History of Court Processes, Programs, 和 Initiatives

 Deliver Justice Effectively, 有效地, 和 Fairly

A Brief History of 法院Funding

In 1972, 超过三分之二的佛罗里达州选民赞成对州宪法第五条进行改革，以使司法部门更加一致和统一.  The ultimate goal of these reforms was to ensure that litigants, regardless of where in 佛罗里达 they reside, receive similar treatment under 佛罗里达 law.  This constitutional revision had seismic effects on the judicial branch: outcomes included the reorganization of 佛罗里达’s 16 different types of trial courts into a two-tier system of 20 circuit 和 67 county courts; the institution of a series of requirements designed to ensure that judges would be qualified 和 impartial; 和 the requirement that the salaries of judges 和 their assistants be paid by the state, rather than by local governments.

阅读更多

然而, 法院系统运行的大部分其他费用仍由各县承担, 这通常意味着一个县与另一个县在Funding和服务方面存在巨大差异.  That changed in 2004, 佛罗里达州宪法第五条第14条的执行, commonly called Revision 7.  Approved by 67 percent of 佛罗里达 voters in 1998, 第7修订案有两个目的:一是减轻地方政府对初审法院不断增加的补贴成本，二是确保州内各县法院Funding的公平性. 

With the 2004 implementation of Revision 7, general revenue became the primary Funding source for the courts.  This means when the economy is robust, 和 sales tax 和 property revenues are growing, the state’s general revenue fund flourishes, giving rise to a healthy court budget.  相反, when the economy is pinched, 每一个依赖国家资助的实体——包括法院系统——都感到了压力.  事实上, during the gloomiest str等h of the recent economic downturn, 当国家的一般收入基金急剧下降时(从2007 - 08财政年度到2008 - 09财政年度), 法院预算减少了12%，导致近300名工作人员被裁掉, a hiring 和 travel freeze, a reduction in the number of judicial education programs, 和 a suspension in the work of numerous court 委员会.  和, as is typical in times of economic distress, just as court services were being reduced or eliminated, citizens 和 businesses were turning to the courts in greater numbers. 

At the same time, foreclosure case filings began rising at historical levels, causing a spike in backlogged foreclosure cases.  This had both direct 和 indirect economic consequences, further destabilizing 佛罗里达’s already fragile financial state.  确保及时执行司法，并保障法院系统的活力, 各部门的领导开始提倡采用预算编制的做法，以便在财政危机期间更好地稳定法院的运作.

在经济困难时期，保护法院免受预算和人员的进一步削减, 2009年1月, lawmakers established the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund, which they bolstered with higher filing fees 和 some fine revenues.  With the creation of this dedicated Funding source for the branch, 法院从主要由一般收入资助转变为主要由信托资助(例如, in the first year after this change was instituted, fiscal year 2009 – 10, the court budget was 70 percent trust-funded; in fiscal years 2010 – 11 和 2011 – 12, it was 90 percent trust-funded). 

2009年春天, after foreclosure filings began reaching singular heights, 立法机关指定止赎申请费用为信托基金的主要收入来源.  然而, 随着这一变化，加上主要由信托基金资助的转变，司法部门的预算变得容易受到超出其控制的波动的影响.  This vulnerability became especially pronounced in October 2010, when foreclosure filings, which had grown to average more than 30,000 /月, 降至9以下,000 /月.  逃不掉地, 申请数量的大幅下降导致信托基金出现巨大缺口, 当信托基金收入不足以支持分支机构的拨款预算时, 首席大法官必须从州长和立法机关获得紧急拨款.

Seeking to restore revenue stability to the state courts system, 2012年春季，考虑到抵押贷款止赎申请数量不可预测的波动，立法机构采取了不同的做法, 立法者决定将这些申请费中的大部分从法院系统的信托基金中转移到州的一般收入基金中, because of its size, can better withst和 the swings), 从而使一般收入再次成为法院的主要Funding来源. 

