LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD

Austin, Texas

FISCAL NOTE, 78TH LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION

March 20, 2003

TO:	Honorable Kent Grusendorf, Chair, House Committee on Public Education
FROM:	John Keel, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE:	HB1145 by Dutton (Relating to discipline management in public schools.), As Introduced

No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

The bill would amend Education Code provisions regarding a school district’s student code of conduct by requiring the principal or other appropriate administrator who is disciplining a student to do so using sound judgment and common sense.

The bill would revise current mandatory placements in Disciplinary Alternative Education Programs (DAEP) to discretionary placements. The bill would make all expulsions, except those associated with federal firearms violations, discretionary. Students who are expelled or transferred to a Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP) are generally not eligible for funding through the Foundation School Program (FSP). Under this bill, the only mandatory expulsions that occur would be for firearms violations. All other expulsions would occur at district discretion. There could be potential fiscal implications for the FSP, if fewer students are expelled and therefore continue to generate attendance. According to the Texas Education Agency, were districts were to significantly reduce expulsions because of this bill, the costs to FSP could reach $1,750,000 per year.

In 2002, 65 students were expelled for reasons that would continue to merit expulsion under the legislation. As a result, costs to the Juvenile Probation Commission would be significantly reduced from the current mandatory population. Current funding for JJAEP’s is provided by a set-aside from FSP. To the extent a reduced amount is needed to fund the mandatory placements in JJAEP’s, those funds would be allocated to local school districts via the FSP funding formulae. While there would be a reduction in funding to the Juvenile Probation Commission, there would not be a significant change in state costs.

 

Local Government Impact

There are potential fiscal implications for districts under this bill, because local school districts are required to fund discretionary placements in juvenile justice alternative education programs. However the net effect of such implications would depend upon local decision making and could vary widely from district to district. If fewer students are expelled, districts would receive somewhat higher FSP revenue.

 

Source Agencies:	665 Juvenile Probation Commission, 701 Central Education Agency
LBB Staff:	JK, CT, UP, PQ