SB 0838 - Fiscal Note

Fiscal Note - SB 0838 - Authorizes automated traffic enforcement programs

COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH

OVERSIGHT DIVISION

FISCAL NOTE

L.R. NO. 3589-01

BILL NO. SB 838

SUBJECT: Automated Photo-Traffic Enforcement Program

TYPE: Original

DATE: February 16, 1998

---

FISCAL SUMMARY

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON STATE FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
State Schools Money Fund	$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
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 School Districts	$0 to Unknown	$0 to Unknown	$0 to Unknown
Municipal Court Systems	$0	$0	$0
Total Estimated Net Effect on Local Funds	$0 to Unknown	$0 to Unknown	$0 to Unknown

Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses

This fiscal note contains 6 pages.

FISCAL ANALYSIS

ASSUMPTION

The State Public Defender (SPD), Greene County Court Clerk, Department of Transportation (DHT), Office of Prosecution Services (OPS), Missouri Highway Patrol (MHP), Department of Revenue (DOR) and Greene County Prosecuting Attorney do not expect to be fiscally impacted.

The Office of State Courts Administrator (CTS) assumes that the issuance of summons, receipt of affidavits from owners that the vehicle was under the control of a named other person, insurance of another summons; and additional filings and trials would add additional work to the courts, either municipal, county or state. The CTS would expect the bulk of usage to occur at local level by the municipalities and St. Louis City since they would be able to keep and use the fine revenue for local purposes. To the extent that the proposal could result in additional cases filed before the circuit court judges using state paid clerks, there would be increased costs. However, the CTS would not expect the costs to be significant.

St. Louis City would anticipate a minimal fiscal impact, but there could be a deterrent effect on speeders. St. Louis City has explored this option in the past with a company that was willing to accept a percentage of the fines as payment for use of the equipment. Since St. Louis City has a municipal court system, it was assumed that the City could make such an arrangement for payment because the fine money would be retained by the city. Additionally, the City did not anticipate a significant increase in the number of tickets issued because of the requirement that the location of the system be announced. It was assumed that motorists would reduce their speed in the vicinity.

The Jackson County Executive indicated a minimal fiscal impact. Since the language of the proposal is permissive, the Executive was doubtful that such a system would even be implemented in the area. The Executive's authority would only be in the unincorporated areas and the majority of the interstate and road system in Jackson County is incorporated. If the Executive chose to implement such a system there would be unknown costs.

ASSUMPTION (continued)

St. Louis County assumes that since the language is permissive the County would incur no costs unless it opts to implement such a program.

Oversight assumes that given the permissive language of the proposal that any city or county could, by ordinance, establish such a program. Income has been shown to the municipal court systems as well as to the State Schools Money Fund because municipal systems retain fines if the offense is not a state offense and certain cities with municipal systems retain revenue generated from fines. Income from court costs in addition to the fines has been shown to the municipal court systems to offset the costs of additional filings and trials, resulting in a net fiscal impact of zero to the municipal court systems. However, local school districts would still receive income disbursed from the State Schools Money Fund which would be fine money received from circuit or associate circuit court cases.

FISCAL IMPACT - State Government	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
	(10 Mo.)
STATE SCHOOLS MONEY FUND
Income
Fines from Photo-Based	$0	$0	$0
Traffic Monitoring	to	to	to
	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Costs
Disbursement to Local	$0	$0	$0
School Districts	to	to	to
	(Unknown)	(Unknown)	(Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON
STATE SCHOOLS MONEY FUND	$0	$0	$0
FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
	(10 Mo.)
LOCAL
Income-Local School Districts
Fines from Photo-Based	$0	$0	$0
Traffic Monitoring	to	to	to
	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government	FY 1999	FY 2000	FY 2001
(continued)	(10 Mo.)
Income-Municipal Court Systems
Fines from Photo-Based	$0	$0	$0
Traffic Monitoring	to	to	to
	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Income-Municipal Court Systems
Court Costs	$0	$0	$0
	to	to	to
	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Costs-Municipal Court Systems
Additional filings/trials	$0	$0	$0
	to	to	to
	(Unknown)	(Unknown)	(Unknown)
Costs
Automated Photo-Traffic Equipment	$0	$0	$0
	to	to	to
	(Unknown)	(Unknown)	(Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON	$0	$0	$0
LOCAL FUNDS	to	to	to
	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business

This proposal would not have a direct fiscal impact on small businesses.

DESCRIPTION

The proposal would allow any city or county, by ordinance, to establish an automated photo-traffic enforcement program. Any city or county would be allowed to enter into agreements with private vendors to perform operational and administrative tasks associated with the use of the systems including, entering into an agreement with the Department of Revenue (DOR) to obtain relevant records regarding the owner and to prepare and mail summonses on behalf of the governmental entity.

DESCRIPTION (continued)

The photo and proof of identity of the owner would be considered sufficient evidence that the

owner was responsible for the violation. Any owner issued a summons would be liable for fine and court costs unless evidence can be provided to the contrary. An affidavit would be required for this purpose, would be admissible in a court proceeding, and would raise a rebuttable

presumption that the person in the affidavit was in actual control of the vehicle. At this point, the court could dismiss the summons and issue another summons for the other person. If the vehicle is alleged stolen, then a police report would be required as proof.

No points would be assessed for violations obtained through the use of an automated photo-traffic enforcement system. Photographic records provided to governmental or law enforcement agencies would be considered confidential. Summons issued pursuant to this proposal would be sent by first class mail within 21 days of the violation with instructions on how to dispose of the violation through a court appearance or payment of fine and costs.

Evidence obtained by this method could be admissible in any action of law brought as a result of personal injury, death or damage to property in the same method prescribed or otherwise required by law.

Public announcements would be required as well as signs indicating the system's presence.

This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other program, would not require additional capital improvements or rental space and would not impact total state revenue.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Department of Revenue

Department of Transportation

St. Louis City

St. Louis County

Jackson County Executive

Greene County Circuit Court

Greene County Prosecuting Attorney

Department of Public Safety

Missouri Highway Patrol

Office of State Courts Administrator

State Public Defender

Office of Prosecution Services

SOURCES OF INFORMATION (continued)

NOT RESPONDING: Cole County Prosecuting Attorney and Kansas City Manager's Office

Jeanne Jarrett, CPA

Director

February 16, 1998