In fiscal year 2014 – 15, 例如, 78 percent of the court budget derived from general revenue, with 22 percent coming from trust funds; in the 2015 – 16 fiscal year, 81 percent came from general revenue 和 19 percent, from trust funds; 和 in the 2016 – 17 fiscal year, 83 came from general revenue, with 17 percent coming from trust funds. 

Note: 佛罗里达’s courts system is paid for in part by 法院的用户, pursuant to fees specified by the legislature.  这些与法院有关的收入还支持法院书记员和各种非法院的国家实体和项目.  总的来说, 佛罗里达州的司法部门通常只得到该州总预算的不到1%, lawmakers appropriate between .6和 .7 percent of the state budget to the courts).  (欲了解更多有关法院经费和法院系统拨款的信息，请点击此链接.)

The Unification of 佛罗里达’s Courts System

这种被称为佛罗里达州法院系统的现象直到最近才真正存在.  佛罗里达’s judiciary used to consist of a host of relatively independent, local courts of varying calibers.  直到1972年通过宪法修正案，彻底修改了州宪法第五条(该条款规定了司法部门)，法院才开始成为一个体系。.  This constitutional revision established the two-tier courts system, created the position of chief judge, 并指定首席大法官为整个法院系统的首席行政官, 建立佛罗里达州法院的结构统一——成为一个系统的第一步. 

To ensure the swift 和 smooth administration of justice, 司法部门需要继续沿着这条走向现代化的道路前进.  法院越来越发现有必要利用补充资源(如.g., 情况下经理, magistrates 和 hearing officers, court interpreters, administrative 和 technology staff) due to the growing number of cases; the exp和ing classification of crimes; the implementation of new, m和atory criminal procedural requirements; the increasing complexity of legal issues; 和 the changing demographics of the state.  These resources needed to be managed efficiently 和 effectively.  因此, not long after the 1972 constitutional revision was passed, 司法部门将重点转向建立行政统一——法院制度演变的下一个阶段.

与此同时, 尽管国家仍然资助法官和他们的助手的工资, most other costs of running the courts system were covered locally, 这通常意味着一个县与另一个县之间在Funding和服务方面存在巨大的不平等.  In 1998, 67%的佛罗里达州选民赞成修改佛罗里达州宪法第五条第14款, 通常被称为7号修订案，该修订案旨在减轻地方政府对初审法院不断增加的补贴成本，并确保每个县法院Funding的公平性，以便所有佛罗里达人, regardless of their county of residence, could have access to the same essential trial court services.  Since the passage of Revision 7, which was implemented in 2004, the courts system has been progressing toward budgetary unification.

由于这些步骤——从结构上的统一开始，到行政和预算上的统一——法院系统组织得更好，更加巩固, 能够为全州的佛罗里达人提供更平等的待遇和更公平的服务.  

Judicial Branch Governance

“司法部门将以有效和高效的方式进行管理.”  With these words, the judicial branch’s second long-range plan (佛罗里达州司法部门的长期战略计划:2009 - 2015PDF下载) enunciated the first goal of issue #1, Strengthening Governance 和 Independence.  The plan recommended several strategies for achieving this goal, 第一项是“改革和加强司法部门的治理和政策制定结构”.该计划认为，“一个更永久和精简的决策和制定政策的框架将有利于司法部门和法院系统的使用者，并提供更大的行政一致性和连续性。.”

Responding to this recommendation, then Chief Justice Peggy A. 贴梗海棠, in an October 2009 administrative order, 他说，“司法部门对其目前的治理结构进行研究是适当和及时的.“除了提请注意上述长期计划的建议外, 首席大法官列举了其他几个促使她有兴趣重新审视司法部门内部治理结构的问题:具体来说, the branch’s historically diffuse governance 和 administrative structure; the effects of the shift, from the local to the state level, of the greater responsibility for court Funding; the growing complexity of issues coming before the courts; 和 the need to develop 和 implement responsive, 一致的, 和 timely court policies.  To address these issues, she established the Judicial Branch Governance Study Group; she appointed Justice Ricky Polston to chair this 11-member body, 其中包括来自四层法院的代表(成员包括两名最高法院法官, 两名DCA法官, three circuit court judges, 和 two county court judges, as well as two 佛罗里达 Bar representatives).

