☒ Estimated Total Net Effect on All funds expected to exceed $100,000 savings or (cost).

☐ Estimated Net Effect on General Revenue Fund expected to exceed $100,000 (cost).

Oversight assumes the provisions in Section 64.907 to be permissive and would have no fiscal impact without action by the governing body and with voter approval. This section allows for a tax, upon voter approval, on charges for storm water control. The proceeds of the tax would only be used for storm water control. Oversight assumes the tax would be applicable to political subdivisions subject to EPA rules concerning storm water discharges.

Officials of the Department of Natural Resources assume no fiscal impact to their department.

Oversight assumes that currently, Jefferson County may adopt orders consistent with state law with penal provisions in the areas of traffic violations, solid waste management, and animal control. Under this section the county would be able to adopt such orders in any area covered by the county’s ordinances.

Oversight assumes that Jefferson County could expect an increase in fine revenue. In fiscal note 5300-01 of last session Jefferson County officials estimated an increase in revenue of $20,000 to $40,000 annually.

Officials of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education assume the school districts in Jefferson County could realize a reduction in the amount of fine revenue. Officials did not estimate the amount of expected loss.

Oversight assumes any loss would be minimal, and less than $100,000 annually. Oversight assumes any loss to schools would be made up from the State’s School Monies Fund resulting in no fiscal impact to Jefferson County Schools.

Oversight assumes the following sections have the potential to impact the State’s General Revenue Fund. Sections 67.997, 67.2040, 67.2500, 67.2510, 92.500, and 94.950 are considered to be permissive and as written does not require certain defined local governments to initiate sales taxes for certain purposes.

Before there would be fiscal impact, the governing body would have to place the question of imposing a sales tax to the voters of the defined district. Oversight is showing this because the Department of Revenue- Sales Tax Division would collect the tax, and would retain a 1% collection fee which would go into the State’s General Revenue Fund. Fiscal impact will be shown as $0 or a positive unknown. If none of the political subdivisions would impose a sales tax there would be no fiscal impact to the General Revenue Fund. If a tax were approved, the 1% collection fee would go into the General Revenue Fund. The amount is unknown.

(Senate Amendment 17) adds Boone County to the list of counties that could establish an entertainment district that would be funded by a voter approved sales tax.

Officials of the Department of Revenue assumes any costs could be handled with existing resources and assume no fiscal impact.

Officials of the Office of Administration - Information Technology stated that any cost could be handled with existing resources and assume no fiscal impact.

Oversight assumes Sections 67.1003 and 67.1360 allows cities to impose, with voter approval, a transient guest tax. Oversight assumes the taxes to be permissive. Both would require action by the governing body with voter approval. Oversight will show income and costs to tourism funds as unknow. Oversight assumes costs would not exceed income resulting in a zero annual fund balance or an annual positive fund balance. For purposes of this fiscal note fiscal impact will be shown as $0.

Section 67.1181 requires political subdivisions that collect and expend tax revenues for advertising and tourism promotion to perform an audit at least every 5 years provided no other statutory auditing requirement exists. Cost of the audit would be paid from revenues for operating costs. The first audit would be completed by January 1, 2009.

Oversight will show costs to the County’s Tourism Fund as unknown. Oversight assumes costs would be minimal.

Section 70.515 this section changes provisions of the Kansas and Missouri Regional Investment District Compact.

In response to identical legislation fiscal note 2520-01 SB 671, the following fiscal impact statements were made:

Officials from the City of Kansas City assume the proposal would have no adverse or beneficial impact on their city.

Officials from the City of St. Joseph and the counties of Jackson, Platte and Buchanan did not respond to our request for fiscal impact.

