COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.: 2186-01
Bill No.: SB 608
Subject: Crimes and Punishment; Drugs and Controlled Substances; Merchandising Practices; Evidence; Department of Health; Courts
Type: Original
Date: March 13, 2001
FISCAL SUMMARY
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| General Revenue | ($94,264 to Unknown) | ($222,326 to Unknown) | ($243,781 to Unknown) |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All State Funds |
($94,264 to Unknown) | ($222,326 to Unknown) | ($243,781 to Unknown) |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| None | |||
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All Federal Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| Local Government | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses.
This fiscal note contains 5 pages.
ASSUMPTION
Officials from the Department of Public Safety - State Highway Patrol and the Office of State Courts Administrator assume the proposed legislation would have no fiscal impact on their agencies.
Officials from the Office of Prosecution Services assume the cost of the proposed legislation could be absorbed within existing resources.
Officials from the Office of the State Public Defender assume, for the purpose of the proposed legislation, existing staff could provide representation for those cases arising where indigent persons were charged with the transportation, possession, or distribution of the precursors to methamphetamine. However, passage of more than one similar bill would require the State Public Defender System to request increased appropriations to cover the cumulative cost of representing the indigent accused in the additional cases.
Officials from the Office of the Secretary of State assume the proposal restricts certain sales of precursors to methamphetamine. The Department of Health will promulgate rules to implement this proposal. Based on experience with other divisions, the rules, regulations, and forms issued by the Department of Health could require as many as 18 pages in the Code of State Regulations. For any given rule, roughly half again as many pages, or 27 pages, are published in the Missouri Register as in the Code because cost statements, fiscal notes, and the like are not repeated in the Code. The estimated cost of a page in the Missouri Register is $23.00. The estimated cost of a page in the Code of State Regulations is $27.00. Based on these costs, the estimated cost of the proposal is $1,107 in FY02 and unknown in subsequent years. The actual cost could be more or less than the numbers given. The impact of this legislation in future years in unknown and depends upon the frequency and length of rules filed, amended, rescinded, or withdrawn.
Oversight assumes the SOS would absorb the costs of printing and distributing regulations related to this proposal. If multiple bills pass which require the printing and distribution of regulations at substantial costs, the SOS could request funding through the appropriation process.
Officials from the Department of Health (DOH) assume the DOH would store reports of suspicious sales of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine or any of their isomers and make them available for review by law enforcement agencies. The DOH would also need to promulgate rules to establish a report format for such reports. It is estimated that the DOH would receive no more than 100 reports per year of suspicious sales of these substances. Current requirements for storage and maintenance of Department records requires that such records would need to be stored for 7 years. This would require the DOH to purchase 2 file cabinets. Costs for these cabinets is $550 each. Total cost would be $1,100.
ASSUMPTION (continued)
Oversight assumes the DOH would absorb the cost of storing the reports within existing resources.
Officials from the Department of Corrections (DOC) stated, in FY00, there were 15 admissions to prison and 30 to probation for possession of ephedrine or its derivatives with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. Probation also had 1 admission charged with distribution. These offenses were charged as class D felonies. Although the number of commitments due to the creation of the new crimes is unknown, DOC conservatively expects the offenders who will be convicted of the new offense to be at least as many as those convicted for possession with intent to manufacture. Therefore, the DOC estimates that, in any given year, there will be 15 prison admissions serving an average of 10 months (the average time served for class D felony offenders in FY00) and 30 probation case openings supervised 4 years (the average probation for class D felonies in FY00).
DOC estimates the increase in population will increase incrementally over the fiscal year. For cost estimates a snapshot of the midyear average population was used to determine fiscal impact.
