LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 83RD LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION April 22, 2013 TO: Honorable Abel Herrero, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB3377 by Turner, Sylvester (Relating to the creation of a prostitution prevention program; authorizing a fee.), As Introduced Depending upon prostitution prevention program rates of participation, defendants' ability to pay, and payment schedules, as determined by the courts, there would be an indeterminate amount of revenue that would be generated by the fee imposed by the bill.
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 83RD LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
April 22, 2013
TO: Honorable Abel Herrero, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB3377 by Turner, Sylvester (Relating to the creation of a prostitution prevention program; authorizing a fee.), As Introduced
TO: Honorable Abel Herrero, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence
FROM: Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB3377 by Turner, Sylvester (Relating to the creation of a prostitution prevention program; authorizing a fee.), As Introduced
Honorable Abel Herrero, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence
Honorable Abel Herrero, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence
Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
Ursula Parks, Director, Legislative Budget Board
HB3377 by Turner, Sylvester (Relating to the creation of a prostitution prevention program; authorizing a fee.), As Introduced
HB3377 by Turner, Sylvester (Relating to the creation of a prostitution prevention program; authorizing a fee.), As Introduced
Depending upon prostitution prevention program rates of participation, defendants' ability to pay, and payment schedules, as determined by the courts, there would be an indeterminate amount of revenue that would be generated by the fee imposed by the bill.
Depending upon prostitution prevention program rates of participation, defendants' ability to pay, and payment schedules, as determined by the courts, there would be an indeterminate amount of revenue that would be generated by the fee imposed by the bill.
Depending upon prostitution prevention program rates of participation, defendants' ability to pay, and payment schedules, as determined by the courts, there would be an indeterminate amount of revenue that would be generated by the fee imposed by 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 $0 2017 $0 2018 $0
2014 $0
2015 $0
2016 $0
2017 $0
2018 $0
All Funds, Five-Year Impact: Fiscal Year Probable Savings/(Cost) fromCriminal Justice Plan Ac421 2014 ($2,921,000) 2015 ($2,921,000) 2016 ($2,921,000) 2017 ($2,921,000) 2018 ($2,921,000)
Fiscal Year Probable Savings/(Cost) fromCriminal Justice Plan Ac421 2014 ($2,921,000) 2015 ($2,921,000) 2016 ($2,921,000) 2017 ($2,921,000) 2018 ($2,921,000)
2014 ($2,921,000)
2015 ($2,921,000)
2016 ($2,921,000)
2017 ($2,921,000)
2018 ($2,921,000)
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would allow a government entity to implement a prostitution prevention program (PPP) that would allow a defendant, with approval from the attorney for the state and the judge, to complete the PPP in exchange for an order of nondisclosure. The bill would allow the Lieutenant Governor and the Speaker of the House of Representatives to assign duties to legislative committees relating to oversight of PPPs. The bill would also allow a legislative committee or the Governor to request the state auditor to perform a management, operations, financial, or accounting audit of a PPP established by the bill. If a municipality in a county with population of 200,000 or more does not establish a PPP, the county would be required to establish a PPP if federal or state funds are available specifically for that purpose. A county that does not establish and maintain a PPP as required upon passage of the bill would be ineligible to receive state funds for its community supervision and corrections department. Multiple counties or multiple municipalities (but not a municipality and the unincorporated part of a county) may establish a regional PPP. A PPP established under the provisions of the bill would be allowed to collect a program fee not to exceed $1,000 from a participant in the program.
The bill would allow a government entity to implement a prostitution prevention program (PPP) that would allow a defendant, with approval from the attorney for the state and the judge, to complete the PPP in exchange for an order of nondisclosure.
The bill would allow the Lieutenant Governor and the Speaker of the House of Representatives to assign duties to legislative committees relating to oversight of PPPs. The bill would also allow a legislative committee or the Governor to request the state auditor to perform a management, operations, financial, or accounting audit of a PPP established by the bill.
If a municipality in a county with population of 200,000 or more does not establish a PPP, the county would be required to establish a PPP if federal or state funds are available specifically for that purpose. A county that does not establish and maintain a PPP as required upon passage of the bill would be ineligible to receive state funds for its community supervision and corrections department. Multiple counties or multiple municipalities (but not a municipality and the unincorporated part of a county) may establish a regional PPP.
A PPP established under the provisions of the bill would be allowed to collect a program fee not to exceed $1,000 from a participant in the program.
Methodology
The Criminal Justice Division (CJD) at the Office of the Governor funds grants to specialty court programs in Texas, which are for drug related courts. The Governor's Office estimates funding for those counties mandated to establish a PPP would cost $2.9 million each fiscal year in grant funds out of General Revenue-Dedicated Criminal Justice Planning Account No. 421, as a similar amount is expended on grants for specialty programs related to drug courts in the affected counties. However, the amount of prostitution cases is significantly less than the amount of drug-related cases, and would therefore likely result in smaller programs requiring fewer grant funds. Additionally, it is difficult to estimate the number of counties or municipalities, outside those mandated by this bill, that would create and implement a PPP.
The Criminal Justice Division (CJD) at the Office of the Governor funds grants to specialty court programs in Texas, which are for drug related courts. The Governor's Office estimates funding for those counties mandated to establish a PPP would cost $2.9 million each fiscal year in grant funds out of General Revenue-Dedicated Criminal Justice Planning Account No. 421, as a similar amount is expended on grants for specialty programs related to drug courts in the affected counties. However, the amount of prostitution cases is significantly less than the amount of drug-related cases, and would therefore likely result in smaller programs requiring fewer grant funds. Additionally, it is difficult to estimate the number of counties or municipalities, outside those mandated by this bill, that would create and implement a PPP.
Local Government Impact
A reduction of cases could result in fewer fines and court costs collected at the county, district, and appellate court levels; however, no significant fiscal impact to local governments is anticipated.
Source Agencies: 212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 301 Office of the Governor, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts, 308 State Auditor's Office, 696 Department of Criminal Justice
212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 301 Office of the Governor, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts, 308 State Auditor's Office, 696 Department of Criminal Justice
LBB Staff: UP, KKR, LM, MW, ESi, SD, CK, JGA
UP, KKR, LM, MW, ESi, SD, CK, JGA