Dear Utah Legislator,

There are numerous problems with the concept and execution of HB 237 DPS Fee Consolidation. Foremost is the transfer of permit fee, and therefore taxing authority from the Legislative to the Executive branch, and thereby removing the need for annual justification and setting of such fees from Legislative oversight and the normal executive department budgetary processes.

Of greatest concern and economic impact is the astronomical increases proposed by DPS for Utah Concealed Firearms Permits and Brady Firearm Purchase background Checks, and the creation of new fees. We feel these exorbitant fee increases cannot be justified and offer the following economic analysis, based on information supplied by DPS.

According to information given on 26 January 1999 by Steve Anderson, an investigator for the Utah DPS/BCI Firearms Section, DPS has two (2) full time investigators assigned to these tasks. Assuming a standard 2000 man hour annual workload (8 hours X 5 days X 50 weeks), this makes 4000 man hours now available at DPS to these tasks, assuming no additional time devoted to sick leave, training, meetings or any other activities or functions.

At this point in time, there are no reports from the field of delays in processing CCW applications, renewals or Brady point of purchase checks. It would appear that there currently are adequate DPS resources and personnel available to meet the demand.

DPS/BCI reports that it requires $1.44 of personnel time and $1.20 to $1.55 of computer costs to process a routine Brady check, for a total of less than $ 3.00 costs against a $ 7.50 fee. Assuming that twice the total rejection rate consists of "non- routine" checks, this still means 95% of the checks are routine and produce income more than twice current costs.

According to the 1997 Utah DPS/BCI Annual Report "Crime in Utah", nearly 98% of individuals being checked under Brady for firearms purchase are approved, meaning that the program is taxing by fee 98 of every 100 honest individuals purchasing firearms, to hopefully screen out 2 ineligible individuals. Even then there are no guarantees of increased public safety, as the Triad incident demonstrated. According to Todd Peterson, the former Supervisor of the DPS/BCI Firearms Section, as of 15 September 1998, there have been NO ARRESTS, NO CRIMINAL CHARGES FILED, NO PROSECUTIONS and NO CONVICTIONS for a criminal attempting to purchase a firearm over the entire 4 years Brady has been on-line in Utah. NONE!

In short, Brady can only be described as a 98% unvarnished failure in protecting public safety, and a 100% sterling success in enhancing the off-budget revenue stream for the administering agency.

Checks for CCW permits are in a similar vein. 98.5% of CCW applications are approved. Assuming that twice the total rejection rate consists of non-routine cases requiring follow-up investigation, this still leaves 97% of cases as routine, requiring DPS to expend about $ 7.50 in personnel time and less that $ 3.00 in computer time, with fee income of $ 35.00.

Routine CCW renewals appear to cost DPS perhaps $ 5.00 on time and computer resources, a zero sum with the current $ 5.00 renewal fee, but offset by extraordinary profit from Brady and CCW.

The potential for abuse of the user fee system regarding firearms carry permits and purchases is monumental. Executive departments, hungry for funding and aggressively seeking additional sources of off-budget revenue hope to `shear the sheep' right down to the skin, and beyond.

Should this legislation be adopted, there would be little or no difficulty in raising this fee structure to what ever the market will bear, and beyond. This authority might well be misused by narrow political interests to create a punitive-level fee structure and a bevy of new fees, all intent on erecting insurmountable economic barriers to firearms ownership and lawful carry of a firearm for self defense to those who would need it most, including the elderly, those on fixed incomes, single parents of limited means, those living or working in high-crime areas and others on the lower end of the economic scale. The power to tax, especially by administrative fees and permit costs, is indeed the power to destroy. Make no mistake, the fees described are indirect taxes on the direct exercise of a Constitutional and basic human right.

If there is some demonstrable, overriding public safety benefit to these DPS services then let the general tax-paying public fund the entire process from general funds, rather than attempting to balance a bloated departmental budget on the backs of Utah's firearms owners.

The Legislature is strongly urged to retain their full oversight and control over both DPS/BCI budgets and fee schedules, and reject this legislative proposal outright.