LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD

Austin, Texas

FISCAL NOTE, 80TH LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION

April 1, 2007

TO:	Honorable Bill Callegari, Chair, House Committee on Government Reform
FROM:	John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE:	HB2290 by Christian (Relating to procedures to help ensure that certain state agency actions are consistent with the meaning and intent of applicable legislative enactments.), As Introduced

Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB2290, As Introduced: a negative impact of ($2,523,109) through the biennium ending August 31, 2009.

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
2008	($1,333,280)
2009	($1,189,829)
2010	($1,189,829)
2011	($1,189,829)
2012	($1,189,829)

All Funds, Five-Year Impact:

Fiscal Year	Probable (Cost) from GENERAL REVENUE FUND 1	Change in Number of State Employees from FY 2007
2008	($1,333,280)	18.0
2009	($1,189,829)	18.0
2010	($1,189,829)	18.0
2011	($1,189,829)	18.0
2012	($1,189,829)	18.0

Fiscal Analysis

The bill would amend statute and require all state agencies proposing a rule to prepare a formal legislative history on the legislative enactment under which the rule is proposed. The bill also enumerates the required elements of the legislative history and requires notice to the Secretary of State and the primary author and sponsor of the legislative enactment.

The state agency, the primary author, or the primary sponsor may request that the OAG issue a written opinion on the consistency of a proposed rule with the legislative intent prior to adoption. In addition, the Governor may issue a proclamation instructing an agency not to adopt a proposed rule and describe how the rule is inconsistent with the legislative intent. Furthermore, the bill would require that agencies specifically respond to comments submitted by members of the Legislature.

Methodology

It is assumed that the provision within the bill requiring that state agencies prepare a formal legislative history on the legislative intent under which the rule is proposed and responding to comments submitted by members of the legislature and that notice be provided to the Secretary of State could be absorbed within existing state resources. Currently, state agencies are required to implement various procedures when adopting rules, and this provision within the bill is one additional step in an already established rule making procedure.

 

The provision within the bill providing that the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) may issue a written opinion on the consistency of the proposed rule prior to adoption would significantly increase the workload for that agency. Based on information provided by the OAG, an additional 10.5 FTEs would be required at a salary cost of $756,748 in General Revenue per year. In addition, the OAG would require an increase of 7.5 FTEs for legal assistance and administrative support at a salary cost of $348,211 in General Revenue per year. General operating costs and capital equipment, such as computers and furniture, would require an additional $228,321 in General Revenue for fiscal year 2008 and $84,870 in General Revenue for the remaining years.

 

It is assumed that the provision within the bill providing that the Governor may issue a proclamation instructing an agency not to adopt a proposed rule and describe how the rule is inconsistent with the legislative intent could be absorbed within existing state resources.

Local Government Impact

No fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.

Source Agencies:

302 Office of the Attorney General

LBB Staff:

JOB, MN, MS, JM