They're not very friendly in Austin, are they?

[red2000vette]

Those buggers cashed my check on March 10. As of today I have heard nothing from them. No PIN, no nothing. So today I called. It took me 7 tries to get them on the phone and the last time I was in their phone que system for 23 minutes before someone picked up. Well, I still know nothing. The snip that answered the phone couldn't wait to get me off. I finally convinced her to look up my SSN and all she would tell me is "you are not in the system yet". Most of the time she sounded like she was reading from a script.

That's my status. Almost 60 days now and not even a letter. Just the bum's rush on the phone.

[dukesean]

You probably caught Simone.

There is a long queue for the phones because they are way understaffed to handle the kind of volume they face. Honestly, the PIN doesn't really help you all that much, all you end up doing is stressing yourself out more each time you check online and it says "processing application" or whatever. It's easier said than done, but it's probably best to just let it go. The wheels are turning on your application, albeit very slowly.

I got my PIN probably 20 days after DPS received my application. 80 total days later still no plastic. Some people received their PIN 40 days after DPS recieved their application and after 60 total days they have their plastic. I'd rather be one of those instead.

[Charles L. Cotton]

There's a real good chance you got one of the 12 temps. The experienced folks are working on apps. Obviously, this is just a guess, but probably a pretty good one.

Chas.

[asleepatthereel]

According to DPS, in 2007 there were 90,867 applications issued. In addition to that, there were 392 applications denied. thats a total of 91,259 applications. They dont give refunds if your application is denied. Thats $12,776,260. Its probably a little less because we dont all have to pay $140 for the application, and it doesnt say if they were new apps or renewals, but lets just assume they took in at least $10,000,000. Why are they using 12 temps? If they hired 12 full time employees, and used only half of the money to pay salaries, they would be making about $41,500 a year. Having worked for the state in the past, I can almost assure you that even the reknowned Simone, bless her heart, isnt making that kind of scratch. Why is our money not being spent the way it is supposed to be? I know Gov. Perry has done alot for us when it comes to CHL, but I have to say, the more I see things like this and the Trans Texas Corridor, etc., the less I like him.

[Mike1951]

But in the previous year, fiscal 2006, the numbers were 67,843 issued and 388 denied, or 68231 total processed.

I figure that means an increase of 34% in the number of applications processed.

Since the legislature only meets in odd years, their budget was probably calculated based on the 2005 and 2006 fiscal years.

So the increase in applications processed should probably reflect even more than 34%, since 2005 numbers weren't available on the DPS website.

I know the delays must seem monumental to those who are waiting, but everyone really just needs to chill out.

All of the griping and grousing in the world won't get your license to you a day sooner.

Of course, if it feels good to vent, by all means go ahead.

Some of us remember back to the early '90's when we had a legislature pass a CHL bill only to have Governor Ann veto it.

So we waited for another election and another legislature to again pass CHL to be signed by George W.

I seem to remember on the initial issuance in 1996 that there was no time limit imposed on DPS.

I believe my class was in late September or early October of 1995 with the license received in Feb 1996.

TSRA has met with DPS and (I believe) some legislators regarding the problem. But any solution will come after the legislature meets in 2009 and (hopefully) approves more funding.

Personally, I think a 34% increase in applications processed from fiscal 2006 to fiscal 2007 is outstanding.

[melkor41]

According to DPS, in 2007 there were 90,867 applications issued. In addition to that, there were 392 applications denied. thats a total of 91,259 applications. They dont give refunds if your application is denied. Thats $12,776,260. Its probably a little less because we dont all have to pay $140 for the application, and it doesnt say if they were new apps or renewals, but lets just assume they took in at least $10,000,000. Why are they using 12 temps? If they hired 12 full time employees, and used only half of the money to pay salaries, they would be making about $41,500 a year. Having worked for the state in the past, I can almost assure you that even the reknowned Simone, bless her heart, isnt making that kind of scratch. Why is our money not being spent the way it is supposed to be? I know Gov. Perry has done alot for us when it comes to CHL, but I have to say, the more I see things like this and the Trans Texas Corridor, etc., the less I like him.

