Fiscal Note - SB 0161 - Takings Analysis For Promulgated Rules
L.R. NO. 0720-05
BILL NO. HCS 2 for SB 161
SUBJECT: Administrative Rules
TYPE: Original
DATE: April 23, 1997
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON STATE FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
None $0 $0 $0
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 $0 $0 $0
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 following agencies indicated that the proposal or similar
proposals would have uncertain fiscal impact on their agencies: Department of
Public Safety-Director's Office, Department of Revenue, Department of
Agriculture, Department of Higher Education, Department of Insurance,
Department of Health, Department of Mental Health, Department of
Transportation, Department of Natural Resources, Missouri Department of
Conservation, Office of Administration, Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education, and Department of Corrections.
Several agencies noted that the proposal would: 1) redefine expenses which
could be ordered reimbursed to plaintiffs who prevailed in cases involving
administrative rules, and 2) remove the court's and agencies' authority to
refuse to order reimbursement of expenses when the court or agency finds the
state's position was substantially justified or that special circumstances
make an award unjust.
Oversight assumes that state agencies 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.
Oversight also assumes that executive branch agencies and the legislature
will agree on the provisions of the "Act Relating to the Implementation of
Law Existing Prior to the Effective Date of This Legislation" in a fashion
timely enough so that normal governmental operations would continue.
Officials of the following agencies stated the proposal or similar proposals
would have no direct effect: Office of the Governor, Missouri House of
Representatives, Missouri Senate, the Courts Administrator.
Oversight notes that the proposal could affect the Secretary of State's
Division of Administrative Rules but assumes that the Secretary could change
charges for the Code of Regulations to cover possible costs for publication
of laws and comments from the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules.
Additionally, Oversight assumes state agencies have been performing takings
analyses as a result of 93-13 executive order which went into effect prior to
the passage of 536.017 RSMo. As the executive order is still in effect, no
additional costs are expected as a result of this proposal.
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, with and emergency clause, would rescind rule making authority
for state agencies except for procedural and emergency rules. Existing rules
would not be affected by this proposal.
The General Assembly would propose "an act relating to the implementation of
law existing prior to the effective date of this legislation" each year. The
bill would contain subject matter to implement the provisions of existing
law. The bill would not be printed in the Revised Statutes of the State of
Missouri, but would be published in full in the Secretary of state's Code of
State Regulations.
The proposal would also: 1) require agencies to file procedural and emergency
rules with the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (which could make
comments on proposed rules and those comments would be published if the
agency did not amend the proposed rule), 2) allow court proceedings against
agency rules and put the burden of proof on the agency to prove challenged
rules procedural and not substantive, 3) define "reasonable fees and
expenses" which could be awarded successful plaintiffs in rules cases, and 4)
allow agencies to seek public input on proposed rules.
The proposal would remove the September 1, 1997 sunset provision from Section
536.017, RSMo. This section requires a takings analysis when private
property is acquired by a governmental entity.
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 Administration
Department of Agriculture
Department of Conservation
Department of Corrections
Department of Economic Development
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Department of Health
Department of Higher Education
Department of Transportation
Department of Insurance
Department of Labor and Industrial Relations
Department of Mental Health
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Public Safety
Department of Revenue
Department of Social Services
State Courts Administrator
State Lottery Commission
State Tax Commission
State Public Defender
House of Representatives
Senate
State Auditor
Governor
Lieutenant Governor
Secretary of State
Treasurer
University of Missouri
Gaming Commission
Veteran's Commission
This Fiscal Note is not an official copy and should not be quoted or cited.