Oversight assumes this proposal is permissive in nature and requires voter approval for such district compact to be enacted. In the fiscal note for the enabling legislation (SB 825 in 2006), Oversight reflected a $0 to potential unknown amount of revenue that would be collected by the state’s Department of Revenue for the 1% collection fee of the sales tax that could be generated for such a district. Oversight also reflected a $0 to Unknown amount of sales tax revenue to local political subdivisions as well as an offsetting $0 to (Unknown) cost for funding the operation of the regional projects and commission. Therefore, Oversight assumes the fiscal impact of this proposal has already been reflected in the fiscal note for the truly agreed to and finally passed SB 825 in 2006, and will not reflect additional fiscal impact from the changes contained in this proposal.

ST. LOUIS COUNTY AND CITY TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX (Section 94.660) (Senate Amendment 13)

This amendment removes the coupling provision in Section 94.660 which requires both the city and the county to approve a transportation sales tax before the tax could go into effect in either jurisdiction. Oversight assumes no fiscal impact.

Officials of the Department of Natural Resources assumes no fiscal impact to their department.

Oversight assumes this proposal as written is permissive and would have no fiscal impact without action by their governing body with voter approval.

ST. LOUIS COUNTY PARKS, PUBLIC SAFETY SALES TAX: (Senate Amendment 8) SECTIONS 144.757, 144.759, 650.396, and 650.399

Currently, any county or municipality, except those within St. Louis County, may impose a local use tax for economic development and local government services. This amendment would provide that 50% of the tax is to be used for enhancing county and municipal public safety, parks, and job creation, rather than economic development. The remaining 50% shall continue to be used for local government services.

Oversight assumes the sales and use taxes allowed in these sections are permissive and would have no fiscal impact without action by the governing body and with voter approval.

Section 163.011 grants school districts, located at least partially within a county, an additional payment equal to the decrease, if any, in the amount the district receives from fines in the current year from revenue the district received in fiscal year 2005.

Responses to identical legislation fiscal note 2020-07 SCS for SB 456 the following fiscal impact statements were issued:

Officials from the Office of State Courts Administrator state this proposal has no fiscal impact on the Courts.

According to officials from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DES),

This proposal would require a state payment to any school district that is located at least partially in any county that creates a county municipal court or is otherwise eligible to prosecute county ordinance violations under section 66.010, after January 1, 2006 for the amount of decrease in fines from the 2005 fiscal year.

DESE is currently aware of only one county (St. Charles County) that has implemented a county municipal court. The districts in St. Charles County and their fine revenue in the 2005 fiscal year are:

The additional state payment pursuant to this proposal would be no more than that specified for the respective district. However, should other counties create county municipal courts, the potential exists for the state payment to greatly exceed this total.

Information was provided by St Charles County outlining the number of traffic and misdemeanor tickets issued by the St Charles Sheriff for FY 2002 and FY 2003, along with the percentage of cases filed that are dismissed. St Charles County also provided the total disbursements for FY 2003 through FY 2006. Based on information from St Charles County, Oversight makes the following assumptions regarding this proposal:

The base amount upon which calculations are made is $1,655,861. The amount of fines collected by a newly created county municipal court average 40% of the total fines collected. Fine revenue is increasing at an average rate of 10% a year.

Fine revenue collections for 2008, net of the amount assumed to go through the county municipal court, and projections for 2009 are as follows:

Based on these assumptions, by FY 2010 the net fine revenue would not be less than the base amount; therefore, no longer requiring payment by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to make up the difference.

Section 190.053 requires ambulance board members first elected after January 1, 2008 to complete educational training.

Officials of the Department of Health and Senior Services stated this proposal would have no fiscal impact on their department’s appropriations. Officials assume ambulance districts would have some costs. Officials could not estimate cost.

Oversight assumes the amount of cost per ambulance district would depend upon the number of members requiring training, location of training, and whether board members would have to travel, require lodging, and meals. Oversight will show costs as $0 to (unknown).

Oversight sent fiscal note response requests to several public water supply districts, and none have responded.

Oversight assumes there could be some election costs savings by lengthening the terms to every three years for directors from the date of being first elected rather than under the current staggered election cycle. Oversight would expect election costs savings per water district to be minimal.