I do not know if this is true or not.. perhaps Chas or someone more involved can fill in... but I was told by my CHL instructor that each applicant is processed at a LOSS to the state. The cost for the hourly wages and fees paid to people like the FBI to do the background checks and other costs (overhead for building space, printing the plastic, record storage, etc) end up costing more than then $140 we pay especially when you figure in the people that get theirs for free or reduced.

[dukesean]

I do not know if this is true or not.. perhaps Chas or someone more involved can fill in... but I was told by my CHL instructor that each applicant is processed at a LOSS to the state. The cost for the hourly wages and fees paid to people like the FBI to do the background checks and other costs (overhead for building space, printing the plastic, record storage, etc) end up costing more than then $140 we pay especially when you figure in the people that get theirs for free or reduced.

You also want to make note that not everyone pays the full $140 fee, since there are some exemptions. The average fee paid would be less. Ask your HR person how much companies charge for a background check, then multiply X2, add some process/handling fees, and yea I wouldn't be surprised if it actually cost more than $140 to process.

[anygunanywhere]

The assertion that the state is taking a loss just does not wash.

Since when does a government agency do anything where they continually do it in the red and not seek deeper funding?

Other states require background checks and fingerprinting and the fees are lower. You can't convince me that they pay their people less and the other factors cost those states less money.

I have a Florida and Virginia license. I had to provide fingerprints for their background checks and those combined did not cost me what my Texas license cost.

I really appreciate the hard job those folks are doing, but for the amount of money they are taking in, they could hire more folks and it should not cost any more or require any funding other than what the license fees bring in.

Anygunanywhere

[Keith B]

I know our church does background checks on individuals and we pay $75 per check. I am sure the DPS gets a better rate, but still there are a lot of administrative fees and overhead expense that has to be taken into account for any business.

One other factor to take into account is the number of active handgun licenses from 2004 - 2006 only grew at about a 3% rate, and from 2003 - 2004 only grew at .03%. In 2007, the growth number jumped 10.6% from 2006. This is a significant increase, and the department was not expecting it. If you count that the 2007 growth for new licenses was 30,746, that tells you that about 60,000 were renewals at <=$70. Factor into that how many get 1/2 price or no fee and you substantially drop the gross $$$ taken in by the department to go against their bottom line.

So, with all those factors, I would say it is very palusable the department does not run on a profit, and their budget is in the red.

[Charles L. Cotton]

There are a lot of problems in the calculations being made concerning revenue from CHL applications that indicate a "profit" is being made. However, none of it matters because DPS does not get that money! It goes into the general fund. DPS has to run its entire agency on its current budget and as important as CHL is to me/us, it doesn't trump everything else. The legislature has to fix the problem, both with additional funding and other changes I am promoting to help reduce the man hours required to process an application. If these changes are adopted, the situation will be much better for CHLs and DPS.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be frustrated by DPS' failure to comply with the statutory time limits. I'm very upset with this situation. But we all need to focus on the cause of the problem, not the those shouldering the burden the problem causes; i.e. CHLs and the DPS.

DPS is using temps because no one is applying for the permanent positions they have available and they have to do something. The jobs are entry level clerical positions, but they even bumped up the job classifications so they can pay more, but they still can't fill the positions.

I have been highly critical of the delays, as a review of my posts on this issue will quickly reveal. I am not given to blindly defending DPS; when the agency is right I support it, when it's in the wrong I point that out. No one was more critical of the DPS's handling of reciprocity than was I and I championed taking reciprocity away from DPS and transferring it to the Attorney General's Office and the Governor's Office. On the issue of delays however, it appears that DPS is doing all they can under the current budget and statutory requirements for issuing a CHL.

