TexasCHLforum.com

RPB wrote:So, "chls living in dorms" = about the same number of people who rent a towel at the local swimming pool instead of bringing their own ...

So, are you saying they essentially don't matter because they're small in number?

For this analysis it is assumed implementing the provisions of the bill would not result in a significant impact on the programs and workload of State corrections agencies or on the demand for resources of those agencies.

Local Government Impact

No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.


Source Agencies:
405 Department of Public Safety, 710 Texas A&M University System Administrative and General Offices, 720 The University of Texas System Administration, 758 Texas State University System, 768 Texas Tech University System Administration, 769 University of North Texas System Administration, 781 Higher Education Coordinating Board, 783 University of Houston System Administration

NorthTexas wrote:

RPB wrote:So, "chls living in dorms" = about the same number of people who rent a towel at the local swimming pool instead of bringing their own ...

So, are you saying they essentially don't matter because they're small in number?

cost of 2 or 3 lockers on the whole campus?

Still, just require those 2 or 3 to get a safe stored in their room. No unconcealment issues.

I have issues with "front desk people"
no "list of chls" on campus. No handing guns and ammo to people who will have accidents due to unfamiliarity with that model

"Where's the safety on this Glock/revolver etc" (Good there's no magazine, it must be unloaded I'll twirl it on my finger like in the Bonanza/Gunsmoke/Bat Masterson ... everyone's asleep, no one will know...)

baldeagle wrote:

NorthTexas wrote:

NorthTexas wrote: The administrator said in the meeting what Housing's financial impact was estimated to be, but I'm going to have to double check my memory with my friend before posting it.

Double-checked with my friend; friend said the administrator said Housing reported back to "the Legislature" that the bills would cost an estimated $750,000 over five years to the Housing department (largely in salaries and benefits I believe, to have front desks manned 24/7 as previously mentioned).

Unfortunately for them the LBB thought differently.

No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

Thanks for this! It does also say, "Institutions of higher education reported that the bill's provisions could increase costs related to campus police operations, security programs, and staff training. Adaptation of campus facilities to accommodate the storage of handguns could result in new costs for institutions." But in general this looks good! I'm thinking the distinction would be that, while no significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated, there "could" be a significant fiscal implication to the individual universities themselves (lots of their money comes from tuition these days, less and less from the state, which I'm sure you know). Of course, $750,000 over five years is only $150,000/year, and I think that's hardly significant for a large state university anyway; but I could still see someone trying to argue that $750,000 is.

If 3 lockers and the salaries to administer those 3 lockers = $750,000 per 5 years, that's some well paid desk personnel .... perhaps I'll apply ....

Morning, pass out 2 or 3 guns, evening take them up .... can I watch TV the rest of the day? microwave handy?

Tough job, where do I apply, I was Staff at UofH and San Jacinto College.
Job come with Staff parking sticker/benefits/retirement/cafeteria discount?

(Yes, toilet paper is softer in Faculty/Staff restrooms than in student restrooms)

RPB wrote:

NorthTexas wrote:

RPB wrote:So, "chls living in dorms" = about the same number of people who rent a towel at the local swimming pool instead of bringing their own ...

So, are you saying they essentially don't matter because they're small in number?

cost of 2 or 3 lockers on the whole campus?

I guess I'm not understanding you. I thought you were saying the small number of CHL holders who would carry in the dorms is too trivial to worry about. I mean no disrespect, but I think that's a dangerous argument to make - those against campus carry could say the same thing about campus carry in general (there's only what, a few percent of the general Texas population that are CHL holders?). By the way, I don't know about other campuses, but UNT has 13 or 14 dorms I believe. 13 or 14 lockers (or even double it and put two per hall) wouldn't be that expensive, but hiring people to staff 13 or so front desks round the clock would be very wasteful IMHO.

RPB wrote: Still, just require those 2 or 3 to get a safe stored in their room. No unconcealment issues.

I have issues with "front desk people"
no "list of chls" on campus. No handing guns and ammo to people who will have accidents due to unfamiliarity with that model

Yes, I agree completely - that's also what I want to see.

RPB wrote: "Where's the safety on this Glock/revolver etc" (Good there's no magazine, it must be unloaded I'll twirl it on my finger like in the Bonanza/Gunsmoke/Bat Masterson ... everyone's asleep, no one will know...)

