This Fiscal Note is not an official copy and should not be quoted or cited.
Fiscal Note - SB 0882 - School Safety and Discipline
L.R. NO. 3332-01
BILL NO. SB 882
SUBJECT: Children and Minors: Safe Schools
TYPE: Original
DATE: February 12, 1996
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON STATE FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999
General Revenue ($46,283 to ($50,099 to ($51,379 to
$10,046,283) $5,050,099) $5,051,379)
Total Estimated
Net Effect on All
State Funds ($46,283 to ($50,099 to ($51,379 to
$10,046,283) $5,050,099) $5,051,379)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999
None $0 $0 $0
Total Estimated
Net Effect on All
Federal Funds $0 $0 $0
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999
Local Government $0 to $0 to $0 to
$10,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000
FISCAL ANALYSIS
ASSUMPTION
Officials from the Department of Mental Health, Office of Administration,
Department of Public Safety, Attorney General's Office, Office of Prosecution
Services, and Department of Social Services assume the proposal would have no
fiscal impact on the departments.
Officials from the Office of State Courts Administrator assume the proposal
could result in a small increase in the number of cases filed but no
significant increase in the workload of the courts.
Officials from the Missouri Sheriff's Association assume the proposal would
have no fiscal impact on them.
Officials from the Office of the State Public Defender (SPD) assume that for
the purpose of the proposed legislation, existing staff could represent those
5-10 additional cases arising where indigent persons would be accused of
"assaulting school personnel" and another 5-10 cases arising where indigent
persons would be accused of "false school registry". However, passage of
more than one similar bill would require the State Public Defender system to
request increased appropriations to cover the cumulative cost of represent
the indigent accused. The Oversight Division has shown no fiscal impact for
the SPD.
Officials from the Department of Corrections (DOC) assume that the proposal
would make assaulting school personnel a class C felony. They state no data
exists to measure any impact to DOC from the proposal. DOC assumes the
impact would be minimal due to the narrow scope of the crime, therefore
limiting persons that could be incarcerated or on probation.
Officials from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)
state that section 7 of the proposal would require the State Board of
Education to establish an alternative education grant program. They state
the total amount available for grants would be subject to appropriation.
They assume the department would need one FTE Supervisor to administer the
Alternative Education Grant Program; provide technical support as requested
by grant recipients; help districts assess the outcomes of their projects;
and coordinate interactions between the State Board of Education and school
districts, community leaders, etc. They state the Governor has recommended
$10 million for FY 97 for these grants ($5 million ongoing and $5 million
one-time). The Oversight Division has ranged the grants from zero to $10
million in FY 97 and zero to $5 million in FY 98 and FY 99, since the total
amount of grants would depend on school district applications.
DESE states section 3 of the proposal would require them to identify, and if
necessary adopt, a violence prevention program. They assume this could be
funded from existing resources.
DESE assumes the legislation could increase the cost to fully fund the
foundation formula if attendance would be increased due to subsection 5 of
section 167.171 of the proposal. However, they have no estimate since data
on expulsions and suspensions is not collected. The Oversight Division
assumes that most schools already utilize in-school suspension for pupils not
dangerous to others, and therefore any increase in the foundation formula
resulting from this provision would be minimal.
At the local government level, DESE states Section 167.171, subsection 5
would require in- school suspension programs for certain students. This
could increase costs for school districts. DESE states they do not collect
or have access to information on the number of expulsions and suspensions.
Subsection 5.2 would provide exceptions to this requirement. DESE states
instructional and support cost averaged $5,180 per high school student during
the 1993-94 school year. Additional classroom space could also be required.
The Oversight Division assumes the majority of the schools already have in-
school suspension, and if the school could not accommodate the provisions of
the proposal with existing resources, funding from the Alternative Education
Grant Program could cover additional costs.
FISCAL IMPACT - State Government FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999
(10 Mo.)
GENERAL REVENUE FUND
Cost-Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education
Personal Service ($27,695) ($34,078) ($34,930)
Fringe Benefits (8,508) (10,469) (10,731)
Expense and Equipment (10,080) (5,552) (5,718)
Grants to school districts (0 (0 (0
to to to
10,000,000) 5,000,000) 5,000,000)
Total Cost-DESE ($46,283 ($50,099 ($51,379
to to to
$10,046,283) $5,050,099) $5,051,379)
FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999
(10 Mo.)
Income-School Districts
Grants $0 $0 $0
to to to
$10,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000
DESCRIPTION
The proposal would require each school board to annually establish a written
policy of discipline, including the district's determination on the use of
corporal punishment and the procedures in which punishment would be applied.
In each district in which corporal punishment would be included in the
policy, parents would be granted and notified of the right to determine that
the use of corporal punishment would not be in the best interest of their
child and specify which policy alternatives would be more appropriate.
The proposal would require all employees to receive annual instruction on the
policy of discipline. The policy would require school administrators to
report acts of school violence to school district employees. School
administrators would be required to report to law enforcement acts involving
violence. Each school district would be required to compile and maintain
records of any serious violation of the district's discipline policy.
The proposal would allow handicapped children with disabilities resulting in
violent behavior to be moved to more appropriate placement.
A school board could authorize the immediate removal of a pupil upon finding
by the school that the pupil poses a threat of harm to himself or others.
The proposal would exempt homeless children, children participating in
desegregation programs, wards of the state and certain other children from
certain registration requirements, including proof of residency in the
district.
Within forty-eight hours of enrolling a student the school official would be
required to request all academic records and discipline records from all
schools previously attended within the last twelve months. Schools receiving
such requests would respond within seven days of receiving the request. The
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education would be required to
establish rules to ensure the enforcement of the provisions.
A school board could not readmit or enroll a student properly suspended for
ten or more consecutive school days for an act of school violence without
first holding a conference to review the conduct that resulted in
suspension. No pupil would be readmitted for certain acts of violence.
Certain pupil suspensions would be served in a well supervised in-school
program, requiring academic activities.
The juvenile officer would be required to notify the superintendent of the
school district of acts committed by the juvenile, which if committed by an
adult would be considered a felony.
Principals would report instances of assault or possession of controlled
substances or weapons to law enforcement agencies and superintendents.
Assaulting school personnel would be a class C felony.
DESE would identify, and if necessary adopt, an existing program of
educational instruction regarding violence prevention to be administered by
school districts, including instructing students of the negative
consequences of association with criminal street gangs. The program would
include training for district employees directly responsible for education.
The programs could be administered beginning no later than the 1998-99 school
year for students in grades K- 12, every year.
The Department could fund the programs pursuant to 160.530, and school
districts could fund the program from funds received under Sections 160.530
and 166.260.
School boards could require parents or guardians to provide sworn statements
indicating if students had been expelled from any school.
Students and family could be required to participate in at-risk programs
pursuant to Section 167.273, RSMo, and alternative education activities.
The State Board of Education would establish a program to award grants to
school districts in providing alternative educational opportunities for
pupils who could not adequately be served in traditional classroom settings.
The Board would solicit applications from school districts. The Board would
adopt rules to implement the grant program.
This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other
program and would not require additional capital improvements or rental
space.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Department of Corrections
Office of State Courts Administrator
Department of Mental Health
Office of Administration
Department of Public Safety
Attorney General's Office
Department of Mental Health
Office of Prosecution Services
Missouri Sheriff's Association
State Public Defender
Department of Social Services
NOT RESPONDING: St. Louis Public Schools, Kansas City School Board, Missouri
Police Chief's Association