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

- DISAGREES that any stan rd should be used as the onl
me or the allocation of positions:
- DISAGREES with using a statewide average salary methodology
for funding purposes. This approach would result in a de
facto abandonment of the current policy of statewide salary
scales and uniformity in job classifications and pay_ These
salary scales have been established in cooperation with the
Department of Personnel and Training and constitutional
officer associations.
- AGREES that the General Assembly should consider a
salary differential for employees of constitutional
officers in Northern Virginia:
- AGREES that ability to pay (or, fiscal stress) should
be considered:
- DISAGREES with any grant or pre-payment approvals to
funding any costs of constitutional officers.
This process would result in limiting the constitutional
officer's operational control of the office and limit the
ability of the State to respond to fiscal emergencies
during a fiscal year.
- AGREES that the allocation of funding between state and
locar-responsibilities should be determined and ultimately
set by the General Assembly, but DISAGREE with the
specific state/local percentage recommendations made by the
,JLARC staff;
- AGREES that the distribution of fees collected should
reflect the percentage of state/local responsibility in the
individual office;
- AGREES that the fee distribution method and the
establishment of budgets for Clerks of Circuit
Courts should be made consistent with other
constitutional officers;
- AGREES that the Compensation Board has inadequate staff to
review budgets: this fact has been confirmed by a 1988 DIT
study and HD 29 (1988 Session) .
- AGREES that the current budgetary and appropriation
process does not recognize differences in the timing for
approval of State and local governments, and proposes an
alternative which differs from the JLARC staff
recommendat ion;
80