According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the fiscal implications of SB 1667 are indeterminate, primarily due to a lack of case-level data on the number of expunction petitions and orders that would be affected by the proposed changes. While the bill includes both the imposition of a new fee and the repeal of certain existing fees, the net effect on overall state or local revenue cannot be precisely estimated without knowing how many cases would fall under the updated expunction procedures.

The bill introduces a new $25 fee for each governmental agency listed in an expunction petition that cannot accept documents electronically. This provision could generate new revenue, particularly for local court clerks who process expunctions for individuals listing multiple non-digital agencies. At the same time, the bill repeals several existing fees: the general filing fee for expunction petitions in district courts, a $1 fee for mailing hearing notices, and a $2 fee for mailing certified expunction orders. These repeals could result in reduced fee collection in jurisdictions that currently process high volumes of expunctions.

From a state perspective, the Office of Court Administration noted that the potential revenue changes cannot be predicted because the number of applicable expunction filings is unknown. Similarly, for local governments, the Comptroller of Public Accounts acknowledged that while the new $25 fee could become a source of revenue, the overall fiscal impact remains uncertain due to unknown usage rates of the expunction process under the bill’s revised procedures.

In sum, SB 1667 could have offsetting fiscal effects: increasing revenue through a new fee for non-electronic transmission while simultaneously reducing income from now-repealed filing and mailing charges. However, without more detailed data, the financial outcome for both state and local governments remains speculative.

SB 1667 offers substantive procedural improvements to the criminal record expunction process in Texas. The bill addresses inefficiencies and inconsistencies in how expunction orders are transmitted and managed across local and state entities. It also responds to concerns raised by clerks and petitioners regarding the cost and accessibility of the expunction process, striking a balance between fiscal sustainability for local courts and fair treatment of individuals seeking record clearance.

The bill enhances individual liberty by expanding access to expunction through more predictable and equitable filing procedures. It eliminates certain existing fees while introducing a capped $25 charge per agency for entities that cannot accept electronic notice, thus reducing unnecessary financial burdens and increasing transparency. The requirement that most agencies accept electronic service when available, combined with the prohibition against charging for electronic transmission, furthers the principle of limited government by streamlining administrative processes and reducing redundancy.

Importantly, SB 1667 also aligns with personal responsibility and privacy rights by allowing for long-term retention of expunction orders, ensuring that individuals can retrieve records without restarting the legal process. This safeguards people from unjust consequences like online background check discrepancies due to lingering public records that should have been removed.

In summary, this legislation supports all five core liberty principles: It strengthens individual liberty and privacy, ensures fair and transparent fees aligned with personal responsibility, encourages modernization in line with limited government ideals, respects private property by facilitating the clearing of wrongful records, and avoids overregulation while respecting due process. Therefore, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 1667.

• Individual Liberty: The bill strongly promotes individual liberty by improving access to the expunction process, allowing individuals who have satisfied legal requirements (such as completing diversion programs or being found not guilty) to more efficiently clear their criminal records. This protects their rights to privacy, reputation, and freedom from unwarranted ongoing consequences of past involvement with the justice system. It also ensures that people are not unfairly penalized by outdated or inaccurately retained arrest information, especially as such records often impact employment, housing, and educational opportunities.
• Personal Responsibility: By making the expunction process more accessible and predictable, the bill reinforces the value of second chances for individuals who have met the conditions set forth by law, such as successful participation in veterans or mental health court programs. It encourages individuals to take the personal initiative to petition for their record expunction and follow the procedural steps required—thus promoting responsibility and civic re-engagement. The retention of expunction orders also prevents individuals from being forced to restart the process due to the clerical destruction of records, reinforcing their autonomy.
• Free Enterprise: While not directly aimed at business regulation, the bill indirectly supports free enterprise by reducing the burdens faced by individuals with expungable criminal records when seeking jobs, professional licenses, or credit. Clean records expand employment eligibility and economic opportunity, allowing more Texans to participate fully in the labor market. It also provides a clearer legal framework that private data compilers must follow, reducing liability and confusion in commercial background check practices.
• Private Property Rights: Criminal history information can act as a barrier to property-related rights, such as leasing or purchasing a home. By ensuring more consistent and enforceable expunctions, this bill helps protect the ability of individuals to secure housing and safeguard their personal data. It also helps prevent private companies from disseminating outdated or expunged records for profit, which can violate an individual’s right to control their personal information.
• Limited Government: The bill exemplifies limited government by reducing bureaucratic inefficiencies in the expunction process. It eliminates unnecessary fees, mandates the use of electronic service where possible, and places clear limits on what clerks can charge. By eliminating redundant notifications and standardizing procedures, it reduces government waste and ensures that justice system resources are used efficiently. It also avoids expanding government power or creating new regulations unrelated to public safety.

• HB 2328 (Similar To)