行政命令指示研究小组对该分支机构当前的治理体系进行深入分析, based on its findings, to draft a report that included an examination of the structure 和 functions of the present governance system 和 an evaluation of its efficiency 和 effectiveness; recommendations of actions or activities that would 改善 the governance of the branch; 和 recommendations of any changes to the current structure that would 改善 the effective 和 efficient management of the branch.  (This link goes to the administrative order.)PDF下载

为了进行这项深入的研究，该小组采取了彻底的三管齐下的方法.  第一阶段包括与40多名法院系统关键专家(e.g., presiding 和 former justices, chairs of judicial conferences, 首席法官, chairs of court 委员会, justice partners, 以及专业的法庭工作人员)关于当前的治理实践.  第二部分是一项基于网络的调查，对100名法官和350名法院工作人员进行了抽样调查，内容涉及部门内部沟通.  For the third prong, 波尔斯顿法官就与法院领导层在政策制定方面的合作征求意见, rulemaking processes, 与法院系统的治理结构有利害关系的团体提出的立法/Funding问题.g.，佛罗里达州律师协会和规则委员会的成员，全州商业协会的成员).  同时, OSCA’s Strategic Planning Unit, which was providing staff support, researched the judicial branch governance structures of other states.  Supported by a State Justice Institute grant, the study group hired consultants from the National Center for State Courts to help with the extensive data collection 和 with 分析 和 synthesizing all the materials gathered; the consultants finalized the research results in a report to the study group.

研究小组的成员被分成小组委员会，根据顾问的结论提出建议, 然后全体成员亲自开会，审议每个小组委员会的建议.  After spirited discussion, the study group revised the recommendations, voted (votes were unanimous on most topics), 和 approved the proposed recommendations.  It submitted its final report to the supreme court in January 2011.  (This link goes to the study group’s final report.)

2012年2月，最高法院在一份法庭意见书中回应了这份报告.  In 参见:司法部门治理研究小组建议的实施-对佛罗里达州司法行政规则的修订, 法院首先概述了研究小组提出的六类建议:1)最高法院的作用和责任及其作用, 责任, 条款, 和 selection of the chief justice as well as the 首席法官 of the DCAs 和 trial courts; 2) the role of OSCA; 3) the role 和 structure of the Judicial Management Council; 4) the authority of the conferences of judges; 5) communication within the branch; 和 6) legislative advocacy on behalf of the branch.  The opinion then stated, “We adopt many of the rule changes as suggested, adopt some suggested changes with modifications, 和 adopt other rule changes on our own motion.”   (Follow this link to the opinion.)PDF下载  

The most momentous changes involved leadership 和 communication issues.  例如, adopted amendments recognized the supreme court’s authority to establish policy for the entire judicial branch; defined more clearly 和 strengthened the leadership role 和 authority of the chief justice; defined more clearly 和 strengthened the leadership role 和 authority of the 首席法官 of the trial courts 和 DCAs; 和 prescribed regular meetings between the chief justice 和 首席法官 to discuss, exchange information about, 并对在全州范围内产生影响的政策和做法的实施提供反馈.

另一项规则变更设立了目前正在运作的司法管理委员会, 事实上, the judicial branch’s fifth judicial management council; prior incarnations were 操作al from 1953 – 1980; from 1985 – 1995; from 1995 – 2004; 和 from 2006 – 2008).  这个委员会的成员比它的前身(只有15个有投票权的成员)更有限:它由首席大法官主持，包括另一位最高法院法官, representatives from each level of court, 佛罗里达 Bar members, 和 public members; the state courts administrator is a nonvoting member.  理事会, which meets at least quarterly, has five areas of responsibility: to identify potential crisis situations affecting the branch 和 develop strategies for addressing them; to identify 和 evaluate information that will assist in improving the performance 和 effectiveness of the branch; to develop 和 monitor progress related to the branch’s long-range planning endeavors; to review the charges of the various court 和 佛罗里达 Bar commissions 和 委员会, recommend consolidation or revision, 和 propose a method for coordinating their work; 和 to address issues that the court brings to the council.  As articulated in the per curiam opinion, 该委员会是“协助法院具有前瞻性眼光的循环的一部分”, while the Court gets feedback from the trial 和 district courts, the 首席法官, 和 the conferences.”    

