AUSTIN - Allowing concealed handgun license holders to tote pistols on college campuses could cost tens of millions of dollars, a burden that could be ultimately passed on to students or siphoned away from education and research programs at Texas universities.

According to fiscal analyses drawn up by Texas' higher education systems and obtained by the Houston Chronicle, so-called campus carry would cost the University of Texas and University of Houston systems nearly $47 million combined over six years to update security systems, build gun storage facilities and bolster campus police units.

The majority of the UT System's more than $39 million in costs would be borne by the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center's University Police Department, which would have to spend $22 million on the installation of gun safes and lockers, additional administrative personnel and to fund "de-escalation" and "judgment" training for staff and on-campus security, according to the documents. The UT Health Science Center in Houston's police department would need to spend a further $7.6 million over six years.

"We should invest in arming our students with a 21st Century education, not arming them with handguns," said state Sen. Rodney Ellis, a Houston Democrat whose district includes University of Houston, M.D. Anderson and Texas Southern University. "As the cost of higher education continues to grow, it doesn't make sense to push more unfunded mandates onto the backs of students and their families."

Julie Penne, associate director for external communications at M.D. Anderson, said the "costs would be covered out of proceeds from patient revenue, which would normally go toward cancer research, education and prevention efforts."

She added that MD Anderson leaders agreed with UT System Chancellor William McRaven's opposition to campus carry, and that approving the proposal would create a "less-safe environment" and "a safety risk" for campus police officers "who have an outstanding history of protecting those who visit and work in this institution of healing."

'Real costs' to bill

Allowing guns on campus would cost $7 million for the Texas Tech University System, $2.5 million for the Texas State University System, $2 million for the University of North Texas System and at least $550,000 for Texas Southern University over six years. Neither Texas Woman's University nor the Texas A&M University System had a cost estimate available.

Cost estimates were provided to the Legislative Budget Board for inclusion in a fiscal note on the costs of Senate Bill 11, which would allow concealed handgun license holders to carry onto college campuses and universities.

But the bill's current fiscal note does not include these campus-specific cost estimates. It acknowledges the systems submitted these estimates, but notes "no significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated" and "it is assumed implementing the provisions of the bill could be absorbed within (institutions') existing resources."

R.J. DeSilva, communications officer for the board, said leaving out these is standard: "Unless we estimate a bill would have significant fiscal impact on state finances, we don't generally list out or otherwise detail what is submitted for our consideration by agencies or institutions."

But Ellis questioned the omission, saying "there are real costs associated with this bill, and the Legislature ought to account for them in a transparent way."

Costs questioned

In 2013, a similar bill failed. This year, in contrast, the legislation is on a fast track - it was already voted out of committee by a 7-2 vote - and boasts a supermajority of 19 co-sponsors in the Senate.

Sen. Brian Birdwell, the bill's original sponsor, questioned the cost estimates' efficacy.

"It is patently absurd to suggest that additional security resources would be needed to accommodate faculty, staff or student CHL-holders on Texas campuses," the Granbury Republican said. "CHL-holders are statistically the most law-abiding citizens in our state, and I think it bordering on offensive to suggest that they will conduct themselves any less thoughtfully or lawfully the moment they set foot inside a university building."

The documents paint a different picture.

The UH System's cost estimate notes the need to "create, maintain, and staff secured weapons storage facilities in nine dormitories," as well as hire additional security personnel "to man the facilities 24 hours per day 7 days per week." The total cost would be $3 million in the first year and $1.2 million annually after that. For the UT System, campuses would need to shell out money "for police to educate the campus community about this law and to remind concealed carry licenses owners how important it is to remain in compliance with gun laws at all times."

The bill says current law barring guns from hospitals would be continued and that public institutions can establish their own rules for on-campus firearm storage. But worries have mounted this year the legislation will pass without a provision to allow campuses to totally opt out of these mandates.

Opt-out option urged

Leaders from Texas Southern and Texas Woman's universities told the Chronicle they oppose the bill outright, especially if it doesn't include a provision to allow campuses to totally opt out of these mandates.

"I do not feel that individuals bringing firearms to campus will increase the security of our students or our campus. We spend a lot of time dealing with the decisions of young people who are still grappling with the responsibilities of becoming an adult, and I do not think adding firearms into that environment will contribute to the safety of our students," said TWU Chancellor Carine Feyten.

TSU spokesperson Kendrick Callis said simply, "TSU would not be in favor of this legislation."

Birdwell has spoken strongly against adding an opt-out provision for public colleges, but he included that allowance for private institutions, he said last week, in order to "respect the private property rights of the private institutions."

Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, agreed with Birdwell on the need to reject calls for an opt-out clause. While he hasn't seen the individual campus cost estimates, he noted he would "hesitate to compare the cost of implementation to the cost of lost lives who were denied their Second Amendment rights to defend themselves."

The bill has not yet been scheduled for debate on the Senate floor, but is likely to be one of the first to be discussed by the upper chamber.