexed copy of the attached resolution,
adopted by the Oakland County Board of Commissioners at their regular meeting
held on May 2 5 , 19 89 with the original record thereof now remaining
on file in my office, and that it is a true and correct transcript therefrom,
and of the whole thereof.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal
of said County at Pontiac,Michigan this 25th day of May • 1989
D. ALLEN, County Clerk
R6gister of Deeds
TeTUTTMFF