LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE
75th Regular Session
May 27, 1997
TO: Honorable Bob Bullock IN RE: Senate Bill No. 1752, As Passed 2nd House
Lieutenant Governor Armbrister
Senate
Austin, Texas
FROM: John Keel, Director
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on SB1752 ( Relating
to the purchase of goods and services by the state and to purchasing
services provided by the state to local governments.) this office
has detemined the following:
Biennial Net Impact to General Revenue Funds by SB1752-As Passed 2nd House
Implementing the provisions of the bill would result in a net
impact of $0 to General Revenue Related Funds through the biennium
ending August 31, 1999.
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would require state agencies and institutions of higher
education to use the "best value" approach when evaluating contractor
bids, and to provide a process for barring contractors from
contracting with the state under certain circumstances. The
bill would also increase the threshold for requiring competitive
bids from $1,000 to $2,000 and allow the General Services Commission
(GSC) to delegate additional purchasing authority to state agencies.
The bill would allow a state agency to purchase goods and services
from a vendor who is not on the bidders list if the purchase
price does not exceed $5,000. The bill would require the GSC
to establish a training and continuing education program for
certifying state agency purchasing staff. The cost of providing
this training program would be provided on a full cost recovery
basis.
The bill would also amend Section 447.008 of the Government
Code relating to the authority of the state energy management
center at the General Services Commission (GSC). The bill would
authorize the center to negotiate rates for state agency electric
services. Electric service contracts could be negotiated by
the center for each state agency, or under a single contract
on behalf of several state agencies.
The Office of the
Attorney General (OAG) would be empowered to represent the energy
management center as an intervenor in Public Utility Commission
proceedings related to electric utility industry deregulation.
The OAG and the center would cooperate in monitoring efforts
to deregulate the electric utility industry and in reporting
on the ways deregulation would affect state government as a
purchaser of electricity.
The energy management center would
be directed to analyze electricity rates and usage to determine
ways in which the state could lower its utility costs. The
PUC and other state agencies would be required to assist the
center in obtaining the information it needs to perform this
analysis.
The bill would amend the Government Code relating
to the Department of Public Safety's authority to make certain
expenditures, and to require the General Services Commission
and the Department of Information Resources to develop a technology
access clause to be included in all state contracts. The bill
would also amend the Public Utility Regulatory Act relating
to fees charged for electronic access to certain information.
Methodolgy
The expanded training program for state agency purchasing staff
required by the bill would result in additional costs based
on an assessment of workload by the GSC. These costs would
be recovered by the GSC in the form of interagency contracts.
However, the cost to each agency is not expected to be significant.
The
purchase of products and services having the "best value" could
result in savings to the state over the long run due to increased
reliability, durability, and quality of the products and services
purchased.
The General Services Commission anticipates that
it would need the following four additional FTEs to negotiate
electric service contracts and electric rates for state agency
electric services: a Director of Programs II, an Attorney V,
an Administrative Technician I, and a Utility Specialist I.
The Commission expects to be able to use oil overcharge money,
which is paid out of a General Revenue dedicated account, for
these functions.
Five Year Impact:
Fiscal Year Probable Change in Number
Savings/(Cost) of State
from Oil Employees from
Overcharge FY 1997
Account/
GR-Dedicated
5005
1998 ($200,593) 4.0
1998 (200,593) 4.0
2000 (200,593) 4.0
2001 (200,593) 4.0
2002 (200,593) 4.0
The bill would not require units of local government to participate
in the training programs offered by the GSC. However, local
governments choosing to receive such training would be charged
on a cost recovery basis by the GSC.
Source: Agencies: 720 University of Texas System Administration
601 Department of Transportation
696 Department of Criminal Justice
303 General Services Commission
304 Comptroller of Public Accounts
473 Public Utility Commission of Texas
302 Office of the Attorney General
LBB Staff: JK ,JD ,RN