Fiscal Note - SB 0430 - Local Sentencing Alternatives for Offenders
L.R. NO. 1699-02
BILL NO. Truly Agreed To and Finally Passed SCS for SB 430
SUBJECT: Department of Corrections; Probation and Parole; Courts
TYPE: Original
DATE: April 15, 1997
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON STATE FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
None
Total Estimated
Net Effect on All
State Funds $0 $0 $0
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
None
Total Estimated
Net Effect on All
Federal Funds $0 $0 $0
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
Local Government $0 $0 $0
FISCAL ANALYSIS
ASSUMPTION
Officials of the State Public Defender, State Courts Administrator, Office of
the Attorney General and Office of Prosecution Services assume that this
proposal would have no fiscal impact to their agency.
Officials of the Department of Corrections (DOC) assume that this proposal
would authorize the DOC to develop partnerships with local jurisdictions to
provide local sentencing options for certain offenders. As local volunteer
community boards are established, the DOC would incur some fiscal impact in
order to train eligible volunteers and to assist in the development of
specific conditions of the probation program. DOC officials stated that they
could not predict the number of courts that will establish the local
volunteer community boards, but assumed that any fiscal impact incurred could
be absorbed within existing funds during the first few years of
implementation. If utilization of this program is high, additional funds
would be requested through the budget process.
DOC officials assume the provisions of this proposal which apply to the
inmate population could be implemented within existing funds, including the
requirements for community service hours, impact of crime panels and other
activities which the DOC might choose to develop.
DOC officials assume that rules promulgated pursuant to the provisions of
this proposal would expire on August 28 of the year after the year in which
the rule became effective unless the General Assembly extended by statute the
rule or set of rules beyond that date to a date specified by the General
Assembly. In an action challenging any rule, the DOC would be required to
provide by a preponderance of evidence that the rule or threatened
application of the rule is valid, is authorized by law, is not in conflict
with any law and is not arbitrary and capricious. The court would award
reasonable fees and expenses as defined in section 536.085 to any part who
prevailed in such an action. DOC officials assume that any fiscal impact
which could result from the proposed rule- making language would be unknown
at this time.
Oversight assumes that the DOC would write procedural and emergency rules in
conformity with provisions of the proposal so that court awards to plaintiffs
for reasonable expenses in bringing suits against rules could be absorbed
within current budgets.
Officials of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations' Division of
Workers' Compensation (DWC) stated that it is impossible to determine the
fiscal impact of this proposal because of uncertainty of an act of foreign
terrorism resulting in eligible crime victims. DWC officials stated that the
average amount paid from the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund per victim in
FY96 was $3,936.75.
Oversight assumes that the impact to the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund
from this proposal would be minimal.
FISCAL IMPACT - State Government FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
0 0 0
FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
0 0 0
FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business
No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of
this proposal.
DESCRIPTION
This proposal would authorize the Department of Corrections (DOC) to
establish a program of restorative justice within the department's
correctional centers to involve offenders in victim-oriented programs. DOC
would be required to encourage the establishment of local sentencing
alternatives for offenders. If a volunteer community board were established,
DOC would provide training to those volunteers in developing conditions of
probation for offenders. Certain provisions of the proposal would terminate
December 31, 2000.
Rules promulgated pursuant to the provisions of this proposal would expire on
August 28 of the year after the year in which the rule became effective
unless the General Assembly extended by statute the rule or set of rules
beyond that date to a date specified by the General Assembly. In an action
challenging any rule, the DOC would be required to provide by a preponderance
of evidence that the rule or threatened application of the rule is valid, is
authorized by law, is not in conflict with any law and is not arbitrary and
capricious.
Portions of this proposal would provide crime victims compensation for a
Missouri resident who is the victim of an act of terrorism that occurred
outside of the United States. This portion of the proposal contains an
emergency clause.
The portion of this legislation which deals with victims of terrorism is
federally mandated by 18 United States Code 2331. It would not duplicate any
other program and would not require additional capital improvements or rental
space.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
State Courts Administrator
Department of Corrections
Office of the Attorney General
Office of Prosecution Services
State Public Defender
Department of Labor & Industrial Relations - Workers' Compensation
This Fiscal Note is not an official copy and should not be quoted or cited.