SB 0647 - Fiscal Note

Fiscal Note - SB 0647 - Public school sexual education shall emphasize abstinence

COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH

OVERSIGHT DIVISION

FISCAL NOTE

L.R. NO. 2449-01

BILL NO. SB 647

SUBJECT: Education, Elementary and Secondary: Health

TYPE: Original

DATE: January 14, 1998

---

FISCAL SUMMARY

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON STATE FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
None	$0	$0	$0
Total Estimated Net Effect on All State Funds	$0	$0	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
None	$0	$0	$0
Total Estimated Net Effect on All Federal Funds	$0	$0	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
Local Government	($0 to $1,300,000)	($0 to $650,000)	($0 to $650,000)

Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses

This fiscal note contains 4 pages.

FISCAL ANALYSIS

ASSUMPTION

Based on responses from similar legislation in the prior year, officials from the Department of Corrections, Department of Health and Attorney General's Office assume the proposal would result in no fiscal impact on them.

Based on a response from similar legislation in the prior year, officials from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) assume the legislation would not require school districts to teach sex education. It would specify the content if such classes would be taught. DESE assumes it is unknown how many classes on sex education are being taught and how many already comply with the legislation.

DESE's assumptions include the following:

(1) Sex education is taught at two grade levels. All students in grades 7 and 10 (approximately 130,000) would receive this course.

(2) Supplementary materials and workshops would be required. It is assumed that none of the 130,000 students are currently receiving instruction in compliance with this legislation.

(3) Material cost would be $10 per student in the first year ($10 x 130,000 = $1,300,000).

The cost would be $5 per student in subsequent years ($5 x 130,000 = $650,000).

(4) 830 teachers of sex education would need additional training at a cost of $30 per teacher

(830 x $30 = $24,900) in year one

one-third would need training in subsequent years:

(277 x $30 x 1.03 = $8,559)

Costs are estimated to rise by 3%.

(5) No costs are assumed for parent notification.

(6) No costs are assumed for the required Advisory Committee.

The Oversight Division has ranged the estimated costs at the local level because all school districts would not necessarily continue teaching sex education, and the costs per district would vary.

ASSUMPTION (continued)

Oversight also assumes the proposal would not mandate any additional coursework but would direct the subject matter of existing courses and could result in a cost of updating existing textbooks and course materials. Oversight has excluded the costs of training and retraining

because it is assumed the districts could incorporate the training related to this proposal in their regular training sessions.

The Oversight Division assumes the proposal would only apply to schools that continue to teach sex education. Therefore, Oversight does not believe Article X, Section 21 of the Missouri Constitution would apply for the state to reimburse school districts.

FISCAL IMPACT - State Government	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
	(10 Mo.)
	0	0	0
FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
	(10 Mo.)
Cost-Local School Districts
Course Material	($0 to	($0 to	($0 to
	$1,300,000)	$650,000)	$650,000)

FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business

No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.

DESCRIPTION

The proposal would require that any course materials and instruction relating to human sexuality and sexually transmitted diseases incorporate certain subjects, including abstinence and contraception.

The board would determine the specific content of the district's instruction in human sexuality and ensure that all instruction is age appropriate.

The school district would notify parents or guardians of the basic content of the instruction and the right to remove the student from any part of the instruction. The district would make all materials available for inspection.

This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other program and would not

DESCRIPTION (Continued)

require additional capital improvements or rental space.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

NOT RESPONDING: Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Health, St. Louis Public Schools

Jeanne Jarrett, CPA

Director

January 14, 1998