COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.: 1491-03
Bill No.: Truly Agreed To and Finally Passed HCS for SB 399
Subject: Prisons and Jails; Crimes and Punishment
Type: Original
Date: May 16, 2003
FISCAL SUMMARY
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
| General Revenue | (Less than $100,000) | (Less than $100,000) | (Less than $100,000) |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on General Revenue Fund |
(Less than $100,000) | (Less than $100,000) | (Less than $100,000) |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
| None | |||
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on Other State Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses.
This fiscal note contains 5 pages.
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
| None | |||
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All Federal Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
| Local Government | $0 | $0 | $0 |
ASSUMPTION
Officials from the Department of Public - Missouri State Highway Patrol and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department assume the proposed legislation would have no fiscal impact on their agencies.
Officials from the Columbia Police Department responded to Oversight's request, but issued no fiscal impact statement.
In response to a previous version of the proposal, officials from the Springfield Police Department assumed the proposed legislation would have no fiscal impact on their agency.
Officials from the Office of State Courts Administrator (CTS) assume the proposed legislation would have no fiscal impact on the courts.
Officials from the Office of Prosecution Services did not respond to Oversight's request for fiscal impact. However, in response to a previous version of the proposal, officials assumed prosecutors could absorb the costs of the proposed legislation within existing resources.
ASSUMPTION (continued)
Officials from the Office of State Public Defender assume existing staff could provide representation for those few cases arising where indigent persons were charged with delivering any controlled substance to prisons, city and county jails, or private prisons or jails. Passage of more than one bill increasing penalties on existing crimes or creating new crimes would require the State Public Defender System to request increased appropriations to cover the cumulative cost of representing indigent persons accused in the now more serious cases or in the new additional cases.
Officials from the Department of Corrections (DOC) assume this bill further expands the crime of delivering any controlled substances to prisons to include city and county jails. Punishment ranges from a class A misdemeanor to a class B felony.
Currently, the DOC cannot predict the number of new commitments which may result from the creation of the offense(s) outlined in this proposal. An increase in commitments depends on the utilization by prosecutors and the actual sentences imposed by the court. DOC received 8 offenders into the system last year (FY02) pursuant to existing provisions. County offenders have the potential to currently be charged under §221.111, RSMo, and the possibility also exists that offenders could be charged with a similar but more serious offense or that sentences may run concurrent to one another.
If additional persons are sentenced to the custody of the DOC due to the provisions of this legislation, the DOC will incur a corresponding increase in operational cost either through incarceration (FY02 average of $35.52 per inmate, per day or an annual cost of $12,965 per inmate) or through supervision provided by the Board of Probation and Parole (FY02 average of $3.10 per offender, per day or an annual cost of $1,132 per offender).
At this time, the DOC is unable to determine the number of people who would be convicted under the provisions of this bill and therefore the number of additional inmate beds that may be required as a consequence of passage of this proposal. Estimated construction cost for one new medium to maximum-security inmate bed is $55,000. Utilizing this per-bed cost provides for a conservative estimate by the DOC, as facility start-up costs are not included and entire facilities and/or housing units would have to be constructed to cover the cost of housing new commitments resulting from the cumulative effect of various new legislation, if adopted as statute.
ASSUMPTION (continued)
In summary, supervision by the DOC through probation or incarceration would result in additional unknown costs to the department. Eight (8) persons would have to be incarcerated per fiscal year to exceed $100,000 annually. DOC assumes the impact would be less than $100,000 per year.
| FISCAL IMPACT - State Government | FY 2004
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
| GENERAL REVENUE FUND | |||
| Costs - Department of Corrections | |||
| Incarceration/probation costs | (Less than $100,000) | (Less than $100,000) | (Less than $100,000) |
| ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUND |
(Less than $100,000) |
(Less than $100,000) |
(Less than $100,000) |
| FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government | FY 2004
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
| $0 | $0 | $0 |
FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business
No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.
DESCRIPTION
The proposed legislation would expand the crime of delivering any controlled substances to prisons to include city or county jails and private prisons or jails.
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
Office of State Courts Administrator
Office of State Courts Administrator
Department of Public Safety
- Missouri State Highway Patrol
Office of Prosecution Services
Office of State Public Defender
Springfield Police Department
St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department
Columbia Police Department
Mickey Wilson, CPA
Director
May 16, 2003