LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
 
FISCAL NOTE, 80TH LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
 
May 14, 2007

TO:
Honorable Jerry Madden, Chair, House Committee on Corrections
 
FROM:
John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
 
IN RE:
SB909 by Whitmire (Relating to the continuation and functions of the Texas Board of Criminal Justice, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, and the Correctional Managed Health Care Committee, and to the functions of the Board of Pardons and Paroles. ), Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted



Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for SB909, Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted: a negative impact of ($5,263,060) through the biennium ending August 31, 2009.



Fiscal Year Probable Net Positive/(Negative) Impact to General Revenue Related Funds
2008 ($2,481,530)
2009 ($2,781,530)
2010 ($2,781,530)
2011 ($2,781,530)
2012 ($2,781,530)




Fiscal Year Probable Savings/(Cost) from
GENERAL REVENUE FUND
1
2008 ($2,481,530)
2009 ($2,781,530)
2010 ($2,781,530)
2011 ($2,781,530)
2012 ($2,781,530)



Fiscal Year Change in Number of State Employees from FY 2007
2008 11.0
2009 11.0
2010 11.0
2011 11.0
2012 11.0

Fiscal Analysis

The Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) and the Correctional Managed Health Care Committee (the Committee) are subject to the Sunset Act and will be abolished on September 1, 2007 unless continued by the Legislature.  The Board of Pardons and Paroles (Parole Board) is not subject to abolishment, but is subject to Sunset review at the same time as TDCJ. This bill contains the following Sunset Commission recommendations regarding TDCJ, the Parole Board, and the Committee. 

 

·          Establishes a new funding formula for the community justice assistance division (CJAD) of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). Provides for funding mechanisms for funding calculated at placements for felony probationers (as opposed to funding direct felony probationers), funding for felons being supervised in pre-trial diversions programs, misdemeanor funding for 182 days of supervision (limited to $.70 per day), and funding for community correction programs calculated as current policy allows. Specifies that in establishing the new funding formula, the CJAD would include the following weights which only apply to felony probationers: 

o       Higher per capita rates for those defendants supervised by a department who were serving the early years of a term of community supervision than for those defendants who were serving the end of the term of community supervision;

o       Penalties in per capital funding with respect to each defendant supervised by a department whose community supervision is revoked due to a technical violation of an applicable condition of community supervision; and

o       Awards in per capita funding with respect to each felony defendant supervised by a department who was discharged following an early termination of community supervision.

Authorizes the Texas Board of Criminal Justice to adopt a policy limiting the percentage of benefit or loss a department could realize as a result of the operation of the per capita funding formula established under this measure.


Methodology

The fiscal impact of SECTION 2 of the bill on offender population would depend on the number of state jail inmates who pose no risk to public safety due to medical conditions released early to intensive supervision probation. The savings for fiscal years 2008 and 2009 are estimated to be $2,126,958.

 

SECTION 3 of the bill would amend the Code of Criminal Procedure by requiring a judge to review a defendant’s record and consider whether to reduce or terminate the period of probation upon completion of one-half of the original community supervision period, or two years of community supervision, whichever is more.  This provision would result in savings to the State depending on the number of defendants with supervision terminated early, as a result of the bill.  Early terminations would result in a corresponding decrease in fees paid from probationers to local government (community supervision and corrections departments - CSCDs). 

 

SECTION 6 of the bill amends the Government Code and requires CSCDs to identify and recommend probationers appropriate for early termination from supervision. The fiscal impact cannot be determined because the number of probationers who may be released from supervision is unknown.

 

SECTION 11 of the bill amends the Government Code and requires TDCJ to use a dynamic risk assessment tool to assign a risk level to an inmate before being discharged or is released on parole who has been serving a sentence for a sexual offense. Currently, the Department of Criminal Justice utilizes the Static-99 risk assessment tool at no cost to the State. Estimating the fiscal impact of using the dynamic risk assessment tool would depend on the Council on Sex Offender Treatment developing or adopting a new assessment tool. Costs that may be associated with the dynamic assessment tool could be a polygraph exam ($150 per test) or penile plethysmograph ($250-$350 per test) which would result in a fiscal impact to TDCJ, based on the number of offenders required to be tested.  If the intent of the bill includes assessing offenders who are discharged from community supervision, the number of offenders impacted would be higher.   

