Funding of Constitutional Officers - Virginia Joint Legislative Audit ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

greater or equal to 1.0 can raise more revenues per unit than the State average. A ratio ofless than 1.0 means less revenue can be raised per unit. The calculation ofthe revenue capacity ratio is illustrated in Exhibit 6. Exhibit6------------.., Calculation of the Revenue Capacity Index Locality Per-Capita Revenue Capacity Statewide Total Per-Capita Revenue Capacity ... Local RevenueCapacity Ratio WHERE: • Locality per-capita revenue capacity is equal to local revenue capacity divided by local population, and • Statewide total per-eapita revenue capacity is equal to the sum of all local revenue capacities divided by the State population. Calculating Local Shares Using the Revenue Capacity Ratio. Once the local revenue capacity ratio has been computed, it is used to calculate the portion of local responsibility costs each locality would be required to fund. Local shares of service costs for each locality are calculated by multiplying each locality's revenue capacity ratio by the statewide aggregate proportion of the local responsibility costs to be paid by the localities: Local Revenue Capacity Ratio x Statewide Local Share of Local Responsibility Costs = Local Share For example, if the proportion of local responsibility costs to be paid by the localities as a whole is 50 percent, then the local revenue capacity ratio for each locality is multiplied by .50. Thus, a county with a revenue capacity ratio of .72 would be required to pay only 36 percent (.72 x .50) ofthe shared costs for which is is responsible. Localities with higher per-capita revenue capacities than the statewide average would have higher local shares. Localities with lower per-capita revenue capacities than the Q,tl'1,tt:>,mrlt:> average would have lower local shares. The State would pay for the portion costs by the localities. 30
ALLOCATION OF STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING Based on the framework developed for this study, State funding of constitutional officers would consist of three elements: «I costs for which the State has been assigned sole responsibility, • the State portion ofcosts which are assigned shared State-local responsibility, • the portion ofthe shared State-local responsibility costs which are assumed by the State through recognition oflocal ability to pay. Local funding ofconstitutional officers would consist of two elements: • costs for which the local governments have been assigned sole responsibility, • the remaining portion ofshared State-local responsibility costs which are not assumed by the State through recognition oflocal ability to pay. A more detailed, mathematical description of the calculation of these State and local staffing costs is provided in Appendix B. Recommendation (6). The General Assembly may wish to consider establishing State and local shares for funding of the constitutional officers based on assignments of cost responsibility and local ability to pay. Cost responsibility can be based on the criteria developed for this study. Ability to pay can be based on an index of relative revenue capacity. STATE AND LOCAL FEES Ifthere is substantial change in State and local responsibilities for the costs of the constitutional officers, it becomes necessary to review the distribution of fees as well. The purpose ofsuch a review is to ensure that the distribution offees to the State and local governments is consistent with the overall goals of the funding system. Under the current system, constitutional officers collect fees for certain services as authorized by law. The disposition ofthe revenues from the fees is also specified by law. In particular, fees collected by clerks of court are used to pay for the costs of office personnel and operations. Fees collected in excess of the costs of operations are distributed two-thirds to the local government and one-third to the State. Fees collected by the sheriffs are distributed two-thirds to the State and one-third to the local governments. Fees collected by the courts for Commonwealth's attorney services 31
Page 3 and 4: REPORT OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDIT AND
Page 5: Preface State funding for constitut
Page 8 and 9: e local governments' relative abili
Page 10 and 11: the constitutional offispecific eva
Page 12 and 13: current process, some changes in sy
Page 15: Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION 1
Page 18 and 19: ROLES OF THE STATE AND LOCAL GOVERN
Page 20 and 21: missioner of revenue, treasurer, an
Page 22 and 23: STUDY APPROACH JLARC staff develope
Page 24 and 25: differences in the ability of local
Page 26 and 27: cost responsibility for each catego
Page 28 and 29: Exhibit 1 Workload Factors Used in
Page 30 and 31: account for regional differences in
Page 32 and 33: Recommendation (3). The General Ass
Page 34 and 35: Recommendation (5). The General Ass
Page 36 and 37: cost re~;ponsJlbiJjty State should
Page 38 and 39: Exhibit 3, a "yes" has been placed
Page 40 and 41: For some other service categories,
Page 42 and 43: A variety of other revenue sources
Page 44 and 45: ------------- Exhibit5-------------
Page 48 and 49: are divided evenly between the Stat
Page 50: a COJmnlOIllW€:a!t;h ft..,Uy,,, .
Page 53 and 54: The reimbursement cycle begins when
Page 55 and 56: process occurs prior to the assessm
Page 57: Appendixes ~ Appendix A: Study Mand
Page 60 and 61: AppendixB Mathematical Formulas Use
Page 62 and 63: Appendix B (Continued) Personnel Co
Page 64 and 65: Appendix B (Continued) Revenue Capa
Page 66 and 67: Appendix B (Continued) Personnel Co
Page 68 and 69: Appendix: C Cost ResponsibilityAssi
Page 70 and 71: Appendix C (Continued) COST RESPONS
Page 72 and 73: Appendix C (Continued) COST RESPONS
Page 74: AppendixD Local Revenue Capacity fo
Page 77 and 78: Examples J.i"U.nClLlng 'O.J'U'..u''
Page 79 and 80: State and Support for Sheriffs Offi
Page 82 and 83: ~ ~ State and Local Support for Com
Page 84 and 85: Ou,a~ll;;; and for Local J:l,;xBI.m
Page 86 and 87: State and Local Support for Sheriff
Page 88 and 89: Local for Court Clerks: Example 2
Page 90 and 91: •••••••••••
Page 92 and 93: AppendixF Agency Response As partof
Page 94 and 95: Introduction The Compensation Board
Page 96 and 97:
- DISAGREES that any stan rd should
Page 98 and 99:
RECOMMENDATION 1. The General Assem
Page 100 and 101:
determining judicial needs. As a re
Page 102 and 103:
In the budget process currently use
Page 104 and 105:
It is a common misconception that t
Page 106 and 107:
The development of state/local perc
Page 108 and 109:
The Compensation Board AGREES with
Page 110 and 111:
AppendixG JLARC StaffComments on th
Page 112 and 113:
officers could maintain monthly rec
Page 114 and 115:
expertise, level of automation, nat
Page 116 and 117:
such as is available in education f
Page 118 and 119:
etween workload indicators and the
Page 120 and 121:
government operations. This is expl
Page 122:
Recent JLARC Reports Organization o
show all

Funding of Constitutional Officers - Virginia Joint Legislative Audit ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?