该意见强调，最高法院通过的规则变更“旨在加强佛罗里达州司法部门的治理和政策制定结构, 改善 the effective 和 efficient management of the branch, 并加强分支机构内部的沟通”——最终使分支机构能够更好地履行其使命，实现其愿景.  

佛罗里达’s Judicial Councils: A History

在回应司法部门研究小组的建议的2012年按法庭意见中, 最高法院要求重新设立司法管理委员会.  佛罗里达州法院家族的成员可能还记得该分支的前任理事会, established by then Chief Justice R. Fred Lewis in 2006和 operative until 2008.  有些人可能还记得1995年至2002年间活跃的安理会早期版本.  事实上, 这些委员会有一对更遥远的祖先:第一个化身, called the Judicial Council of 佛罗里达, was created by the legislature in 1953 和 served the court system until 1980; this was followed by the 1985 establishment, 根据法院规定, of a second Judicial Council.  本文追溯了这些咨询机构的发展历程，揭示了最近成立的理事会赖以建立的庄严基础.

The Judicial Council of 佛罗里达, 1953 – 1980

成立该州第一个司法委员会的动力实际上来自佛罗里达律师协会, 长期以来一直关注州法院的拥挤问题, especially in the court of last resort, the Supreme Court, in which the number of cases had risen to about 1250 yearly, 与之形成对比的是，全国平均有333个案件在终审法院审理”(前法官埃尔温·托马斯), “The Judicial Council of 佛罗里达,” 1958).  寻求各种战略，以补救超负荷的法院和实现更有效的司法行政, 佛罗里达酒吧, through its legislative committee, 在1953年的立法会议上成功地发起了一项法案，建立了该委员会.  那一年, just over half the states in the nation had a judicial council: “佛罗里达 became the twenty-third state to have a Judicial Council by legislative enactment; five other states [had] a judicial council by constitution, court rule or other authority” (Herbert U. Feibelman, “佛罗里达’s Judicial Council,” 佛罗里达 Bar Journal(1954年3月). 

As defined in the statute, the governor made all appointments to that 17-member body, 和 membership included a supreme court justice or retired justice, who served as the presiding officer; a circuit judge; a county judge; the attorney general or designee; four Bar members; 和 nine laypeople. 

委员会的首要责任是对该组织进行“持续的调查和研究”, 过程, 实践, 规则, 以及本州所有法院的管理和运作方法, the volume 和 condition of business in said courts, the work accomplished 和 the results obtained.”  Toward that end, it was specifically tasked with collecting 和 分析 statistics showing the work of the various courts; gathering 和 considering criticism 和 suggestions from sources associated with the administration of justice; 和 recommending to lawmakers any changes in the organization, 管辖范围内, 操作, 过程, 以及需要采取立法行动的法院执行业务的方法，并向法院建议可能简化司法业务管理的规则和惯例或方法的任何变化, 改善, or 加快 the administration of justice (section 43.15, 佛罗里达 Statutes, 1953).

该委员会最显著的成就之一是起草了1956年佛罗里达州宪法修正案.  Adopted by the legislature 和 ratified by voters, this amendment created intermediate courts of appeal to alleviate the overburdened supreme court 和 to make appellate courts more accessible to litigants; defined the new 管辖范围内 of the supreme court; 和 empowered the chief justice to adopt uniform 规则 governing the 实践 和 过程 in all the state courts.  Soon after the amendment passed, the state’s first DCAs were established; housed in Tallahassee, 莱克兰, 和迈阿密, the three DCAs were each initially staffed with three judges.  (理事会 had other visionary proposals that, 最后, were excluded from the 1956 amendment but were adopted in later periods of judicial reform; read about them in A. 布拉德福德·史密斯的《bg视讯官方平台》 ABA月刊——1956年6月.) 