As for cost v. revenue, I don't have any specific information. At full fee ($140 or $70) I seriously doubt that the State loses money on the program. However, we now have a lot of people who are not paying the full fee. Many people are only paying $35 for renewals rather than $70 and some number of people aren't paying any fee. I do know the FBI charges each submitting agency (DPS) $35 per fingerprint card to run background checks, so the senior renewal fee of $35 covers only the FBI background check and none of the work/processing done by DPS. I strongly suggest we not make fees an issue! If we do, someone's going to take a look at the true numbers and we'll be paying more for renewals.

Chas.

[aardwolf]

I do not know if this is true or not.. perhaps Chas or someone more involved can fill in... but I was told by my CHL instructor that each applicant is processed at a LOSS to the state.

If that's true, we should get licenses from reciprocal states instead.

We pay less.

We get our licenses faster.

Texas doesn't lose money processing our licenses.

Everybody wins!

[The Annoyed Man]

I'm not saying we shouldn't be frustrated by DPS' failure to comply with the statutory time limits. I'm very upset with this situation. But we all need to focus on the cause of the problem, not the those shouldering the burden the problem causes; i.e. CHLs and the DPS.

Roger that. There is no doubt that the increased wait time is frustrating, but it does not help the cause if we vent on the clerical folks who process the apps. The frustration should be expressed to those elected representatives and their appointees who allowed the problem to develop in the first place. We are at this place because of a certain lack of foresight on the part of those who are responsible for ensuring that the system is provided with what it needs in order to function smoothly. Some of that lack of foresight is unavoidable. Nobody can actually predict the future. But a certain amount of it is due to political machinations and maneuvering, and some of it is due to elected officials who simply don't attach the same level of priority to certain issues as do the constituencies that elected them. They are the proper target for our venting, not the poor schlubbs who are just trying to do their jobs in the face of increasingly hostile and irritated "customers."

I was frustrated too at the 70 days it took for my license to arrive, but I am pleased to say that I kept it in check when dealing directly with folks in Austin, partly because I was dependent on their good will to get it done, as there was a complication with my having been foreign born. Don't shoot yourself in the foot just because you are frustrated.

[dukesean]

Chas,

I write to my Senators and Representatives on Capitol Hill, but who would you recommend I write to with regards to the processing times? I usually write handwritten letters, but if there's a link to submit via web to appropriate persons that is fine too.

[Keith B]

Chas,

I write to my Senators and Representatives on Capitol Hill, but who would you recommend I write to with regards to the processing times? I usually write handwritten letters, but if there's a link to submit via web to appropriate persons that is fine too.

Charles may have some specific individuals who are directly involved in the licensing process, but here is a good site to see who your legislators are http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/

[Tactical_Texan_CHL]

I run the background checks on employees for my company. The company we hired to do them is a national company that specializes in them. We get a decreased rate for volume and being part of a corporate franchise. Ours are $55, more if we add different searches. I'd say Keith's $75 thought is pretty close. I'm sure his church doesn't do them in the volume that I have to. I'd bet that DPS gets a discounted rate too. I'd bet $45 - $50 per check. Which would still be cheaper than having to pay their own officers to do them. I know some PD's have detectives assigned to do background checks on new hires, and it takes them a long time to do them.

One thing I can guarantee adds time is having to run a check on someone with multiple past addresses. It's been a few years since I submitted my app, but didn't we have to put down addresses for the past 5 years? I know my license took awhile because I was fresh out of college and I'd moved 5 times in 3 different counties. They had to wait for results from all of those counties and cities.

In the background checks I do on my employees, they're usually back in 3-5 days if they've been at the same address for 5 years or more. It has taken up to 2 weeks to get background checks back if my new hires have lived in several places. They have to run checks in cities, counties, and sometimes states. Granted, that shouldn't make it add up to 180 days, but if you have multiple applications with detailed background checks, maybe that is a reason it takes so long.