LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 77th Regular Session Revision 1 March 12, 2001 TO: Honorable Royce West, Chair, Senate Committee on Jurisprudence FROM: John Keel, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE: SB625 by Duncan (Relating to the electronic storage of records by the court of criminal appeals.), As Introduced ************************************************************************** * No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. * * * ************************************************************************** The bill would amend Section 51.105, Government Code, to give the Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals authority to maintain writs and other records and document in an electronic storage format. The court has indicated that it can absorb the costs any technology or personnel needed to maintain records electronically in its baseline budget. The estimated costs and assumptions of the technology impact of the bill are as follows: The bill would allow court records to be maintained in an electronic storage format. In fiscal year 2002, $80,000 would be used to purchase a digital scanner and a CD writer. Another $20,000 would be required to purchase server software and $54,400 would be needed for contract development costs (estimated length of contract, four months). The technology would require an additional FTE to maintain the system (salary cost at $30,000) and an additional $10,000 in maintenance costs for every year after the first year. The technology impact estimate was prepared using current prices for necessary hardware and software. The technology impact estimate assumes that a contractor would be hired to develop the system and the length of the contract would be four months. The technology impact estimate assumes that an additional FTE would be needed to maintain the system, and that the FTE would be employed the final six months of fiscal year 2002 and every year thereafter. Additional maintenance costs to the system are estimated to be $10,000 in fiscal year 2003 and every year thereafter. Local Government Impact No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated. Source Agencies: 211 Court of Criminal Appeals, 212 Office of Court Administration LBB Staff: JK, TB, JN, SS