LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 83RD LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION April 28, 2013 TO: Honorable Tryon D. Lewis, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB1710 by Raymond (Relating to a cost-of-living increase in compensation for district judges.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. The bill would amend Chapter 32 of the Government Code to authorize a county to pay a district judge an annual cost-of-living increase not to exceed 10 percent of the judge's combined salary from state and county sources if the state has not increased the state salary paid to the judge during the preceding three-year period. The cost-of-living increase would not be included as part of the judges salary for purposes of the salary limitation provided by Section 659.012. The bill would require a county to stop paying the judge the cost-of-living increase if the state increases the salary paid to the judge after the county begins paying the cost-of-living increase. The bill would take effect January 1, 2014. Local Government Impact There could be costs to a county that chose to pay a cost-of-living increase pay to applicable district judges; however, the amounts would vary depending on the number of eligible judges and the amount of the increases. It is assumed that a county would only chose to pay increased amounts if sufficient resources are available or it would not result in a negative fiscal impact; therefore, no significant fiscal impact is anticipated. Source Agencies:212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts LBB Staff: UP, CL, ZS, TP, TB
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 83RD LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
April 28, 2013
TO: Honorable Tryon D. Lewis, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB1710 by Raymond (Relating to a cost-of-living increase in compensation for district judges.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
TO: Honorable Tryon D. Lewis, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB1710 by Raymond (Relating to a cost-of-living increase in compensation for district judges.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
Honorable Tryon D. Lewis, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Honorable Tryon D. Lewis, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
HB1710 by Raymond (Relating to a cost-of-living increase in compensation for district judges.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
HB1710 by Raymond (Relating to a cost-of-living increase in compensation for district judges.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
The bill would amend Chapter 32 of the Government Code to authorize a county to pay a district judge an annual cost-of-living increase not to exceed 10 percent of the judge's combined salary from state and county sources if the state has not increased the state salary paid to the judge during the preceding three-year period. The cost-of-living increase would not be included as part of the judges salary for purposes of the salary limitation provided by Section 659.012. The bill would require a county to stop paying the judge the cost-of-living increase if the state increases the salary paid to the judge after the county begins paying the cost-of-living increase. The bill would take effect January 1, 2014.
Local Government Impact
There could be costs to a county that chose to pay a cost-of-living increase pay to applicable district judges; however, the amounts would vary depending on the number of eligible judges and the amount of the increases. It is assumed that a county would only chose to pay increased amounts if sufficient resources are available or it would not result in a negative fiscal impact; therefore, no significant fiscal impact is anticipated.
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: UP, CL, ZS, TP, TB
UP, CL, ZS, TP, TB