Print 🖨

House Appropriations met on August 23 to consider HB 1 (Bonnen | et al.), HB 5 (Bonnen | et al.), and SB 7 (Huffman | et al.). All three bills were left pending. An archive of the hearing can be found here.

 

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

HB 1 (Bonnen | et al.) Relating to making appropriations for the legislature and legislative agencies

  • Represents article 10, passed in General Appropriations Act during legislative session
  • Funding all legislative agencies through 2022-2023 biennium

 

Public Testimony

Luis Acuña, Policy Advisor at TX 2036 – For

  • Rising cost of Austin living impacts staff workforce, recruitment, and retention
  • Median salary for full-time Article 10 staffer is $56,000, barely qualifies for subsidized housing
  • 2000-2019: median home price increased 68%, median rent price increased 25%, median salary of fulltime Article 10 staffer increased 6% (adjusted for inflation)
  • $69,000 annually needed to afford living in Austin
  • Additional appropriation of 51 million annually, less than 0.0% of Texas general revenue spending

 

HB 1 left pending

 

HB 5 (Bonnen | et al.) Relating to making supplemental appropriations and giving direction regarding appropriations

  • Schaefer offers committee substitute for HB 5
  • CS supplemental appropriation appropriates $1.25 billion
  • Article 10 agencies totaling $315.9million
  • $90 million for DFPS to increase foster care capacity
  • $20 million in grants to foster care provider facilities
  • Compliments SB 1 funding for community-based care
  • $17.4 million for Dept. of Information Resources cyber security enhancements of state agencies
  • $6.9 million and 7 FTEs for security operations center
  • $6.5 million and 1 FTE for in-point detection and response
  • $4 million and 1 FTE for multi-factor authentication
  • Contingency appropriation for in process HB 3, HB 4, HB 8, HB 12, SB 3
  • Provides $4.3 million to SOS for audible voting machines, contingent on HB 3/ SB 1 passage
  • $100 million for property tax relief and homestead exemption, contingent on HB 4 and SB 8
  • $701.1 million TRS for one-time supplemental payment, contingent on HB 8 or SB 7 passage
  • $2.3 million and $2 million from GR account 5157 to Office of Court Administration for SB 6 bail bonds implementation
    • contingent on HB 12 or SB 6 passage
  • $14.6 million for TEA Civic training program provision of SB 3 contingent on SB 3 passage
  • Schaefer – DFPS representative available to speak?
    • Yes, each agency qualified for appropriation has a representative available

 

 

Public Testimony

Jamie Masters, Commissioner DFPS – Resource

David Kinsey, Financial Officer DFPS – Resource

Trevor Woodruff, Deputy Commissioner DFPS – Resource

  • Schaefer – Crisis on Children Without Placement, stressed staff due to judge’s heightened order on monitoring?
    • Masters – Combination of various factors: COVID-19, heightened monitoring, etc.
  • Schaefer – Many providers are not helping children due to judge’s scrutiny?
    • Masters – They do not want to be scrutinized, correct
  • Schaefer – How many providers under heightened scrutiny have been able to come off?
    • Masters – Zero
  • Schaefer – No all-around satisfaction for providers, judge, and CPS?
    • Masters – Correct, none have been able to come off scrutiny
  • Schaefer – Will funds guarantee more capacity from these providers?
    • Hopeful that it will, hoping funds will lower provider to child ratio, for higher-needs kids
    • Providers need lower ratio to manage
  • Schaefer – Have providers said they will provide for more children with more funding?
    • Masters – Yes
  • Schaefer – State employees staffing numbers, do we have vacancies, what will funding do there?
    • Masters – Staff turnover rate is over 40% due to stress and lack of bandwidth
  • Schaefer – What is the plan to address that?
    • Masters – Re-evaluate DFPS system flaws and employee investigation into issues with abused children
  • Schaefer – That is not a plan, these issues were present months ago as well
    • Masters – We need bandwidth to get kids home, not just focus all attention on the housing and providing of children
    • Masters – The plan is to change the system through a holistic approach
  • Schaefer – What do I tell stressed out CPS workers?
    • Masters – They are heard, seen, and they are working with hospitals, CPS, myself, etc.
  • Schaefer – If you cannot fix this, who can?
    • Masters – It takes the whole system; hospitals, providers, licensing to provide for CWOP and I cannot address issues without everyone
  • Schaefer – Need to contact AG to push back against this executive agency, before judge’s ruling for heightened monitoring, how many CWOP category did we have?
    • Masters – Not sure, not 200, but was small amount also impacted by COVID-19
  • Schaefer – Can we start a new provider without heightened scrutiny? Other than just giving money to existing providers?
    • Woodruff – Need to support current workers and hire more case worker, have expanded contracts for supervised visitation and recruited workers
    • Woodruff – Commissioner and HHSC are working on alternate Heightened Monitoring plan to bring to the court
  • Schaefer – When will that plan be ready?
    • Woodruff – Within the next week
    • Woodruff – CPS commissioner has contracts with out-of-state providers to grow capacity
  • Schaefer – Will the plan coming within the next week require additional funds?
    • Woodruff – Not the monitoring piece, additional $91 million is essential to hiring additional staff, mental health providers, and other resources
  • Schaefer – Are there financial resources or regulatory flexibility you need to address this crisis?
    • Masters – Cannot speak to regulatory, funds could address the issue as a whole
    • Masters – I have also closed some facilities accordingly, which has affected our capacity
  • Schaefer – If you have other requests, please share with this committee
    • Masters – Appreciate your questions
  • Rose – CPS and DFPS needs an overhaul on the front end for investigation, current system is like a band-aid
    • Masters – Agree, investigators bring children in, and others do not see the workload on backend
  • Rose – Could you explain the issue with CWOP? What happens to those children?
    • Masters – Some issue is loss of capacity, children refuse placement, joint-management conservatorship, issues with parental opinion, those children end up in the office