The assumptions used by the DOC to determine cost, and rounded to the nearest whole number, include:
|
AVERAGE |
OPERATING |
AVERAGE |
OPERATING |
TOTAL COST | |
|
POPULATION |
EXPENSE | POPULATION | EXPENSE | W/ INFLATION | |
|
(Incarceration) |
(Incarceration) |
(Probation) | (Probation) | ||
| FY 2002 | 13 | $77,998 | 15 | $13,530 | $94,264 |
| FY 2003 | 13 | $168,974 | 45 | $40,590 | $222,326 |
| FY 2004 | 13 | $168,974 | 60 | $54,120 | $243,781 |
At this time, the DOC is unable to determine the number of people who would be convicted under the provisions of this proposal to estimate the potential need for additional capital improvements. Estimated construction cost for one new medium-security inmate bed is $48,300 at FY99 average costs. A maximum security inmate bed is $55,000, also using FY99 average costs. Utilizing this per-bed cost provides for a conservative estimate by the DOC, as 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)
Based on the above-mentioned assumptions, the long range fiscal impact to the DOC is unknown, but is estimated at least to include the costs as follows:
|
AVERAGE |
OPERATING |
AVERAGE |
OPERATING |
TOTAL COST | |
|
POPULATION |
EXPENSE | POPULATION | EXPENSE | W/ INFLATION | |
|
(Incarceration) |
(Incarceration) |
(Probation) | (Probation) | ||
| FY 2005 | 13 | $168,974 | 60 | $54,120 | $251,094 |
| FY 2006 | 13 | $168,974 | 60 | $54,120 | $258,627 |
| FY 2007 | 13 | $168,974 | 60 | $54,120 | $266,386 |
| FY 2008 | 13 | $168,974 | 60 | $54,120 | $274,377 |
| FY 2009 | 13 | $168,974 | 60 | $54,120 | $282,609 |
| FY 2010 | 13 | $168,974 | 60 | $54,120 | $291,087 |
| FY 2011 | 13 | $168,974 | 60 | $54,120 | $299,820 |
| Total Ten-Year Fiscal Impact: | $2,484,371 | ||||
| FISCAL IMPACT - State Government | FY 2002
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| GENERAL REVENUE FUND | |||
| Costs - Department of Corrections
Incarceration/Probation costs |
($94,264 to Unknown) | ($222,326 to Unknown) | ($243,781 to Unknown) |
| FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government | FY 2002
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
| $0 | $0 | $0 |
FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business
Manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, and anyone else furnishing ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine or any of their isomers would be required to report any suspicious sales to the Department of Health. These reports would require both time and resources on the part of the business.
DESCRIPTION
This proposal requires any manufacturer or wholesaler of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine to obtain certain identifying information from any person engaging in a DESCRIPTION (continued)
suspicious transaction, as defined in the proposal, and report the information to the Department of Health. A violation is a class D felony.
It shall be unlawful for any person to possess more than 5 grams of ephedrine or 12 grams of pseudoephedrine. The proposal contains exceptions for pharmacists, physicians and other professionals, manufacturers, wholesalers and distributors, and any person in their residence under circumstances consistent with typical medicinal or household use. Possession of more than the specified amounts shall constitute prima facie evidence of intent to manufacture methamphetamine or other controlled substance. A violation is a class D felony for the first offense, and a class C felony for the second or subsequent offense.
The proposal creates a class D felony for the sale or distribution of any product containing ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine if the person knows that the purchaser will use the product as a precursor to manufacturing methamphetamine or other controlled substance, or with reckless disregard for its use. A second or subsequent offense is a class C felony.
The proposal also prohibits the purchase, or the sale or distribution by a retail distributor or employee in a single transaction, of more than 3 packages of products known to contain ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine; any single package of any of the substances containing more than 96 individual units; or more than 9 grams of the substances. A violation is a class A misdemeanor. The proposal lists certain exceptions, including pediatric products in specified amounts.
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 the State Public Defender
Office of the Secretary of State
Department of Health
Office of Prosecution Services
Department of Public Safety - State Highway Patrol
Office of State Courts Administrator
Department of Corrections
Jeanne Jarrett, CPA
Director
March 13, 2001