Officials of the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District stated that the service they provide is an unapplied for service. Officials stated that this means an application by the property owner is not received prior to the establishment of an account. Officials stated that they do not turn on and off service when tenants move in and out. All charges remain with the property and are the responsibility of the owner. This is in accordance with MSD ordinances.

Officials stated that since they are not an applied for service and without the means of easy shut-off particularly in the City of St. Louis where there are combined sewers as other utilities have, they are unable to track transient tenants as they move to collect their debts.

While billed services have always remained with the property and the owner is ultimately responsible for the bill, the practice of billing tenants and not strictly the owner has been the substantial contributor over the last 20 years to the District’s over current outstanding $27 million in outstanding receivables and $26 million in bad debt allowance.

Officials estimate they would have one-time costs in fiscal year 2008 for programming and implementation costs. Officials estimate they would realize operational costs in 2008, 2009, and 2010. There would be one-time operational costs in FY 2008 of $114,200. There would be on-going costs in all three fiscal years. Total 3 year cost is estimated at $3,476,464.

JACKSON COUNTY CONSTRUCTION VIBRATIONS REGULATION (Section 319.400) Senate Amendment 22

Section 319.400 grants authority to the Jackson County government to regulate certain construction operations related to groung vibration in certain areas. Violation of the codes would result in fines. The fines would go to schools or neighborhood organizations. The county government would decide on where fines would go. Oversight assumes this proposal would have some fiscal impact to the government for administration and enforcement costs. An independent seismologist is provided for, and the cost would be paid by the company conducting blasting operations. Oversight assumes costs would be administrative. Oversight assumes fines would be minimal and expect strict compliance. Oversight will show fines to schools as $0 to Unknown, and would expect annual revenue from fines to be minimal.

Section 321.162 requires board members of fire protection districts, first elected after January 1, 2008, to complete educational training.

Officials of the Department of Public Safety - Division of Fire Safety stated they currently have a training program that will meet the requirements outlined in this legislation and assume no fiscal impact.

Officials of the DeSoto Rural Fire Protection District stated that they would estimate their costs at $500 each year that an election was held, provided there were new board members elected. Officials assume if training were held within a reasonable traveling distance, costs would be less.

Oversight assumes costs of training for each fire protection district would depend upon the number of newly elected board members, the distance the members would have to travel to have training, would lodging be necessary, and the number of meals required. Oversight will show fiscal impact as $0 to (Unknown), and expects costs per fire district to be minimal.

Officials from the Office of Administration - Division of Accounting assume, although there would be no fiscal impact relating to this authorization increase, there would be a fiscal impact if any of the currently outstanding authorization is actually issued. There would need to be approximately $700,000 for principal and interest for every $10 million dollars issued and one time costs of approximately $192,509 for each issuance.

Officials from the Department of Natural Resources assume the proposal would authorize the Board of Fund Commissioners to sell $40 million in bonds for stormwater control plans, studies and projects under Article III, Sections 37(h), (g), and (e).

37(e) money is approved for $10 million to be spend as follows:
$7 Million for the 40% State Construction Grant Programs
$3 Million for the Rural Water and Sewer grants

37(g) money is approved for $10 Million to be spent as follows:
$5 Million for Rural Water grants and loans
$5 Million for Rural Sewer grants and loans

47(h) money is approved for $20 Million to be spent as follows:
$10 Million for stormwater grants
$10 Million for stormwater loans

Oversight is unable to determine when bonds would be sold and has ranged the sale from $0 to $40 million. Oversight has ranged the annual income and annual repayment of bonds sold from $0 to $3,570,033.

Section 1 - CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY IN CITY OF KANSAS CITY - (Senate Amendment 11)

Senate Amendment 11 authorizes the Governor to convey certain state property located in Jackson County to the City of Kansas City.

In response to fiscal note 2107-01 SB 469 of this session, the following fiscal impact statements were made:

Officials from the Office of Administration - Division of Facilities Management, Design & Construction assume no fiscal impact to their agency.

