NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
SPONSOR: |
Hurt |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
|
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Session Law Distribution |
SB |
25 |
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Chavez |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
|
Refer to Fiscal Implications Section |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Secretary
of State (SOS)
LFC
Files
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
Senate Bill 25
proposes a change to the distribution of session laws from an automatic distribution
to a distribution upon request.
Significant
Issues
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
No appropriation is
contained in this bill. However the
expenditures of the distribution of the session laws reside within the
Secretary of State’s operating budget.
The Secretary of State suggests that it will be impossible to project
budget cost with respect to the distribution of session laws if the
distribution of session laws is based on request. An additional concern is that per volume cost
will increase if a set number cannot be ordered.
The Secretary of State
has a statutory duty to distribute session laws. Therefore, the general fund appropriation to
the Secretary of State must provide enough resources to cover all possible
costs for distributing session laws, whether required or based on request.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS