Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 216.023 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 216.023 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 216.023

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XIV
TAXATION AND FINANCE
Chapter 216
PLANNING AND BUDGETING
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 216.023
216.023 Legislative budget requests to be furnished to Legislature by agencies.
(1) The head of each state agency, except as provided in subsection (2), shall submit a final legislative budget request to the Legislature and to the Governor, as chief budget officer of the state, in the form and manner prescribed in the budget instructions and at such time as specified by the Executive Office of the Governor, based on the agency’s independent judgment of its needs. However, a state agency may not submit its complete legislative budget request, including all supporting forms and schedules required by this chapter, later than October 15 of each year unless an alternative date is agreed to be in the best interest of the state by the Governor and the chairs of the legislative appropriations committees.
(2) The judicial branch and the Division of Administrative Hearings shall submit their complete legislative budget requests directly to the Legislature with a copy to the Governor, as chief budget officer of the state, in the form and manner as prescribed in the budget instructions. However, the complete legislative budget requests, including all supporting forms and schedules required by this chapter, shall be submitted no later than October 15 of each year unless an alternative date is agreed to be in the best interest of the state by the Governor and the chairs of the legislative appropriations committees.
(3) The Executive Office of the Governor and the appropriations committees of the Legislature shall jointly develop legislative budget instructions for preparing the exhibits and schedules that make up the agency budget from which each agency and the judicial branch shall prepare their budget request. The budget instructions shall be consistent with s. 216.141 and shall be transmitted to each agency and to the judicial branch no later than July 15 of each year unless an alternative date is agreed to be in the best interest of the state by the Governor and the chairs of the legislative appropriations committees. In the event that agreement cannot be reached between the Executive Office of the Governor and the appropriations committees of the Legislature regarding legislative budget instructions, the issue shall be resolved by the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
(4)(a) The legislative budget request for each program must contain:
1. The constitutional or statutory authority for a program, a brief purpose statement, and approved program components.
2. Information on expenditures for 3 fiscal years (actual prior-year expenditures, current-year estimated expenditures, and agency budget requested expenditures for the next fiscal year) by appropriation category.
3. Details on trust funds and fees.
4. The total number of positions (authorized, fixed, and requested).
5. An issue narrative describing and justifying changes in amounts and positions requested for current and proposed programs for the next fiscal year.
6. Information resource requests.
7. Supporting information, including applicable cost-benefit analyses, business case analyses, performance contracting procedures, service comparisons, and impacts on performance standards for any request to outsource or privatize agency functions. The cost-benefit and business case analyses must include an assessment of the impact on each affected activity from those identified in accordance with paragraph (b). Performance standards must include standards for each affected activity and be expressed in terms of the associated unit of activity.
8. An evaluation of major outsourcing and privatization initiatives undertaken during the last 5 fiscal years having aggregate expenditures exceeding $10 million during the term of the contract. The evaluation must include an assessment of contractor performance, a comparison of anticipated service levels to actual service levels, and a comparison of estimated savings to actual savings achieved. Consolidated reports issued by the Department of Management Services may be used to satisfy this requirement.
9. Supporting information for any proposed consolidated financing of deferred-payment commodity contracts including guaranteed energy performance savings contracts. Supporting information must also include narrative describing and justifying the need, baseline for current costs, estimated cost savings, projected equipment purchases, estimated contract costs, and return on investment calculation.
10. For projects that exceed $10 million in total cost, the statutory reference of the existing policy or the proposed substantive policy that establishes and defines the project’s governance structure, planned scope, main business objectives that must be achieved, and estimated completion timeframes. The governance structure for information technology-related projects must incorporate the applicable project management and oversight standards established pursuant to s. 282.0051. Information technology budget requests for the continuance of existing hardware and software maintenance agreements, renewal of existing software licensing agreements, or the replacement of desktop units with new technology that is similar to the technology currently in use are exempt from this requirement.
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature that total accountability measures, including unit-cost data, serve not only as a budgeting tool but also as a policymaking tool and an accountability tool. Therefore, each state agency and the judicial branch must submit a summary of information for the preceding year in accordance with the legislative budget instructions. Each summary must provide a one-page overview and must contain:
1. The final budget for the agency and the judicial branch.
2. Total funds from the General Appropriations Act.
3. Adjustments to the General Appropriations Act.
4. The line-item listings of all activities.
5. The number of activity units performed or accomplished.
6. Total expenditures for each activity, including amounts paid to contractors and subordinate entities. Expenditures related to administrative activities not aligned with output measures must consistently be allocated to activities with output measures prior to computing unit costs.
7. The cost per unit for each activity, including the costs allocated to contractors and subordinate entities.
8. The total amount of reversions and pass-through expenditures omitted from unit-cost calculations.

