LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
                                   Austin, Texas
         
                                   FISCAL NOTE
                               75th Regular Session
         
                                  April 3, 1997
         
         
      TO: Honorable Kenneth Armbrister, Chair            IN RE:  Senate Bill No. 73, Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
          Committee on State Affairs                              By: Gallegos
          Senate
          Austin, Texas
         
         
         
         
         FROM:  John Keel, Director    
         
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on SB73 ( Relating 
to financial statements filed by judges of statutory county 
courts and statutory probate courts.) this office has detemined 
the following:
         
         Biennial Net Impact to General Revenue Funds by SB73-Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
         
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
         

         
 
This bill would give judges of statutory county courts and statutory 
probate courts, as well as candidates for these offices, a choice 
between filing their personal financial statements with the 
Ethics Commission or with the county clerk.  Current law requires 
them to file with the county clerk.  The bill would provide 
that, upon written request of a county judicial officer or candidate, 
the county clerk or the Ethics Commission would remove the names 
of the officer's or candidate's dependent children from the 
financial statement before the statement is made available to 
a member of the public.  The bill would also give the Ethics 
Commission enforcement authority over county judicial officers 
who elect to file their personal financial statements with the 
Commission instead of the county clerk, and authorize appropriations 
from the Ethics Fund to administer and enforce Subchapter C, 
Chapter 159, Local Government Code. The bill would be effective 
September 1, 1997.

Because the Ethics Commission would have 
enforcement authority over county judicial officers who elect 
to file their personal financial statements with the Commission, 
and the county clerk would not have such authority, the Commission 
estimates that the number of filers electing to file with the 
Commission would be relatively low. Therefore, no significant 
costs are anticipated. 

The bill would recreate the currently 
abolished State Ethics Fund as a separate fund in the State 
Treasury, but would not rededicate any revenue to the fund. 
The recreation of special funds and dedicated revenue sources 
outside the General Revenue Fund could further restrict the 
Legislature's ability to appropriate revenues for general operating 
purposes.


          
The bill would require the county clerk, upon written request 
from the officeholder or candidate, to remove the name of dependent 
children from the financial statement before the statement is 
made available to a member of the public.  No significant fiscal 
implications to local governments are anticipated.
          
   Source:            Agencies:   304   Comptroller of Public Accounts
                                         356   Ethics Commission
                                         
                      LBB Staff:   JK ,JD ,JC