And that is why.

cbr600 wrote:Does the bill/law actually require them to implement new polices and procedures for dorms? If not, the true financial impact is zero. Any cost above zero is not a financial impact of the legislation, but instead a financial impact of their hysteria.

Neither bill requires them to do anything. They grant them the option of establishing rules and regulations regarding storage of weapons in their dorms.

RPB wrote:Hey, John Woods is 30-ish, his income from "students for gun free schools" might diminish, perhaps he could get part time work behind the desk?

John Woods is a biology PhD student. Even at a third-rate grad program like UT-Austin, they have to give full scholarships and stipends to attract students. He probably makes around $25,000 per year, funded most likely by your tax dollars.

hirundo82 wrote:

RPB wrote:Hey, John Woods is 30-ish, his income from "students for gun free schools" might diminish, perhaps he could get part time work behind the desk?

John Woods is a biology PhD student. Even at a third-rate grad program like UT-Austin, they have to give full scholarships and stipends to attract students. He probably makes around $25,000 per year, funded most likely by your tax dollars.

Seriously?

I really need to get my FAF forms filled out then
5 honor societies etc

hirundo82 wrote: Even at a third-rate grad program like UT-Austin, they have to give full scholarships and stipends to attract students. He probably makes around $25,000 per year, funded most likely by your tax dollars.

I doubt his funding is from state money, but could quite possibly be supported via various federal research funding sources. In which case, while our federal tax dollars may be paying for some of it, proportionally more of would be is being paid by folks in places like New York and Connecticut. Since John Woods takes some of this money and buys breakfast tacos, etc., I consider his scholarship as a net transfer from outside the State, and thus a net benefit to the Texas economy.

J.R.@A&M wrote:

hirundo82 wrote: Even at a third-rate grad program like UT-Austin, they have to give full scholarships and stipends to attract students. He probably makes around $25,000 per year, funded most likely by your tax dollars.

I doubt his funding is from state money, but could quite possibly be supported via various federal research funding sources. In which case, while our federal tax dollars may be paying for some of it, proportionally more of would be is being paid by folks in places like New York and Connecticut. Since John Woods takes some of this money and buys breakfast tacos, etc., I consider his scholarship as a net transfer from outside the State, and thus a net benefit to the Texas economy.

At somewhere like UT-Austin that doesn't exactly rake in the federal research money (in terms of NIH money to the UT system, UT-Austin comes in behind MD Anderson, UT-Southwestern, UT-Houston, UTMB, and UTHSCSA), more of the money for grad students more likely comes from tuition charged to other students than from overhead from grants.

ETA: Not trying to criticize UT in general; it's just very difficult (I'd say verging on impossible) to have a top biology graduate program without a medical school. In UT's case, I understand that's a political issue rather than an educational one, but it makes it very difficult to attract top research faculty to a school.

hirundo82 wrote:At somewhere like UT-Austin that doesn't exactly rake in the federal research money (in terms of NIH money to the UT system, UT-Austin comes in behind MD Anderson, UT-Southwestern, UT-Houston, UTMB, and UTHSCSA), more of the money for grad students more likely comes from tuition charged to other students than from overhead from grants.

ETA: Not trying to criticize UT in general; it's just very difficult (I'd say verging on impossible) to have a top biology graduate program without a medical school. In UT's case, I understand that's a political issue rather than an educational one, but it makes it very difficult to attract top research faculty to a school.

First, I stand corrected about NIH funding specifically and other funding sources that you're familiar with. Second, being a native of Austin and graduate of Texas A&M University, I would encourage you to criticize UT in general :)

Went to UNT ('95) and I recall my dorm having a staffed front desk 24/7.

PUCKER wrote:Went to UNT ('95) and I recall my dorm having a staffed front desk 24/7.

Some are, some are not. The mostly freshmen dorms (a little more than half of them, I think) are staffed 24/7, while the rest (the mostly upperclassmen dorms) are not staffed 24/7 and would require hiring additional staff if the plan were put into place.

Another interesting twist I didn't think about when I posted this originally: some of the dorms at UNT contain a classroom or two where official university classes are taught by faculty. If the plan were put into place, faculty coming in to the dorm to teach in one of the classrooms would, I suppose, have to leave their weapon in their office or car, or check it at the desk. (Yes, I understand that if the bills pass as written, they probably wouldn't be able to legally enforce this plan; that doesn't mean they wouldn't try, either out of ignorance of the bills/law or in spite of it).