LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
                                   Austin, Texas
         
                                   FISCAL NOTE
                               75th Regular Session
         
                                  May 10, 1997
         
         
      TO: Honorable Rodney Ellis, Chair            IN RE:  House Bill No. 3281, As Engrossed
          Committee on Jurisprudence                              By: Goodman
          Senate
          Austin, Texas
         
         
         
         
         FROM:  John Keel, Director    
         
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on HB3281 ( Relating 
to local court processing for child support cases and to enforcement 
of child support orders; providing penalties.) this office has 
detemined the following:
         
         Biennial Net Impact to General Revenue Funds by HB3281-As Engrossed
         
Implementing the provisions of the bill would result in a net 
positive impact of $15,180,000 to General Revenue Related Funds 
through the biennium ending August 31, 1999.
         
The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal 
basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions 
of the bill.

         
 
Fiscal Analysis
 
The bill would amend the Government, Family, and Transportation 
Codes to implement initiatives to increase child support collections. 
 Texas Performance Review recommendations GG12-16 in Disturbing 
the Peace:  The Challenge of Change in Texas Government would 
be partially implemented.

The bill would establish a pilot 
program to streamline court processing, allow competitive bids 
on child support collections action, enhance the Child Support 
Evaders program, and require the Department of Public Safety 
(DPS) to include a notice in each mailing to driver's license 
holders that a license may be suspended if the driver is delinquent 
in paying child support.   An independent evaluation of child 
support activities in the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) 
would also be required; the Sunset Advisory Commission would 
select the firm and report results to the 76th Legislature.
 
Methodolgy
 
The Comptroller of Public Accounts assumes that:  creating the 
pilot program would not be contingent upon implementing a state 
case registry, there would be federal financial participation, 
and increased collections would entirely fund the project.  
The Comptroller estimates a one-time cost to the Child Support 
Retained Collections Account (Dedicated Account) in fiscal year 
1998, and a gain of $601,000 in each fiscal year thereafter.

The 
Comptroller further assumes that competitive bids on child support 
enforcement functions would increase child support collections 
and that allowing the OAG to pay vendors on a contingency basis 
would not reduce  available operating funds.  The Comptroller 
estimates increased revenue to the Dedicated Account to be $3,188,000 
in fiscal year 1998, $10,467,000 in fiscal year 1999 and $11,577,000 
in subsequent fiscal years.

The Comptroller assumes that 
an additional 10 percent of non-custodial parents can be located 
using social security numbers and that approximately one-half 
of the state's share of collections for recipients of Temporary 
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) benefits would be deposited 
in the Dedicated Account.   Estimated gains are $135,000 in 
fiscal year 1998 and $270,000 in subsequent fiscal years.

Based 
on an assumption that more public exposure of child support 
evaders would enhance the OAG's search efforts, the Comptroller 
estimates a net gain to the Dedicated Account of $44,000 per 
fiscal year.

The DPS estimates that it would incur additional 
mailing costs of $242,506 and require one FTE to send  advisory 
notices to those renewing their driver's licenses.

Costs 
of the independent study are not included since the bill requires 
the OAG to pay those costs from funds appropriated for child 
support enforcement.
The probable fiscal implications of implementing the provisions 
of the bill during each of the first five years following passage 
is estimated as follows:
 
Five Year Impact:
 
Fiscal Year Probable Revenue   Probable Revenue   Probable           Probable           Change in Number   
            Gain/(Loss) from   Gain/(Loss) from   Savings/(Cost)     Savings/(Cost)     of State          
            General Revenue    General Revenue    from General       from State         Employees from    
            Fund               Fund -- Child      Revenue Fund --    Highway Fund       FY 1997           
                               Support Retained   Child Support                                           
                               Collections        Retained                                                
                               Account            Collections                                             
                                                  Account                                                 
            0001               0001               0001               0006                                  
       1998          $300,000        $3,746,000      ($1,002,000)        ($281,268)               1.0
       1998           601,000        11,537,000           (2,000)         (280,470)               1.0
       2000           601,000        12,647,000           (2,000)         (280,470)               1.0
       2001           601,000        12,647,000           (2,000)         (280,470)               1.0
       2002           601,000        12,647,000           (2,000)         (280,470)               1.0
 
 
         Net Impact on General Revenue Related Funds:
 

 
              Fiscal Year      Probable Net Postive/(Negative)
                               General Revenue Related Funds
                                             Funds
               1998           $3,044,000
               1999           12,136,000
               2000           13,246,000
               2001           13,246,000
               2002           13,246,000
 
Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as 
the provisions of the bill are in effect.
          
No fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
          
   Source:            Agencies:   116   Sunset Advisory Commission
                                         405   Department of Public Safety
                                         304   Comptroller of Public Accounts
                                         302   Office of the Attorney General
                                         
                      LBB Staff:   JK ,BB ,CB ,JC