LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 89TH LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION April 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Jeff Leach, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence FROM: Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE: HB5128 by Leach (Relating to court administration, including the term of a local administrative judge, court administration training, and the compensation of certain administrative judges.), As Introduced Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB5128, As Introduced: a negative impact of ($851,578) through the biennium ending August 31, 2027. 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 toGeneral Revenue Related Funds2026($425,789)2027($425,789)2028($425,789)2029($425,789)2030($425,789)All Funds, Five-Year Impact: Fiscal Year Probable Savings/(Cost) fromGeneral Revenue Fund12026($425,789)2027($425,789)2028($425,789)2029($425,789)2030($425,789) Fiscal AnalysisThe bill would require district judges in counties with two or more district courts to elect a district judge as a local administrative judge. The bill also outlines voting processes and term lengths for local administrative judges representing two or more district courts.The bill would require the Office of Court Administration (OCA) to conduct an annual meeting that provides certain information to the presiding judges of administrative regions, including court budgets and operational funding, case-level statistics pertaining to volume and case type, and local administrative judge duties. The bill would also authorize OCA to provide reimbursements to certain individuals for attending the meeting.The bill would maintain the salary of a district judge who is elected to serve as a local administrative district judge pursuant to Government Code, Section 659.012 but would increase supplemental pay based on the number of courts served. The bill provides a 3.0 percent increase for local administrative judges who represent counties with three to four district courts, a 5.0 percent increase for counties with four to 10 district courts, and a 7.0 percent increase for counties with 10 or more district courts. The bill would also tie the base pay of a business court judge who serves as administrative presiding judge to the annual base salary provided under Government Code, Section 659.012, or $140,000.
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 89TH LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Jeff Leach, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence FROM: Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE: HB5128 by Leach (Relating to court administration, including the term of a local administrative judge, court administration training, and the compensation of certain administrative judges.), As Introduced
TO: Honorable Jeff Leach, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
FROM: Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB5128 by Leach (Relating to court administration, including the term of a local administrative judge, court administration training, and the compensation of certain administrative judges.), As Introduced
Honorable Jeff Leach, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Honorable Jeff Leach, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board
Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board
HB5128 by Leach (Relating to court administration, including the term of a local administrative judge, court administration training, and the compensation of certain administrative judges.), As Introduced
HB5128 by Leach (Relating to court administration, including the term of a local administrative judge, court administration training, and the compensation of certain administrative judges.), As Introduced
Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB5128, As Introduced: a negative impact of ($851,578) through the biennium ending August 31, 2027. 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 HB5128, As Introduced: a negative impact of ($851,578) through the biennium ending August 31, 2027. The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions of the bill.
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:
2026 ($425,789)
2027 ($425,789)
2028 ($425,789)
2029 ($425,789)
2030 ($425,789)
All Funds, Five-Year Impact:
2026 ($425,789)
2027 ($425,789)
2028 ($425,789)
2029 ($425,789)
2030 ($425,789)
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would require district judges in counties with two or more district courts to elect a district judge as a local administrative judge. The bill also outlines voting processes and term lengths for local administrative judges representing two or more district courts.The bill would require the Office of Court Administration (OCA) to conduct an annual meeting that provides certain information to the presiding judges of administrative regions, including court budgets and operational funding, case-level statistics pertaining to volume and case type, and local administrative judge duties. The bill would also authorize OCA to provide reimbursements to certain individuals for attending the meeting.The bill would maintain the salary of a district judge who is elected to serve as a local administrative district judge pursuant to Government Code, Section 659.012 but would increase supplemental pay based on the number of courts served. The bill provides a 3.0 percent increase for local administrative judges who represent counties with three to four district courts, a 5.0 percent increase for counties with four to 10 district courts, and a 7.0 percent increase for counties with 10 or more district courts. The bill would also tie the base pay of a business court judge who serves as administrative presiding judge to the annual base salary provided under Government Code, Section 659.012, or $140,000.
The bill would require the Office of Court Administration (OCA) to conduct an annual meeting that provides certain information to the presiding judges of administrative regions, including court budgets and operational funding, case-level statistics pertaining to volume and case type, and local administrative judge duties. The bill would also authorize OCA to provide reimbursements to certain individuals for attending the meeting.
The bill would maintain the salary of a district judge who is elected to serve as a local administrative district judge pursuant to Government Code, Section 659.012 but would increase supplemental pay based on the number of courts served. The bill provides a 3.0 percent increase for local administrative judges who represent counties with three to four district courts, a 5.0 percent increase for counties with four to 10 district courts, and a 7.0 percent increase for counties with 10 or more district courts.
The bill would also tie the base pay of a business court judge who serves as administrative presiding judge to the annual base salary provided under Government Code, Section 659.012, or $140,000.
Methodology
According to the OCA, the total cost for conducting an annual meeting would be $5,300 in General Revenue each fiscal year and the total cost to provide reimbursements to attendees of the Court Leadership Conference would be $153,369 in General Revenue each fiscal year. This analysis assumes an estimated 125 attendees will require travel, lodging, meals, and parking. According to the Comptroller of Public Accounts, the total cost for providing additional salary supplements for district and business court judges elected to serve as local administrative judges would be $224,000 in General Revenue each fiscal year. Currently, there are 29 local administrative judges who serve counties with three to four district courts who would be eligible to receive the 3.0 percent salary supplement ($4,200), 17 local administrative judges who serve counties with five to nine district courts eligible to receive the 5.0 percent salary supplement ($7,000), and nine local administrative judges who serve counties with 10 or more district courts eligible to receive the 7.0 percent salary supplement ($9,800). Under current statute, a local administrative judge who serves a county with more than five district courts receives a salary supplement of $5,000. Currently there are 21 judges who receive this salary supplement. This analysis assumes $105,000 already paid to these judges will offset the new, higher salary supplement.The total cost to the Judicial Retirement System Plan 2 (JRS-2) is the cumulative increase in salary supplements, multiplied by a state contribution of 19.25 percent. The resulting cost would total $43,120 in General Revenue each fiscal year.
According to the Comptroller of Public Accounts, the total cost for providing additional salary supplements for district and business court judges elected to serve as local administrative judges would be $224,000 in General Revenue each fiscal year. Currently, there are 29 local administrative judges who serve counties with three to four district courts who would be eligible to receive the 3.0 percent salary supplement ($4,200), 17 local administrative judges who serve counties with five to nine district courts eligible to receive the 5.0 percent salary supplement ($7,000), and nine local administrative judges who serve counties with 10 or more district courts eligible to receive the 7.0 percent salary supplement ($9,800).
Under current statute, a local administrative judge who serves a county with more than five district courts receives a salary supplement of $5,000. Currently there are 21 judges who receive this salary supplement. This analysis assumes $105,000 already paid to these judges will offset the new, higher salary supplement.
The total cost to the Judicial Retirement System Plan 2 (JRS-2) is the cumulative increase in salary supplements, multiplied by a state contribution of 19.25 percent. The resulting cost would total $43,120 in General Revenue each fiscal year.
Local Government Impact
No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
Source Agencies: b > td > 212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts, 327 Employees Retirement System
212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts, 327 Employees Retirement System
LBB Staff: b > td > JMc, KDw, DA, JPa, NV
JMc, KDw, DA, JPa, NV