LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 83RD LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION Revision 1 May 6, 2013 TO: Honorable Kevin Eltife, Chair, Senate Committee on Administration FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB1642 by Bonnen, Dennis (Relating to the Port of Houston Authority.), Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB1642, Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted: an impact of $0 through the biennium ending August 31, 2015. The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions of the bill.
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 83RD LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
Revision 1
May 6, 2013
Revision 1
Revision 1
TO: Honorable Kevin Eltife, Chair, Senate Committee on Administration FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB1642 by Bonnen, Dennis (Relating to the Port of Houston Authority.), Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted
TO: Honorable Kevin Eltife, Chair, Senate Committee on Administration
FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB1642 by Bonnen, Dennis (Relating to the Port of Houston Authority.), Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted
Honorable Kevin Eltife, Chair, Senate Committee on Administration
Honorable Kevin Eltife, Chair, Senate Committee on Administration
Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
HB1642 by Bonnen, Dennis (Relating to the Port of Houston Authority.), Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted
HB1642 by Bonnen, Dennis (Relating to the Port of Houston Authority.), Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted
Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB1642, Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted: an impact of $0 through the biennium ending August 31, 2015. The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions of the bill.
Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB1642, Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted: an impact of $0 through the biennium ending August 31, 2015.
The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions of the bill.
General Revenue-Related Funds, Five-Year Impact: Fiscal Year Probable Net Positive/(Negative) Impact to General Revenue Related Funds 2014 $0 2015 $0 2016 ($216,084) 2017 ($24,009) 2018 $0
2014 $0
2015 $0
2016 ($216,084)
2017 ($24,009)
2018 $0
All Funds, Five-Year Impact: Fiscal Year Probable Revenue Gain/(Loss) fromAppropriated Receipts666 Probable (Cost) fromGeneral Revenue Fund1 2014 $0 $0 2015 $0 $0 2016 $216,084 ($216,084) 2017 $24,009 ($24,009) 2018 $0 $0
Fiscal Year Probable Revenue Gain/(Loss) fromAppropriated Receipts666 Probable (Cost) fromGeneral Revenue Fund1 2014 $0 $0 2015 $0 $0 2016 $216,084 ($216,084) 2017 $24,009 ($24,009) 2018 $0 $0
2014 $0 $0
2015 $0 $0
2016 $216,084 ($216,084)
2017 $24,009 ($24,009)
2018 $0 $0
Fiscal Analysis
This bill would implement recommendations from the Sunset Advisory Commission's (SAC) review of the Port of Houston Authority (PoHA). There would be no significant cost to the state to implement these recommendations; however, there would be a cost to PoHA. The bill would require SAC to conduct another review of PoHA during the 2016-17 biennium and would require PoHA to pay for the cost of the review. The bill would also require the Governor to appoint a port commissioner if certain appointing entities fail to appointment a port commissioner within a specified period, and PoHA commissioners to file a statement required of state officers with the Texas Ethics Commission.
This bill would implement recommendations from the Sunset Advisory Commission's (SAC) review of the Port of Houston Authority (PoHA). There would be no significant cost to the state to implement these recommendations; however, there would be a cost to PoHA. The bill would require SAC to conduct another review of PoHA during the 2016-17 biennium and would require PoHA to pay for the cost of the review. The bill would also require the Governor to appoint a port commissioner if certain appointing entities fail to appointment a port commissioner within a specified period, and PoHA commissioners to file a statement required of state officers with the Texas Ethics Commission.
Methodology
The cost of the review that the bill would require in 2016-17 is based on the actual cost incurred to conduct the SAC review of PoHA in 2011-12. The cost of this review would be $216,084 in fiscal year 2016 and $24,009 in fiscal year 2017. This cost includes staff salaries and benefits, travel costs, and other administrative expenses. The Governor already appoints various commissions and the Texas Ethics Commission already maintains statements required of state officers. These agencies both indicate there would be no fiscal implication associated with implementing provisions of the bill.
The cost of the review that the bill would require in 2016-17 is based on the actual cost incurred to conduct the SAC review of PoHA in 2011-12. The cost of this review would be $216,084 in fiscal year 2016 and $24,009 in fiscal year 2017. This cost includes staff salaries and benefits, travel costs, and other administrative expenses.
The Governor already appoints various commissions and the Texas Ethics Commission already maintains statements required of state officers. These agencies both indicate there would be no fiscal implication associated with implementing provisions of the bill.
Local Government Impact
PoHA would be required to reimburse the SAC for costs associated with the review. This cost is estimated to be $216,084 in fiscal year 2016 and $24,009 in fiscal year 2017, according to SAC. The bill would eliminate current requirements of the Harris County Auditor, which SAC estimates would save PoHA approximately $140,000 per year based on 2013 expenditures. The bill would set forth that the Harris County Auditor could conduct occassional financial audits of PoHA as part of the county-wide risk assessment and audit plan. According to SAC, the fiscal impact of this would depend on rates established by PoHA and the Harris County Auditor as well as the scope and number of audits performed. The bill would require PoHA to establish an internal audit department and develop various policies and plans. PoHA has already established an internal audit department and has existing staff that could implement requirements to develop the various policies and plans. SAC indicates that any additional cost to PoHA would depend on the way PoHA chooses to implement these provisions and cannot be estimated. Additionally, any savings resulting from the internal audit or changes to policy as required by the bill would depend on implementation and cannot be estimated at this time.
PoHA would be required to reimburse the SAC for costs associated with the review. This cost is estimated to be $216,084 in fiscal year 2016 and $24,009 in fiscal year 2017, according to SAC.
The bill would eliminate current requirements of the Harris County Auditor, which SAC estimates would save PoHA approximately $140,000 per year based on 2013 expenditures. The bill would set forth that the Harris County Auditor could conduct occassional financial audits of PoHA as part of the county-wide risk assessment and audit plan. According to SAC, the fiscal impact of this would depend on rates established by PoHA and the Harris County Auditor as well as the scope and number of audits performed.
The bill would require PoHA to establish an internal audit department and develop various policies and plans. PoHA has already established an internal audit department and has existing staff that could implement requirements to develop the various policies and plans. SAC indicates that any additional cost to PoHA would depend on the way PoHA chooses to implement these provisions and cannot be estimated. Additionally, any savings resulting from the internal audit or changes to policy as required by the bill would depend on implementation and cannot be estimated at this time.
Source Agencies: 116 Sunset Advisory Commission, 356 Texas Ethics Commission
116 Sunset Advisory Commission, 356 Texas Ethics Commission
LBB Staff: UP, AG, JI, MMe, KKR, KK, TP
UP, AG, JI, MMe, KKR, KK, TP