Officials from the Department of Transportation (MoDOT) assume the conveyance of property in Section 1, consists of property owned or leased by MoDOT. MoDOT estimated a negative fiscal impact up to $6 million to relocate our maintenance facility. The exact dollar can not be determined at this time. Further, the bill does not specify where any revenue received from the Governor’s conveyance of the property will be deposited.

Oversight assumes this conveyance would occur in FY08 and has estimated a range of cost for that fiscal year.

Officials from the City of Kansas City and Jackson County did not respond to our request for a fiscal impact.

For any school district located in more than one county and whose headquarters are located within Monroe City and located in more than one county, the county signified in the school district number shall be the county in the district with the highest dollar value modifier.

Officials of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education stated the proposed language will cause an increase to the dollar value modifier variable used for the district from 1.000 to 1.023. This change will increase the state payment to the district by approximately $33,707 in FY08, $50,657 in FY09 and $50,657 in FY10 for a total of $135,021. These are estimates based on constant pupil counts and the state adequacy target.

Senate Amendment 2: This section provides that any condition of cancer which affects certain bodily systems, as well as any condition of cancer which may result from exposure to heat or radiation or to a known or suspected carcinogen, as determined by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, shall be presumed to be suffered in the line of duty for the purposes of computing retirement benefits for firefighters if it can be proven to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the condition did not result nor was contributed to by the voluntary use of tobacco.

Senate Amendment 4: This section requires taxpayers to provide a list of all tangible personal property, subject to tax in the county of the taxpayers residence address, to the assessor of such county. A taxpayer who knowingly violates the requirement to list such property in the county of residence shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Senate Amendment 9: This section provides that a fire protection district, municipal fire department, or volunteer fire association would be the sole provider of fire suppression response and related activities within its legal boundaries. Another such entity may provide service within the boundaries upon a majority vote of the governing body of the district, department, or association. Any other entity wanting to provide fire suppression response within the boundaries that is denied its request would have the right to appeal the decision to the circuit court.

This section would not prohibit a fire protection district, municipal fire department, or volunteer fire association from accepting assistance when requested from another such entity during an emergency without a vote of the governing body.

Senate Amendment 23: This section repeals provisions of law which currently prohibit any Kansas City police officer from:

(2) Soliciting any person to vote for or against any political candidate, party, or organization;

(4) Allowing any solicitation of contributions to take place on police department property.

This section also repeals the provision which prohibits any person from soliciting a police officer or a member of the police board for any political purpose.

Senate Amendment 25: Changes the requirement for bids on construction contracts of ten thousand or more, rather than twenty five thousand or more. Currently political subdivisions that are not subject to any bidding requirements would comply with this change.

The following list of respondents stated there would be no fiscal impact to their agencies:

Missouri Department of Transportation, Department of Health and Senior Services, Department of Economic Development- Tourism Division, Department of Revenue, Office of the State Auditor, Office of State Courts Administrator, Missouri Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement, Department of Public Safety - Fire Safety Division, Little Blue

FISCAL IMPACT - State Government	FY 2008 (10 Mo.)	FY 2009	FY 2010

GENERAL REVENUE FUND

Income - From 1% collection fee on sales tax	$0 or Unknown	$0 or Unknown	$0 or Unknown
(Sections 67.997, 67.2040, 67.2500 and 67.2510, 92.500, 94.950, 650.396 and 650.399 Senate Amendment 8)

Cost - Department of Elementary and Secondary Education - Additional payment to certain districts (§163.011) (Senate Amendment 24)	($152,897)	($2,601)	$0

Transfer of Revenue to School Monies Fund - Department of Elementary and Secondary Education - Additional payment to certain district - Monroe City R-II - (Senate Amendment 14)	($33,707)	($50,657)	($50,657)

FISCAL IMPACT - State Government (continued)	FY 2008 (10 Mo.)	FY 2009	FY 2010


Transfer of Revenue - To State School Monies Fund
Offset loss of school fine monies in Jefferson County. (Section 67.320)	(Less than $100,000)	(Less than $100,000)	(Less than $100,000)


ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO STATE GENERAL REVENUE FUND	($286,604) to Unknown	($153,258) to Unknown	($150,657) to Unknown


STATE SCHOOL MONIES FUND

Transfer In - From General Revenue
To pay increase in state aid (SA 14 Sec. 1)	$33,707	$50,657	$50,657


Transfer In - From General Revenue
To offset loss in fine revenue in Jefferson County. (Section 67.320)	Less than $100,000	Less than $100,000	Less than $100,000


Transfer Out - to Monroe City R-II School District Modifier Change in Formula. (SA 14 Section 1)	($33,707)	($50,657)	($50,657)


Transfer Out - Distribution to School Districts in Jefferson County. (Section 67.320)	(Less than $100,000)	(Less than $100,000)	(Less than $100,000)

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO STATE SCHOOL MONIES FUND	$0	$0	$0

FISCAL IMPACT - State Government (continued)	FY 2008 (10 Mo.)	FY 2009	FY 2010


BOARD OF FUND COMMISSIONERS (Senate Amend. 5)

Income - Board of Fund Commissioners
Sale of Bonds	$0 to $40,000,000	$0 to $40,000,000	$0 to $40,000,000

Income - Fees for Storm Water Control	$0 to $3,570,033	$0 to $3,570,033	$0 to $3,570,033

Cost - Local Revenue Backed by Storm Water Control Fees	$0 to ($40,000,000)	$0 to ($40,000,000)	$0 to ($40,000,000)

Cost - Payment of Bonds	$0 to ($3,570,033)	$0 to ($3,570,033)	$0 to ($3,570,033)

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON BOARD OF FUND COMMISSIONERS (Senate Amendment 5)	$0	$0	$0


ROAD FUND (Section SA 11)

Cost - Relocation of Maintenance Facility	$0 to ($6,000,000)	$0	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO ROAD FUND	$0 to ($6,000,000)	$0	$0

FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government	FY 2008 (10 Mo.)	FY 2009	FY 2010

CERTAIN POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS (Section 64.907)

Income - To Political Subdivisions
From voter approved tax on charges	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown

Cost - To Political Subdivisions
From providing storm water control	(Unknown)	(Unknown)	(Unknown)

Total Effect to Certain Political Subdivisions	$0	$0	$0

JEFFERSON COUNTY (Section 67.320)

Income - Jefferson County
From increase in fines and fees	Less than $100,000	Less than $100,000	Less than $100,000

Total Estimated Effect to Jefferson County (Section 67.320)	Less than $100,000	Less than $100,000	Less than $100,000


JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS (Section 67.320)

Transfer In - From State School Monies Fund	Less than $100,000	Less than $100,000	Less than $100,000

Losses - School Districts in Jefferson County
From redistribution of court fines to local government.	(Less than $100,000)	(Less than $100,000)	(Less than $100,000)

Total Estimated Effect to Jefferson County School Districts (Section 67.320)	$0	$0	$0

FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government (continued)	FY 2008 (10 Mo.)	FY 2009	FY 2010

COUNTY TOURISM FUND (Section 67.1181)

Cost - From conducting audit of fund.	$0	(Unknown)	$0

Total Cost to County Tourism Fund	$0	(Unknown)	$0


THE COUNTY CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND

Income - From voter approved property tax	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown

Cost - From maintenance of county cemeteries.	(Unknown)	(Unknown)	(Unknown)

Total Effect to County Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund (Section 137.1040)	$0	$0	$0

POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS

Income - St Charles School Districts - Fine loss reimbursement (§163.011 Senate Amendment 24)	$152,897	$2,601	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS	$152,897	$2,601	$0







FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government (continued)	FY 2008 (10 Mo.)	FY 2009	FY 2010

AMBULANCE DISTRICT FUND (Section 190.053)

Cost - From providing board member training.	$0 to (Unknown)	$0 to (Unknown)	$0 to (Unknown)