 

SECTION 21 of the bill defines the requirements for the quality of care monitoring by the TDCJ and health care providers. The Department of Criminal Justice Health Services Division would monitor the quality of care of the health care providers. TDCJ has estimated the cost to be approximately $845,009 annually (includes 11 new FTE’s salaries $795,009 and operating expenses of $50,000).

 

SECTION 27 of the bill would require the Board of Pardons and Paroles to prepare and submit a legislative appropriations request that is separate from TDCJ.  Also, the budget structure of the Board of Pardons and Paroles shall be maintained separately from TDCJ. The bill does not provide for associated start up costs required to establish a separate agency such as office space rental, information resources, and other necessary costs.

  

SECTION 29 of the bill would require TDCJ to establish a career ladder for parole officers. TDCJ has estimated the fiscal impact to be approximately $5.7 million for fiscal year 2008 and 2009. The estimate includes salary expenditures for all parole positions to the appropriate pay levels. The incremental pay raise would cost approximately $3.0 million in the subsequent years.

 

SECTION 35 of the bill would establish a new funding formula for basic supervision probation for the community justice assistance division (CJAD) of the Department of Criminal Justice. Section 56 of the bill provides that the new funding formula would be used for the state fiscal year beginning in September 1, 2008. CJAD has estimated that the fiscal impact on the funding allocation to the community supervision and corrections departments (CSCDs) could be approximately $11.4 million in fiscal year 2009. This calculation includes the amount of funding necessary to protect CSCDs from potential financial losses as a result of the bill, $4.2 million in fiscal year 2009.  The impact to account for the projected loss of offender fees is estimated to be $7.2 million in fiscal year 2009. However, the bill provides that the board may adopt a policy limiting loss or gain as a result of the operation of the new formula. It is unknown how much loss or gain the board would allow as a result of the new formula, therefore, at this time, the impact of the provision to the CSCDs is unknown. The bill would provide for funding mechanisms for funding calculated for offenders placed on felony probation (as opposed to funding direct felony probationers), funding for felons being supervised in pre-trial diversions programs, misdemeanor funding for 182 days of supervision (limited to $.70 per day), and funding for community correction programs calculated as current policy allows.

 

The Texas Department of Criminal Justice has determined that the cost of implementing the other provisions of this bill would not be significant.

 

The Correctional Managed Health Care Committee has determined that the costs to implement the provisions in the bill are not anticipated to be significant and could be absorbed with current resources.

 

The Board of Pardons and Paroles has determined that no fiscal impact is anticipated to implement SECTIONS 25, 26, 28, and 30-32 of the bill.

 

Unless otherwise noted, all costs associated with implementation of the bill have been estimated upon the Act becoming effective on September 1, 2007.


Local Government Impact

The provisions of the bill that are likely to have an impact on local government are the provisions amending community supervision statutes.  For SECTION 35 of the bill, which would establish a new funding formula for basic supervision probation, this analysis indicates the amount of state funding necessary to protect Community Supervision and Corrections Departments from potential financial losses as a result of the bill.  SECTION 3 of the bill would likely result in decreased community supervision populations, depending on the number of defendants with supervision terminated early, as a result of the bill.  Local governments would experience a decrease in revenue through lowered court costs and lowered probation fees to community supervision and corrections departments. The impact to individual localities would vary considerably due to court costs, probation fees, and supervision costs which vary by locality.

Under existing statute, in addition to funding received from the state for each felony offender on direct community supervision, the court may impose a supervision fee on the offender to help offset the costs of their supervision. Collection of the supervision fee and other fees imposed on offenders may be spread over the length of their community supervision; a shorter period of supervision could reduce the collection rate. However, if the majority of felony community supervision cases are not extended beyond the proposed maximum terms, there would be a reduction in the number of felony offenders under supervision, which would result in reduced workload and costs to a community supervision and corrections department.



Source Agencies:
696 Department of Criminal Justice
LBB Staff:
JOB, ES, MN, GG, SDO