这是该州第一届司法委员会不那么引人注目的成就，但仍然非常重要, 和 now of historical interest—was its gathering of caseload statistics, publicized in its annual reports (it released 25 reports in all).  每年, 和 on each court, the council collected data on, among other things, the number 和 categories of cases on the docket, number of cases added, number of cases disposed of, 和 number of cases pending.  在整个70年代末，这些年度报告是这些全州数据的唯一存储库.  (Please note: OSCA did not begin capturing statewide data until 1978, so it cannot verify the accuracy of these numbers.)

该委员会被认为是1972年司法改革的积极领导者，这一年选民又批准了对州宪法第五条的另一套戏剧性的修订, 推进司法现代化，加强司法统一统一. 那一年，所有下级法院都置于首席大法官的行政监督之下.  也是那一年, to support its burgeoning administrative 责任, 最高法院设立了bg视讯官方平台(OSCA), whose primary responsibility, 起初, was the development of a uniform case reporting system (i.e., a mechanism for methodically capturing categories of cases, time required in the disposition of cases, 和 manner of disposition of cases); 最终, 司法部门正在寻求建立统一的标准，以帮助它确定司法需要, best allocate its resources, 和 manage individual 和 collective dockets.  With OSCA now responsible for the collection of judicial data, one of the Judicial Council’s major tasks had become redundant.  由于这个原因，以及其他一些原因，立法机关决定在1980年解散司法委员会.

The Judicial Council of 佛罗里达, 1985 – 1995

Then in 1985, in a per curiam opinion, the supreme court adopted rule 2.《bg视讯官方平台》第125条，建立一个“常设司法委员会”.”  The rule stipulated that the chief justice or a designee serve as presiding officer of the council; others on this 23-member body included three DCA judges (including the conference president), three circuit court judges (including the conference chair), three county court judges (including the conference president), a state attorney, a public defender, a clerk of the court, four 佛罗里达 Bar members (including the Bar president), 和 six public members.  Excepting the responsibility of collecting, 分析, 以及公布案件数量的统计数据——这是OSCA现在的任务——在本质上，该委员会的指控细节与它的前身相似, 它的工作是帮助司法部门管理其资源，研究并向最高法院提出简化改革的建议, 加快, 和 改善 the administration of justice in 佛罗里达.

During its tenure, the Judicial Council released several reports.  OSCA still retains copies of many of these reports.  除了, 佛罗里达最高法院图书馆有两份委员会的年度报告(1986年和1987年).  第一份报告显示，理事会处理的首批主要问题之一是制定审判和上诉法院处理案件的时间标准(它引用了首席大法官执行理事会时间标准建议的行政命令)。.  第二份报告指出，理事会“就执行替代性争端程序提出了建议, child support matters, reducing costs 和 improving efficiency in court reporter services, the substantial need for increased Funding for public defender offices, 需要对佛罗里达州审判法庭的合并进行详细的研究, impeachment of judges, 和 过程s for selecting 和 terminating trial court administrators.该委员会至少还编写了另外两份报告(可在佛罗里达州立图书馆查阅):一份, 关于州和地方政府在初审法院系统融资中的适当角色的研究(1987年), 第二个是, 审查第5条的费用和收入以及为法院系统筹措经费的建议(1991年). 

The Judicial Management Council, 1995 – 2004

In 1995, the court reorganized the Judicial Council.  The 1995 rule amendment (now rule 2.225) completely replaced the previous rule, 和, to reflect the council’s new focuses, the court made a name change, calling the new body the Judicial Management Council (JMC).  联委会有21名正式委员(当然委员的数目逐年变化)。, all appointed by the chief justice; in addition to the membership spectrum of prior councils, this one included someone from the governor’s legal office, 两个议员, 和 a member of the 佛罗里达 Council of 100.  它的任务是全面研究和拟订有关可能在全州产生影响的高效率和有效的司法行政问题的建议, affect multiple levels of the court system, or affect multiple constituencies in the court 和 justice community; the development of the long-range strategic plan 和 an accountability program for the branch; the development of recommendations to the Constitution Revision Commission; the review of other commissions, 委员会, 等., that consider matters with policy, Funding, or 操作al implications for the judicial branch; 和 liaising with private sector entities with an interest in the court system.