 

Jamie Masters, Commissioner DFPS

  • Minjarez – There have been 175 kids placed outside of state, correct?
    • Masters – Yes, maybe more
  • Minjarez – Where are these kids placed out of state?
    • Kansas, Missouri, Florida, Michigan among others
  • Minjarez – How much does sending these kids out of state cost?
    • Can get to you
  • Minjarez – Would the $91 million be for children in state?
    • Would support providers here
    • Would be potential to use for children placed out of state
    • Would be for PRTF children; is no step-down facility in this state to place them
  • Minjarez – If the funding is approved, would in state providers step up?
    • Confident providers will step up; $91 million would help them with their bandwidth and help with their ratio/overhead
  • Minjarez – Will those out of state have priority to come back into the state?
    • We can, but need to prioritize those sleeping in offices first
  • Minjarez – $91 million is enough? Will make an impact?
    • Will make a real impact with providers
  • Walle – Funding only addresses children without placement?
    • Funding only addresses provider capacity which should lessen CWAP
  • Walle – Increases the rate by which providers are paid for housing/lodging?
    • Yes, helps open up more bedspace and lowers overhead
  • Walle – Some facilities should close? Asks to address a video taken in a facility in Harris County
    • Correct
    • Occurrences like that happen at most CWAP places; children fight, attack staff, etc.
    • Is a crisis; staff is not trained to deal with that kind of behavior; why turnover is what it is
  • Walle – Staff are enduring harsh conditions?
    • Video was a female child who got into an altercation with a male child; child was arrested and brought right back to CWAP the next day
    • Are no consequences for these kids, but there are for our staff
  • Walle – System is broken?
    • System is not broken; need to address the most vulnerable
  • Schaefer – Judges are just letting these kids go?
    • Many judges and hospitals have sat down with me to figure out what to do with CWAP kids
  • Schaefer – Staff will continue to receive overtime?
    • Correct
  • Schaefer – Increase in foreign nationals in yours system?
    • No
  • Johnson – Do you have any idea what happened on charging decisions in this case?
    • Across the board there is no consistency on how these children are charged

 

Jamie McCormick, Texas Alliance of Child and Family Services – For

  • Bonnen – Address provider side of this?
    • Recruiting foster homes has been difficult during this time
    • Increase in the regulatory requirements has made it difficult for providers

 

