ORDER NO.29325 IMPLEMENT INCREASE IN ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION FEE Came to be heard this the 22nd day of August, 2005, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to: Increase the Alternative Dispute Resolution Fee from $10 to $15, as provided by HB 282. ~,~~ ,~~j'_~,2~ COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA RE VEST PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND NINE COPIES OF THE REQUEST AND DOCUMENTS TO BE RE9IEWED BY THE COURT MADE BY Linda Uecker OFFICE: Disrict Clerk MEETING DATE: ~u~ . 2 z , do4'S TIME PREFERRED: SUBJECT: (PLEASE BY SPECIFIC) To implement the increase in the Alternative Dispute Resolution fee from $ 10 to $15, as provided by HB282. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTID: (PLEASE STATE REASON) NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT: Linda Uecker Ilse Bailev ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: 10 Minutes IF PERSONNELL MATTER -NAME OF EMPLOYEE; Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted pursuant with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code is by 5:00 PM on the previous Tuesday of a meeting scheduled for Mondays. THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON: All agenda requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has been prepazed for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court meetings. See Agenda Request Rules adopted by the Commissioners' Court. H.B. No. 282 AN ACT relating to the funding of alternative dispute resolution systems. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTION 1. Section 152.004 (a), Civil Practice and Remedies Code, is amended to read as follows: (a) To establish and maintain an alternative dispute resolution system, the commissioners court may set a court cost in an amount not to exceed $15 [S.lG] to be taxed, collected, and paid as other court costs in each civil case filed in a county or district court in the county, including a civil case relating to probate matters but not including: (1) a suit for delinquent taxes; (2) a condemnation proceeding under Chapter 21, Property Code; or (3) a proceeding under Subtitle C, Tit 1e 7, Health and Safety Code. SECTION 2. Section 152.005, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, is amended to read as follows: Sec. 152.005. ADDITIONAL FEE FOR JUSTICE COURTS (^°°~,~.*T*' 6b~43'S~~S.] (a) To establish and maintain an alternative dispute resolution system, the commissioners court [^` ^"^ "'~ ^•' „'^^ ^F ' ~ •^~ "~^^ -°] may, in addition to the court cost authorized under section 152.004, set a court cost in an amount not to exceed $5 [$.3] for civil cases filed in a justice court located in the county, but not including: (1) a suit for delinquent taxes; or (2) an eviction proceeding, including a forcible detainer, a forcible entry and detainer, or a writ of re-entry. (b) A clerk of the court shall collect and pay the court cost in the manner prescribed by Section 152.004(c). SECTION 3. Chapter 152, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, is amended by adding Section 152.006 to read as follows: Sec. 152.006. FEE FOR ALTERNATI~ DISPUTE RESOLUTION -.._ __ CENTERS. An_ entity described by Section 152.002 (b)(1) that provides services for the resolution of disputes in a county with a_ population of 250,000 or more but less than 290,000 may collect a -- - -- reasonable fee in andamount set by the commissioners court from a person who receives the services. This section maV not be construed to affect the_collection of a fee by __any other entity described by Section 152.002 (b)(1). SECTION 4. (a) Sections 1 and 2 of this Act apply only to a civil case filed on or after the effective date of this Act. (b) Section 3 of this Act applies only to alternative dispute resolution services provided on or after the effective date of this Act. Any alternative dispute resolution services provided before the effective date of this Act are governed by the law in effect immediately before that date, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose. SECTION 5. This Act takes effect September 1, 2005. • Texas law gives County Commissioners the authority to establish and maintain an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) system in their county for the resolution of citizen disputes (Section 152.002, Civil Practice and Remedies Code). _ • Today, such ADR systems operate in Amarillo, Austin, Beaumont, Bryan/College Station, Conroe, Corpus Christi, Dallas, Denton, El Paso, Ft. Worth, Houston, Kerrville, Lubbock, Richmond, San Antonio, Waco, and Paris. • From 1987 to 2005, the maximum fee that a commissioners court could set as a court cost to establish and maintain these ADR systems had been capped at $10 per new civil case filed in county or district courts (with certain exceptions)_ In 1999, Harris County obtained the right to set an additional Sling fee of up to $3 for justice court cases (also with some exceptions). • In the past I7 years, salazies, insurance, rent and utilities, and other operating costs have all significantly increased while the $10 Cunding cap for the ADR systems has not changed. • ADR systems have attempted to meet rising costs by instituting administrative or scheduling fees, seeking grants, or other fund raising activities. These efforts are not a reliable source of income, have enjoyed varying levels of success, and detract from the original statutory intent and focus ofaffordable alternative dispute resolution. • ADR systems offer much needed affordable access to justice by addressing dispute resolution for individual conflicts, such as small claims, family law, landlordltenant, and employment matters. • ADR systems provide cost efficiency: many cases come in for ADR after a lawsuit is filed but before the case is heard by judge or jury, or even before a suit is ever Sled. • A successful ADR program can reduce the backlog of court cases and help delay the need for building new courthouses as cases are diverted from court and resolved through mediation. • An ADR system can administratively process up to three or four times the number of cases that a single court of retard can administratively process. • ADR systems offer acost-effective public service to Texans that otherwise may not be served. -- - ADR systems handle cases that private ADR providers may not because of Iimited economic resources of the clients or other case impediments. - Most ADR systems offer low-cost dispute resolution in contrast with private mediation services that may range from $1,000 to $3,000 per day. • Raises the cap from $10 to $t5 for court costs that a Commissioners Court may set on most civil cases in county and district court to establish or maintain an ADR system • Raises the cap from $3 to $5 for court costs that a Commissioners Court may set on most justice court cases and extends this provision beyond Hams County to include all counties. • The new law just changes the caps. To change the amount of court costs charged and eoflected by the court for ADR systems requires a Commissioners Court order.