At the regular session immediately following the submission of the agency unit cost summary, the Legislature shall reduce in the General Appropriations Act for the ensuing fiscal year, by an amount equal to at least 10 percent of the allocation for the fiscal year preceding the current fiscal year, the funding of each state agency that fails to submit the report required under this paragraph.

(5) As a part of the legislative budget request, the head of each state agency and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for the judicial branch shall include an inventory of all litigation in which the agency is involved that may require additional appropriations to the agency, that may significantly affect revenues received or anticipated to be received by the state, or that may require amendments to the law under which the agency operates. No later than March 1 following the submission of the legislative budget request, the head of the state agency and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall provide an update of any additions or changes to the inventory. Such inventory shall include information specified annually in the legislative budget instructions and, within the discretion of the head of the state agency or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, may contain only information found in the pleadings.
(6) As part of the legislative budget request, each state agency must include the following information for each contract in which the consideration to be paid to the agency is a percentage of the vendor revenue and in excess of $10 million under the contract period:
(a) The name of the vendor.
(b) A brief description of the services provided by the vendor.
(c) The term of the contract and the years remaining on the contract.
(d) The amount of revenue generated or expected to be generated by the vendor under the contract for the prior fiscal year, the current fiscal year, and the next fiscal year.
(e) The amount of revenue remitted or expected to be remitted to the state agency by the vendor for the prior fiscal year, the current fiscal year, and the next fiscal year.
(f) The value of capital improvements, if any, on state property which have been funded by the vendor over the term of the contract.
(g) The remaining amount of capital improvements, if any, on state property which have not been fully amortized by June 30 of the prior fiscal year.
(h) The amount, if any, of state appropriations made to the state agency to pay for services provided by the vendor.
1(7) As part of the legislative budget request, each state agency and the judicial branch shall include an inventory of all ongoing technology-related projects that have a cumulative estimated or realized cost of more than $1 million. The inventory must, at a minimum, contain all of the following information:
(a) The name of the technology system.
(b) A brief description of the purpose and function of the system.
(c) A brief description of the goals of the project.
(d) The initiation date of the project.
(e) The key performance indicators for the project.
(f) Any other metrics for the project evaluating the health and status of the project.
(g) The original and current baseline estimated end dates of the project.
(h) The original and current estimated costs of the project.
(i) Total funds appropriated or allocated to the project and the current realized cost for the project by fiscal year.

For purposes of this subsection, an ongoing technology-related project is one which has been funded or has had or is expected to have expenditures in more than one fiscal year. An ongoing technology-related project does not include the continuance of existing hardware and software maintenance agreements, the renewal of existing software licensing agreements, or the replacement of desktop units with new technology that is substantially similar to the technology being replaced. This subsection expires July 1, 2025.

(8) The Executive Office of the Governor shall review the legislative budget request for technical compliance with the budget format provided for in the budget instructions. The Executive Office of the Governor shall notify the agency or the judicial branch of any adjustment required. The agency or judicial branch shall make the appropriate corrections as requested. If the appropriate technical corrections are not made as requested, the Executive Office of the Governor shall adjust the budget request to incorporate the appropriate technical corrections in the format of the request.
(9) At any time after the Governor submits his or her recommended budget to the Legislature, the head of the agency or judicial branch may amend his or her request by transmitting to the Governor and the Legislature an amended request in the form and manner prescribed in the legislative budget instructions.
(10) The legislative budget request from each agency and from the judicial branch shall be reviewed by the Legislature. The review may allow for the opportunity to have information or testimony by the agency, the judicial branch, the Auditor General, the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Budgeting, and the public regarding the proper level of funding for the agency in order to carry out its mission.
(11) In order to ensure an integrated state planning and budgeting process, the agency long-range plan should be reviewed by the Legislature. The legislative budget request instructions must provide for consistency between the agency’s long-range plan and the agency’s legislative budget request.
History.s. 31, ch. 69-106; s. 1, ch. 77-314; s. 3, ch. 77-352; s. 11, ch. 79-190; s. 2, ch. 80-45; s. 4, ch. 83-49; s. 2, ch. 86-297; s. 2, ch. 89-51; s. 8, ch. 90-110; s. 4, ch. 91-109; s. 38, ch. 92-142; s. 1157, ch. 95-147; s. 15, ch. 97-95; s. 18, ch. 2000-237; s. 7, ch. 2000-371; s. 3, ch. 2001-56; s. 2, ch. 2001-238; s. 9, ch. 2001-266; s. 2, ch. 2001-380; s. 1, ch. 2003-55; s. 20, ch. 2005-2; s. 15, ch. 2005-152; s. 7, ch. 2006-119; s. 26, ch. 2006-122; s. 17, ch. 2006-146; s. 12, ch. 2007-105; s. 2, ch. 2011-45; s. 8, ch. 2014-221; s. 107, ch. 2024-228.
1Note.Section 107, ch. 2024-228, added subsection (7) “[i]n order to implement appropriations for state agencies and the judicial branch in the 2024-2025 General Appropriations Act.”

F.S. 216.023 on Google Scholar

F.S. 216.023 on Casetext

Amendments to 216.023


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 216.023
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 216.023.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 216.023

Total Results: 16

Siegel v. Tower Hill Signature Insurance Co.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-08-30

Citation: 225 So. 3d 974, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 12424

Snippet: public adjuster in the amount of $30,716.23 ($33,216.23 minus the $2,500 deductible). Tower .Hill then

Hickman v. FLORIDA PAROLE COM'N

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1999-02-03

Citation: 724 So. 2d 197, 1999 WL 44617

Snippet: see Sheley v. Florida Parole Comm'n, 720 So.2d 216, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S556 (Fla.1998), treat his initial

Polite v. Florida Parole Commission

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1999-01-13

Citation: 723 So. 2d 922, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 169

Snippet: See Sheley v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 720 So.2d 216, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S556 (Fla.1998). MINER, LAWRENCE

Durham v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1998-12-31

Citation: 728 So. 2d 757, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 16408, 1998 WL 906696

Snippet: See Sheley v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 720 So.2d 216, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S556 (Fla.1998). MINER, LAWRENCE

Jernigan v. Florida Parole Commission

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1998-12-28

Citation: 722 So. 2d 278, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 16286, 1998 WL 896373

Snippet: See Sheley v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 720 So.2d 216, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S556 (Fla.1998). MINER, LAWRENCE

Bergelson v. Singletary

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1998-11-19

Citation: 721 So. 2d 1194, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14708, 1998 WL 798731

Snippet: certiorari. Sheley v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 720 So.2d 216, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S556 (Fla. Oct. 22, 1998). Because

Sawczak v. Singletary

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1998-11-19

Citation: 720 So. 2d 621, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14697, 1998 WL 798694

Snippet: See Sheley v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 720 So.2d 216, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S556 (Fla.1998). MINER and LAWRENCE

State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Brooke

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-01-02

Citation: 573 So. 2d 363, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 45

Snippet: (b). Section 20.19(9) is a corollary to sections 216.023 and 216.031 which place responsibility for making

STATE, DEPT. OF HEALTH & REHAB. SERVS. v. Brooke

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-01-02

Citation: 573 So. 2d 363

Snippet: (b). Section 20.19(9) is a corollary to sections 216.023 and 216.031 which place responsibility for making

Martinez v. Florida Legislature

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1989-03-23

Citation: 542 So. 2d 358, 1989 WL 27663

Snippet: Governor by November 1 of each even-numbered year. § 216.023. The executive office makes a detailed study of

UNITED FACULTY OF FLORIDA, ETC. v. Bd. of Regents

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1979-01-09

Citation: 365 So. 2d 1073, 100 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2543

Snippet: University System], in the manner provided in Section 216.023." (Section 240.042(2)(e), Florida Statutes 1975

Ago

Court: Florida Attorney General Reports | Date Filed: 1975-11-19

Snippet: submitted in accordance with the requirements of ss. 216.023 and 216.162, F.S. Thus, even assuming that the

In Re Advisory Opinion to Governor

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1971-01-21

Citation: 243 So. 2d 573, 1971 Fla. LEXIS 3134

Snippet: officer of the State (Fla. Stat. Ann., ch. 216, § 216.023) and I am required to submit a recommended budget

State v. Malone

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1969-11-12

Citation: 227 So. 2d 896, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5196

Snippet: Fla.Stat., F.S.A., 9 Fla.Jur., Criminal Law, § 216; 23 Fla.Jur., Municipal Corporations, §§ 84, 94, 110

State v. Gay

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1949-04-29

Citation: 40 So. 2d 225, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1356

Snippet: aforesaid, and had fixed the amount of such tax at $1,216.23, apportioned among the said four counties in the

Falk v. Kimmerle

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1909-01-15

Citation: 57 Fla. 70

Snippet: rendered in favor of the plaintiffs for the sum of $216.23 with interest-thereon at the rate of eight per