LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION May 10, 2011 TO: Honorable Tommy Williams, Chair, Senate Committee on Transportation & Homeland Security FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB777 by Gonzalez, Naomi (Relating to court costs imposed on conviction and deposited to the appropriate courthouse security fund or court building security fund.), As Engrossed No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. The bill would amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to increase the court costs imposed on conviction of felony and misdemeanor offenses to be deposited into a courthouse or court building security fund by an amount of $5. All of the revenue received from this court cost is retained by local governments; therefore, the bill would have no fiscal impact on the State. Local Government Impact There would be a revenue gain from an increase in court cost fees, but the amounts would vary depending upon the number of convictions in a locality. Three counties and three cities reported information to the Comptroller of Public Accounts that there would be no new revenue generated in fiscal year (FY) 2011 since the new court costs would not take effect until January 1, 2012. In addition, all three counties, the city of Lufkin, and the city of Lamesa FY 2012 begins October 1 and the net revenue/costs estimated for FY 2012 has been prorated. The city of El Paso's FY begins on September 1. Travis County reported the new fee schedule would not require any technology or setup changes and estimated the additional revenue would be $1,208,000 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. Bell County reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $612,252 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. Brown County reported the new fee schedule would not require any technology or setup changes and only data entry manipulations; and estimated the additional revenue would be $127,740 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. The City of El Paso reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $2,333,333 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. The City of Lufkin reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $189,750 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. The City of Lamesa reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $115,000 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. Source Agencies:212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts LBB Staff: JOB, KJG, ESi, TP
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
May 10, 2011
TO: Honorable Tommy Williams, Chair, Senate Committee on Transportation & Homeland Security FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB777 by Gonzalez, Naomi (Relating to court costs imposed on conviction and deposited to the appropriate courthouse security fund or court building security fund.), As Engrossed
TO: Honorable Tommy Williams, Chair, Senate Committee on Transportation & Homeland Security
FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB777 by Gonzalez, Naomi (Relating to court costs imposed on conviction and deposited to the appropriate courthouse security fund or court building security fund.), As Engrossed
Honorable Tommy Williams, Chair, Senate Committee on Transportation & Homeland Security
Honorable Tommy Williams, Chair, Senate Committee on Transportation & Homeland Security
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
HB777 by Gonzalez, Naomi (Relating to court costs imposed on conviction and deposited to the appropriate courthouse security fund or court building security fund.), As Engrossed
HB777 by Gonzalez, Naomi (Relating to court costs imposed on conviction and deposited to the appropriate courthouse security fund or court building security fund.), As Engrossed
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
The bill would amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to increase the court costs imposed on conviction of felony and misdemeanor offenses to be deposited into a courthouse or court building security fund by an amount of $5. All of the revenue received from this court cost is retained by local governments; therefore, the bill would have no fiscal impact on the State.
The bill would amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to increase the court costs imposed on conviction of felony and misdemeanor offenses to be deposited into a courthouse or court building security fund by an amount of $5. All of the revenue received from this court cost is retained by local governments; therefore, the bill would have no fiscal impact on the State.
Local Government Impact
There would be a revenue gain from an increase in court cost fees, but the amounts would vary depending upon the number of convictions in a locality. Three counties and three cities reported information to the Comptroller of Public Accounts that there would be no new revenue generated in fiscal year (FY) 2011 since the new court costs would not take effect until January 1, 2012. In addition, all three counties, the city of Lufkin, and the city of Lamesa FY 2012 begins October 1 and the net revenue/costs estimated for FY 2012 has been prorated. The city of El Paso's FY begins on September 1. Travis County reported the new fee schedule would not require any technology or setup changes and estimated the additional revenue would be $1,208,000 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. Bell County reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $612,252 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. Brown County reported the new fee schedule would not require any technology or setup changes and only data entry manipulations; and estimated the additional revenue would be $127,740 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. The City of El Paso reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $2,333,333 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. The City of Lufkin reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $189,750 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. The City of Lamesa reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $115,000 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016.
There would be a revenue gain from an increase in court cost fees, but the amounts would vary depending upon the number of convictions in a locality. Three counties and three cities reported information to the Comptroller of Public Accounts that there would be no new revenue generated in fiscal year (FY) 2011 since the new court costs would not take effect until January 1, 2012. In addition, all three counties, the city of Lufkin, and the city of Lamesa FY 2012 begins October 1 and the net revenue/costs estimated for FY 2012 has been prorated. The city of El Paso's FY begins on September 1. Travis County reported the new fee schedule would not require any technology or setup changes and estimated the additional revenue would be $1,208,000 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. Bell County reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $612,252 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016. Brown County reported the new fee schedule would not require any technology or setup changes and only data entry manipulations; and estimated the additional revenue would be $127,740 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016.
The City of El Paso reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $2,333,333 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016.
The City of Lufkin reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $189,750 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016.
The City of Lamesa reported that only data entry changes would be required to reflect the new fees and estimated the additional revenue would be $115,000 combined for the five-year period covering FY 2012 to FY 2016.
Source Agencies: 212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts
212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts
LBB Staff: JOB, KJG, ESi, TP
JOB, KJG, ESi, TP