The JMC’s first considerable undertaking was its development of the branch’s first long-range plans; in conjunction, it produced the first two-year 操作al plan.  联委会亦推行多项措施，以建立市民对联委会的信任和信心(例如.g., through its Committee on Communications 和 Public Information, established in 1996, 并通过与政府三个部门的代表举行一系列讨论会, the legal community, 和 the general public).  除了, 联委会的工作重点是分院的表现和问责(联委会于1997年成立了区域上诉法院的表现和问责委员会，并于1998年成立了初审法院的表现和问责委员会，随着法院系统开始实施修订第七版，委员会的工作变得尤为紧迫)。.  The JMC remained active until 2002, 当时法院系统的首要任务是2004年实施第七修订案.  在这一点上, the JMC became dormant, 关键领域的活动被转移到联合军委以外的委员会.

The Judicial Management Council, 2006 – 2008

In 2006, 随着修订7的全面实施，分支机构再次恢复了更日常的节奏, then Chief Justice Lewis declared, “It is appropriate to reauthorize 和 renew the Council.”  In an administrative order, 联委会“改组为一个司法部门咨询委员会，目的是提供一个正式机制，使主要公民选民和法院之间就司法制度进行有效的双向沟通, informing the public about the justice system, 并为重要的法院动议提供独特而广泛的视角.”  Taking a “collaborative approach,” this 27-member JMC, 谁的成员结构与其直接前任相似, 旨在为分支机构的领导人提供“对佛罗里达州法院面临的无数行政挑战的广阔视角”.”

就像它的前身一样，这个联合军事委员会的目标无疑是令人钦佩和重要的.  But time, unfortunately, was not on the council’s side.  For not long after it was established, 佛罗里达, like the rest of the nation, began struggling with the ramifications of the escalating recession.  Between fiscal years 2007—08 和 2008—09, 法院系统的预算急剧下降:从4.91亿美元开始, it was reduced to $478 million, then to $438 million, 和 最后 settled at $433 million—a 12% drop.  与此同时, close to 300 court positions across the state were eliminated; a hiring freeze 和 travel freeze were instituted; court education programs were curtailed; 和 many 委员会 和 task forces were temporarily suspended.  与此同时，案件数量，特别是抵押贷款止赎申请，开始飙升.  在这种氛围下，JMC不可能蓬勃发展，因此在2008年被搁置.

尽管如此, 这个联合管理委员会显然重新激起了分支机构领导对设立咨询委员会的兴趣.  当经济开始复苏，法院Funding开始显示出稳定的迹象, the supreme court re-created the JMC.

The Judicial Management Council, 2012  

目前的司法管理理事会的成员数目比它的前辈更有限，责任也更有限.  The chief justice chairs it, 15名有投票权的成员包括首席大法官和另一名大法官, representatives from each level of court, 和 public members; the state courts administrator is a nonvoting member.  在需要的临时基础上，理事会邀请其他国家作为无投票权的成员参加. 

2012年的“按委员会意见”将新理事会设想为“协助法院具有前瞻性眼光的循环的一部分”, while the Court gets feedback from the trial 和 district courts, the 首席法官, 和 the conferences.”   Meeting at least quarterly, the council has five areas of responsibility: to identify potential crisis situations affecting the branch 和 develop strategies for addressing them; to identify 和 evaluate information that will assist in improving the performance 和 effectiveness of the branch; to develop 和 monitor progress related to the branch’s long-range planning endeavors; to review the charges of the various court 和 佛罗里达 Bar commissions 和 commissions, recommending consolidation or revision, 和 propose a method for coordinating the work of these bodies; 和 to address issues that the court brings to the council. 