Public Testimony

Monty Exter, ATPE – On

  • Members do not want a permanent expansion of virtual education offered up in another piece of legislation
  • Would like to offer something more temporary; is more a budgetary issue than a policy issue
  • Have draft language on this solution
  • Districts are not funded on a state-level for virtual education
  • Virtual education has been consistently failing students
  • Asking committee provide temporary action to have access to already appropriated funding limited to the upcoming school year
    • Funds would have guard rails
  • Will have an upcoming commission to meet during the interim
  • Schaefer – What about federal COVID monies?
    • They could use it for
  • Schaefer – Why are we appropriating more money if they already have funds to do so?
    • Money was not evenly distributed among all districts
    • Schools would have access to ADA funding for these programs
  • Gonzalez – This moment in time needs virtual learning with bounds; funding is a place to create those bounds?
    • Agree; this moment in time has produced a minority of parents who are demanding virtual learning
    • Do not support permanently expanding virtual learning right now
    • Is very limited/targeted; would only be for the school year
  • VanDeaver – Why are you asking money for funds that have already been appropriated?
    • Many riders will direct how money is utilized, our language does that
    • Not asking to change funding formulas or to create statutory language
  • Gonzalez – Not asking for new funds? A process for virtual learning?
    • Yes
  • Bonnen – Online kids to be counted through ADA for a specific period of time?
    • Yes
  • Dominguez – Law currently applies to homebound students who have a face-to-face instructor?
    • Yes, and is a much heavier weight in ADA
  • Dominguez – What about if that homebound student had a sibling? Prudent to include them?
    • Parents are concerned about that now
    • Not sure if classifying them as home-bound would be helpful
  • Dominguez – TEA allows students to have remote conferencing for 20 days a year? What should we do to help?
    • Yes; should pass the language we suggested to you
    • Hopefully we have COVID under control by the time we get to next school year

 

Leo Lopez, Chief School Financial Officer TEA – Resource

  • Gonzalez – $14.6 million to TEA; how much money did TEA get from the federal government?
    • 10%, approximately $1.7 billion
    • HB 1525 granted some funds as well
  • Gonzalez – Possible to fund the $14.6 million from these funds, not GR?
    • Not sure
  • Gonzalez – SB 3, how did you get to this cost?
    • Agency looked into cost of implementing reading academies
  • Gonzalez – Basically are increasing TEA’s budget by this amount for one piece of legislation?
    • Would be required
    • Gonzalez – Will ask LBB
  • Gonzalez – Fiscal note during the original budget?
    • Can get that to you
  • Gonzalez – Part of these funds used to enforce the statue of what teachers can teach?
    • Not advised
    • Gonzalez – Want to know if there are enforcement dollars tied to these funds

 

William Pulver, LBB – Resource

  • Gonzalez – Does this funding have to come out of GR?
    • Could re-direct funds currently in budget bills passed, did fund a significant amount contingent on HB 1525
    • Could divert some of these funds
  • Gonzalez – Does TEA report how they will use the discretionary funds?
    • When the biennium ends, they will
    • Will have that information within the first quarter
  • Gonzalez – Are reporting after the fact or before use of funds?
    • In general they report as they spend the funds
    • Gonzalez – Would like to report back on this

HB 5 left pending

 

SB 7 (Huffman | et al.) Relating to a one-time supplemental payment of benefits under the Teacher Retirement System of Texas

  • Rogers – Many TRS retirees earn under $2,000 a month; monthly average is about $2,100
  • 96% of retirees do not receive or meet requirements for social security benefits
  • This one-time check would be equal to the lesser of their annuity or $2,400
  • J Johnson – Agree, layout emphasized a COLA; one-time adjustments are not sustainable
    • Support a COLA, saw an improvement $7.6 billion additional funds from the regular to the first special
    • Do not have enough funds to pass a COLA at this time
  • J Johnson – Would love to see it be “at least” $2,400 in the bill
  • Stucky – Need to look at a COLA in the future, but we did not have extra funds until this session
  • Howard – Fiscal note on Capriglione’s bill was $3.6 billion to be actuarily sound; Darby has a bill that addresses COLAs
    • Reiterates support for a COLA

 

Timothy Lee, TRTA – For

  • Are about 100,000 members in our organization
  • $700 million is being used from GR to pay for this so it will not have an impact on TRS
  • Inflation is hitting retired people; encouraged by COLA discussions
  • Provides an anecdote from a member who is too injured to substitute after retirement

 

Monty Exter, ATPE – For

  • Thanks members and Chair Bonnen for this bill
  • 13th check is appropriate now; pension should be on good footing for a COLA in the 88th session
  • Bonnen – This may be better for a COLA right now
    • Agree, is currently a much higher percentage

 

Craig Campbell, Self – For

  • Is a retired teacher
  • Next session begins in 16 months; COLA would allow retirees to plan for the future
  • There is a return on investment when paying retirees higher annuity
  • Every $1 given by TRS generates $2.83 dollars of economic activity in Texas

SB 7 left pending

 

Closing Comments

  • Bonnen – As a reminder, will meet tomorrow at 8:00 AM to consider HB 9