| TO: | Honorable Joe Driver, Chair, House Committee on Law Enforcement |
| FROM: | John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board |
| IN RE: | HB1535 by Martinez Fischer (Relating to generally prohibiting the carrying of a Taser or other stun gun; providing certain criminal penalties and defenses to prosecution for persons who obtain a license.), As Introduced |
| Fiscal Year | Probable Net Positive/(Negative) Impact to General Revenue Related Funds |
|---|---|
| 2008 | $3,112,275 |
| 2009 | $2,908,275 |
| 2010 | $3,112,275 |
| 2011 | $2,908,275 |
| 2012 | $3,112,275 |
| Fiscal Year | Probable Revenue Gain/(Loss) from GENERAL REVENUE FUND 1 |
Probable Savings/(Cost) from STATE HIGHWAY FUND 6 |
Change in Number of State Employees from FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | $3,112,275 | ($1,646,399) | 18.0 |
| 2009 | $2,908,275 | ($830,974) | 18.0 |
| 2010 | $3,112,275 | ($978,286) | 18.0 |
| 2011 | $2,908,275 | ($841,900) | 18.0 |
| 2012 | $3,112,275 | ($1,018,138) | 18.0 |
The bill would amend the Penal Code and Government Code relating to generally prohibiting the carrying to a Taser or other stun gun.
The bill would amend Penal Code, Sections 30 and 46 which would add Taser or other stun guns under the provisions that currently govern concealed handgun license holders. The bill also states that unlicensed carrying of Taser or other stun guns is prohibited and limits where the license to carry of these weapons is permitted. The bill states that the Department of Public Safety (DPS) is required to develop policy and procedures for a licensing system and collect fees allowing people to carry a Taser or other stun gun legally. The bill states that a license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a Taser or a stun gun and provides various locations where a Taser or a stun gun can not be carried. DPS is also required to disclose to a criminal justice agency information in their records system whether a person is licensed to carry a Taser or a stun gun under this chapter. The bill also establishes policies and procedures for record disclosure. The bill also states procedures on when a person must display their certification and when a license holder may be disarmed. The bill would take effect on September 1, 2007.
DPS states that records or statistics indicating how many current concealed handgun license holders, private security officers, citizens, or any other group might be interested in owning a stun gun or applying for a stun gun license are not available. DPS' Regulatory Licensing Service used assumptions based on current handgun license holder statistics to determine license and revenue collection estimates. DPS estimates a total of 38,777 applications for stun gun licenses each year based on a combination of estimates for current and new concealed handgun license holders, current and new security officer licenses, and individual stun gun owners who would require a license. DPS assumes they would charge $75 per license for stun gun application totaling $2,908,275 in General Revenue each year ($75 x 38,777 stun gun applications). In addition, DPS assumes they would charge $100 per license for stun gun instructor applications that are valid for two years totaling an additional $204,000 in General Revenue every other year ($100 x 2,040 instructor applications). DPS estimates total annual revenue to be $3,112,275 in General Revenue ($2,908,275 + $204,000) during fiscal years 2008, 2010 and 2012 allowing for instructor recertifications and total annual revenue without instructor recertifications is estimated to be $2,908,275 in General Revenue for fiscal years 2009 and 2011.
This analysis assumes that an additional 18 FTEs per year would be required to implement the provisions of the bill, including: 2 commissioned officers (1 sergeant and 1 lieutenant) to staff the stun gun license training academy to educate both potential license holders and future license trainers and 16 support staff FTEs to process and archive application materials, input registration information into the database, and provide administrative and legal support to the officers and the agency. The cost estimate also includes the necessary police equipment (including state travel costs).
DPS estimates that additional office space will be required to accommodate the additional personnel. This analysis assumes estimated lease costs of $75,582 per year, which is also included in the cost estimate. Other operating expenses such as maintenance and repair of office machines and computer equipment, computer supplies, non-capital computer equipment, and furniture and equipment, are also included in the cost estimate.
The Department of Criminal Justice anticipates no significant fiscal impact to the agency.
This analysis includes technology costs estimated for computers, printers, and enterprise software agreements totaling $328,597 in 2008. Fiscal years 2009 through 2012 have a technology impact of $2,682 per year for continued enterprise software agreements.
There would be costs to local law enforcement agencies to arrest, process, house, and prosecute the offenders of the newly established offense, depending on the number of offenders. However, some of these costs could be offset by fines and court costs collected from the offender.
| Source Agencies: | 405 Department of Public Safety, 696 Department of Criminal Justice
|
| LBB Staff: | JOB, ES, GG, LG, KJG
|