JMC被设计成一个灵活的机构，可以快速动态地响应分支机构面临的管理问题.  This agility is achieved through the creation of workgroups, 每个程序都负责特定的任务，并在其任务完成时停止运行.  最初, the chief justice established three workgroups: Access to Justice; 表演; 和 教育 和 外展.  诉诸司法工作组一直侧重于发展互动式, 基于网络的, 安排有指引的面谈，方便自行代表的诉讼人到法庭出庭.  The 表演 Workgroup, 在按案件类型和工作水平审查归档和处置趋势后, 就如何满足未来分支机构在某些关键绩效领域统一一致的数据报告和分析需求，向法院提出建议.  处理与内部和外部有效沟通有关的问题, public trust 和 confidence, 和 the use of clear, unified messages within 和 outside the judicial branch, the 教育 和 外展 Workgroup updated the branch-wide communication plan; the 该计划获得了最高法院的批准，并于2016年1月开始实施.  Then in 2014 – 15, the Long-Range Strategic Planning Workgroup was established to refresh the branch’s long-range plan; the Long-Range Strategic Plan for the 佛罗里达 Judicial Branch 2016 – 2021 该计划获得了最高法院的批准，并于2016年1月开始实施.  In 2016, 另外还任命了两个工作组:初审法院安全工作组和监护工作组.  

The Judicial Branch’s 2016 – 2021 Long-Range Plan 和 its Antecedents

2015年年底，司法部门发布了第三个长期计划， Justice: Fair 和 Accessible to All, The Long-Range Strategic Plan for the 佛罗里达 Judicial Branch, 2016 – 2021.  首席大法官拉巴尔加将新计划描述为“基于一年多细致工作的全面而平衡的蓝图”.”   

The new plan has much in common with its two predecessors, Taking Bearings, Setting Course, published in 1998, 和 佛罗里达州司法部门的长期战略计划:2009 - 2015, published in 2009.  每一份报告都是全面推广工作的成果，其中包括为各种法庭听众(法官)设计的硬拷贝和(或)电子调查, quasi-judicial officers, 法院工作人员, clerk of the 法院工作人员, 律师, justice partners, 陪审员, 法院的用户, 和 the general public); telephone 和/or mail surveys; meetings with justice system partners; 和 regional public forums.  也, 三个计划中的每一个都围绕五个长期问题组织起来，这些问题构成了该分支机构长期的基本方向.  除了, each was designed to function as a roadmap that embodies where the judicial branch is 和 where it hopes to be; these roadmaps are simultaneously aspirational (in that they reach toward a desired end) 和 practical (in that they enumerate goals that must be met to achieve that end).  和, 最后, 因为分支机构的领导人早就认识到，一个由长期计划指导的组织最适合对其未来的形态和健康进行某种程度的控制, 这三个长期计划都是为了支持分支机构预测变化(并快速做出反应)而制定的, 巧妙地, 并有效地(当变化确实发生时)保持其最终目标, even in crisis situations.

But even though it shares these fundamental similarities, the newly released plan is also quite different from its forerunners.  Most conspicuously, the new plan is emphatically more concise.  Taking Bearings, Setting Course (包括第一个长期计划以及大量丰富的介绍性材料和附录)长达100多页.  Although considerably shorter, 第二个计划(连同附带的材料)仍然有30多页长.  In stark contrast, the new plan is a trifold—slim, 优雅的, 和 portable enough to tuck into one’s 10-inch tablet folio.  根据司法管理委员会的长期战略规划工作组(负责重新评估和更新长期计划的实体), the hope is that a pithy plan will be digestible 和 accessible, thus more routinely usable, 有用的, 和, 最终, implementable than a lengthy plan.

