COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.: 1377-01
Bill No.: Truly Agreed and Finally Passed SB 353
Subject: Education, Elementary and Secondary: Aid
Type: Original
Date: May 8, 2001
FISCAL SUMMARY
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| General Revenue | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) |
| State School Moneys | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All State Funds |
($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All Federal Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| School Districts | $0 to Unknown | $0 to Unknown | $0 to Unknown |
Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses.
This fiscal note contains 3 pages.
ASSUMPTION
Officials of Department of Elementary and Secondary Education stated that the proposal would allow school districts to propose tax increases which would be phased in over more than one year. Districts would have a voluntary roll back until the increases were fully implemented; however, district tax rates would be higher than those for the previous year and they would still be given credit for reassessment add-ons in the Foundation Formula.
The proposal could increase the cost to fully fund the Foundation Formula; however, officials of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education have no way of estimating the number of school districts that would propose phased-in tax increases (or whether the voters would approve those increases).
They also noted that calculated levies would not be eliminated due to increased voluntary rollbacks; therefore, the proposal would not ever decrease the cost of fully funding state aid.
| In response to Amendment 1, officials from DESE indicated that the amendment does not in itself cause an increase to the basic state aid formula. One or more of the approximately 25 districts with tax levies less than $2.75 due to reassessment might raise their tax levy up to $2.75 when the district board sets the tax levy in August because they have the constitutional authority to do so. It is not possible to determine which board might view this proposed legislation as an encouragement to set its levy at $2.75. An increase in the tax levy, regardless of this legislation, increases the cost of the formula. |
| FISCAL IMPACT - State Government | FY 2002
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| GENERAL REVENUE FUND | |||
| Cost - Increased Transfers to State School Moneys Fund | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) |
| ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUND | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) |
| STATE SCHOOL MONEYS FUND | |||
| Income - Increased Transfers from General Revenue Fund | $0 to Unknown | $0 to Unknown | $0 to Unknown |
| Cost - Increased Distributions to School Districts | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) | ($0 to Unknown) |
| ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON STATE SCHOOL MONEYS FUND | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government | FY 2002
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| SCHOOL DISTRICTS | |||
| Income - Increased State Aid | $0 to Unknown | $0 to Unknown | $0 to Unknown |
| ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON SCHOOL DISTRICTS | $0 to Unknown | $0 to Unknown | $0 to Unknown |
FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business
No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.
DESCRIPTION
This proposal revises the "recalculated levy" used in determining state aid for some school districts. The "recalculated levy" is the mechanism used to protect a district from a loss of state aid when the district is required to roll its levy back upon reassessment pursuant to Article X, Section 22 of the Missouri Constitution.
Currently, a district is not allowed a recalculated levy if the district enacts a voluntary rollback or increases the amount of a voluntary rollback from the previous year's amount. The draft bill revises this restriction to provide that a district is not allowed a recalculated levy if it decreases its tax rate from the previous year due to an increase in a voluntary rollback.
For example, a recalculated levy would not be permitted under current law for a district which approves a waiver of Proposition C rollback and decides not to use all or a portion of the waiver in a following year while maintaining its actual levy at or above the previous year's value. This act would allow a district to adopt such a practice and maintain a recalculated levy.
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
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Jeanne Jarrett, CPA
Director
May 8, 2001