LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
                              Austin, Texas
                                     
                    FISCAL NOTE, 76th Regular Session
  
                              April 14, 1999
  
  
          TO:  Honorable Senfronia Thompson, Chair, House Committee on
               Judicial Affairs
  
        FROM:  John Keel, Director, Legislative Budget Board
  
       IN RE:  HB804  by Gallego (Relating to salaries and fees for
               services of certain prosecutors), Committee Report 1st
               House, Substituted
  
**************************************************************************
*  Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for    *
*  HB804, Committee Report 1st House, Substituted:  negative impact      *
*  of $(9,000,450) through the biennium ending August 31, 2001.          *
*                                                                        *
*  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 to General Revenue Related  *
          *                             Funds                *
          *       2000                         $(4,500,225)  *
          *       2001                          (4,500,225)  *
          *       2002                          (4,500,225)  *
          *       2003                          (4,500,225)  *
          *       2004                          (4,500,225)  *
          ****************************************************
  
All Funds, Five-Year Impact:
  
         *****************************************************
         * Fiscal Year      Probable Savings/(Cost) from      *
         *                      General Revenue Fund          *
         *                              0001                  *
         *      2000                             $(4,500,225) *
         *      2001                              (4,500,225) *
         *      2002                              (4,500,225) *
         *      2003                              (4,500,225) *
         *      2004                              (4,500,225) *
         *****************************************************
  
Fiscal Analysis
  
The bill would provide state salary supplements to county attorneys who
practice in a county served by district attorneys effective September 1,
1999.
  
  
Methodology
  
State salary supplements to county attorneys would be based on taking
one-half the "benchmark salary" of a district judge (currently $101,700)
which would yield $50,850.  In cases where a district attorney serves one
county, the annual supplement would be $50,850.  If a district attorney
serves two counties, the supplement would be split between two county
attorneys, or $25,425 each.  If a district attorney serves three or more
counties, each county attorney receives one-third of the supplement or
$16,950.  Finally, if a county is served by more than one state
prosecutor, the salary supplement, determined by a formula set forth in
the bill, would be $33,900.

There are thirty county attorneys eligible for the $50,850 supplement.
There are 39 attorneys eligible for the $25,425 supplement.  There are
105 attorneys eligible for the $16,950 supplement.  There are six county
attorneys whose supplement would be determined by the formula set forth
in the bill.  These six county attorneys would be eligible for the
$33,900 supplement.

Information from the Comptroller of Public Accounts was used to determine
the salary of district court judges.  Information from the Texas
District and County Attorneys Association was used to determine the
number of district attorney jurisdictions and county attorneys affected
by this bill.
  
  
Local Government Impact
  
No fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
  
  
Source Agencies:   
LBB Staff:         JK, PE, DG