不那么明显的是，这三个计划所围绕的长期问题存在差异.  当前计划中的三个长期问题与先前计划中的问题有着密切的关系(尽管这次的重音略有不同)。, 和 two of the long-range issues, though implicit in the prior plans, now have a prominence they didn’t have previously.  例如, readers are likely to recognize the language of long-range issues 2, 4, 和 5—“Enhance Access to Justice 和 法院服务,“使司法管理和法院设施运作现代化。,” 和 “Maintain a Professional, 道德, 和 Skilled Judiciary 和 劳动力.不太熟悉的是新的长期议题1和3——“有效地伸张正义”, 有效地, 和 Fairly” 和 “Improve Underst和ing of the Judicial Process.“长期问题的演变及其期望的最终状态反映了长期计划的必然适应性.  Over time, trends change; circumstances change; the challenges facing the courts change.  因此, in order to keep its long-range plan responsive, 有关, 和有用的, the judicial branch must review it periodically, 修改长期问题和目标，以应对法院面临的变化. 

当前计划与其前身之间一个非常显著的区别是，新计划没有提出实现其目标的具体战略.  The first plan enumerated 13 goals 和 offered 39 strategies for reaching them; the second plan articulated 16 goals, with 71 strategies for actualizing them.  The current plan identifies 29 goals, 但是，工作组选择不列入战略，以便在确定应针对哪些目标以及如何实现这些目标方面具有灵活性.  取消与目标相关的战略与当前计划与其前身之间的另一个相当大的差异有关.  在过去几年里, 没有正式的程序使该计划制度化或监测实现其目标的进展情况.  这一次, 然而, in seeking to ensure that the plan is carried out, 大法院批准了一项行动方针，敦促地方司法管辖区和法院委员会为实现这些目标制定自己的战略. 

On the local level, 要求法院在该计划的范围内确定自己的优先事项和需要，并制定战略，以执行29个目标中最有可能帮助它们做好准备，应对向所有人提供正义的挑战.  欧安组织战略规划股的任务是向地方司法管辖区提供所需的支持，以处理它们决定重点关注的计划的各个方面.  和 on the statewide level, 最高法院严重依赖由OSCA人员组成的21个最高法院委员会来监测与该计划有关的倡议.  委员会主席被要求确定正在进行或即将开展的活动，这些活动可以作为推进计划内具体目标的战略.  除了, 首席大法官为委员会的任期制定了新的行政命令, the charges contain references to the plan 和 specific goal language, 适当的.  The Judicial Management Council, 负责“制定和监测与司法部门长期规划有关的进展情况”,” will evaluate advances toward goal achievement on an ongoing basis. 

该计划于2015年12月公布，最高法院将其确定为分支机构的优先事项.  颁布它, 司法管理委员会的长期战略规划工作组编写了一份引人注目的小册子(前面提到的三部分)，描述了该计划的问题和目标，并将其分发给整个法院系统的法官和法院工作人员.  该计划也可以在网上获得，同时还提供了有关该计划制定的一些背景信息, an executive summary of the workgroup’s outreach findings, 以及战略规划组在2014年进行的环境扫描的结果，该扫描预计将修订长期计划. (This link provides access to all these documents.)  除了, to make the framework of the plan accessible to judges, 法院工作人员, 公众, a video about the plan was developed 和 posted on many court websites; featuring Chief Justice Labarga, 该视频强调了该计划的优先级，并解释了其长期问题和目标的重要性. 司法管理委员会成员和战略规划股工作人员也在协助推动这项计划, 使自己能够在法庭委员会会议上介绍有关的情况，并提供实际的执行战略, court conferences, 和 other court-related gatherings. 

Heralding the publication of the plan, 首席大法官拉巴尔加称其“忠实于法院在我们的社会和政府中发挥的基本作用”.他还强调，该计划“对法院已经开始面临的不断变化的环境发出了重要警告，这些环境在未来几年将变得更加重要。.”  But while serving as a cautionary note, the long-range plan also acts as a ballast—for, as the branch navigates these changing circumstances, 该计划将坚定地“协助最高法院和首席大法官，因为他们为该部门提供领导和指导。.”

短暂的历史

Last Modified: October 10, 2023