Introduced
by
To provide a “template” or “place holder” for the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Judiciary budget. This bill contains no appropriations, but may be amended at a later date to include them.
Referred to the Committee on Appropriations
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered
To adopt a version that contains actual appropriations. For details see <a href="http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/billanalysis/Senate/pdf/2009-SFA-0249-U.pdf">analysis</a> from the non-partisan Senate Fiscal Agency.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To add money for an appeals court low income assigned counsel program.
The amendment failed 15 to 20 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To allow the state to delay filling non-incumbent circuit court judicial vacancies for up to two years where the incumbent judge is ineligible to stand for election due to the requirements of state law, and the local county requests the delay.
The amendment failed 14 to 21 (details)
Passed in the Senate 25 to 10 (details)
The Senate version of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009-2010 Judiciary budget. This would appropriate $258.5 million in gross spending, compared to $262.8 million, which was the FY 2008-2009 amount enrolled in 2008. Of this, $154.2 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the FY 2008-2009 amount of $159.3 million. $88.6 million is from "restricted funds," or earmarked state tax and fee revenue, $5.1 million is federal revenue, and the balance is from "local" and "private" funds.
Referred to the Committee on Appropriations
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered
To adopt a version of this budget that expresses the fiscal and policy preferences of the Democratic-majority in the House on various spending items and programs. For details see <a href="http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/billanalysis/House/pdf/2009-HLA-0249-2.pdf">analysis</a> from the non-partisan House Fiscal Agency.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require the Supreme Court to report every other month to the legislature on number of its full time employees.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Passed in the House 106 to 3 (details)
The House version of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009-2010 Judiciary budget. This would appropriate $257.4 million in gross spending, compared to $262.8 million, which was the FY 2008-2009 amount enrolled in 2008. Of this, $154.1 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the FY 2008-2009 amount of $159.3 million. $88.6 million is from "restricted funds," or earmarked state tax and fee revenue, $5.1 million is federal revenue, and the balance is from "local" and "private" funds.
Failed in the Senate 0 to 35 (details)
To concur with a House-passed version of the bill. The vote sends the bill to a House-Senate conference committee to work out the differences.
Received
The House-Senate conference report for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009-2010 Judiciary budget. This would appropriate $258.7 million in gross spending, compared to $262.8 million, which was the FY 2008-2009 amount enrolled in 2008. Of this, $153.1 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the FY 2008-2009 amount of $159.3 million. $89.9 million is from "restricted funds," or earmarked state tax and fee revenue, and $5.1 million is federal revenue.
Passed in the Senate 24 to 13 (details)
Passed in the House 107 to 1 (details)