Total Costs to Ambulance District Fund	$0 to (Unknown)	$0 to (Unknown)	$0 to (Unknown)


PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY DISTRICTS

Savings - Election costs due to changes in director’s terms.	Minimal	Minimal	Minimal

Estimated Net Effect to Public Water Supply Districts (Section 247.060)	Minimal	Minimal	Minimal


CERTAIN SCHOOLS IN JACKSON COUNTY (Senate Amendment 22)

Income - To Certain School Districts in Jackson County (Section 319.400)	$0 to Unknown	$0 to Unknown	$0 to Unknown

Estimated Net Effect to Certain School Districts in Jackson County	$0 to Unknown	$0 to Unknown	$0 to Unknown

FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FUND (Section 321.162)

Cost - From providing training to board members.	$0 to (Unknown)	$0 to (Unknown)	$0 to (Unknown)

Total Costs to Fire Protection District Fund	$0 to (Unknown)	$0 to (Unknown)	$0 to (Unknown)
FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government (continued)	FY 2008 (10 Mo.)	FY 2009	FY 2010

METROPOLITAN ST. LOUIS SEWER DISTRICT (Section 250.140)

Costs to Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District
From Sewer Collection Costs
Programming (one-time)	($1,530,725)	$0	$0
Operational (one-time)	($114,200)	($227,850)	$0
On-Going costs	($36,501)	($783,594)	($783,594)

Total Cost to Metropolitan Sewer District	($1,681,426)	($1,011,444)	($783,594)


CITIES, COUNTIES, SPECIAL DISTRICTS SALES TAX FUNDS

Income - From voter approved sales tax.	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown

Costs - From administering defined purpose of sales tax.	(Unknown)	(Unknown)	(Unknown)

Estimated Net Effect to Cities, Counties, Special Districts (Sections 67.997, 67.2040, 67.2500 and 67.2510, 92.500, 94.950, 650.396 and 650.399 SA 8) *	$0	$0	$0

CITIES OF SULLIVAN, HOLLISTER, AND GLADSTONE TOURISM FUND

Income - From voter approved transient guest tax.	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown

Cost - From promotion of tourism.	(Unknown)	(Unknown)	(Unknown)




FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government (continued)	FY 2008 (10 Mo.)	FY 2009	FY 2010

Estimated Net Effect to Cities of Sullivan, Hollister and Gladstone Tourism Fund. (Sections 67.1003 and 67.1360) Senate Amendment 27 added Hollister *	$0	$0	$0

Transfer In - Monroe County R-II School District Modifier Change increase in state aid. (SA 14 Section 1)	$33,707	$50,657	$50,657


ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT	Unknown to (Unknown)	Unknown to (Unknown)	Unknown to (Unknown)

* Oversight assume costs of providing defined services would not exceed income, resulting in either a $0 or positive annual fund balance. Oversight assumes for purposes of this fiscal note a $0 annual fund balance.

Small business located within districts that impose voter approved sales taxes or certain businesses that would be required to collect a transient guest tax would have to collect and administer the

Section 64.907 allows any political subdivision subject to EPA rules concerning storm water discharges to adopt rules necessary to comply with the federal rules, rather than only counties. Any such political subdivision is authorized to establish a storm water control utility to administer the rules and a tax, upon voter approval to be used for storm water control.

Section 67.320 Currently, Jefferson County may adopt orders with penal provisions consistent with state law in the areas of traffic violations, solid waste management, and animal control. Under this section the county would be able to adopt such orders in any area covered by the county’s ordinances.

Section 67.997 allows Perry County to impose, upon voter approval, a sales tax of up to one-fourth of 1% to equally fund senior services and youth programs.

Section 67.1181 requires political subdivisions that collect and expend tax revenues for advertising and tourism promotion to perform an audit at least every five years if no other statutory auditing requirement exists for such political subdivision. The political subdivision shall pay the actual cost of the audit from the revenues for operating costs. The first audit shall be completed by January 1, 2009.

67.1003 allows the City of Gladstone to impose, upon voter approval, a transient guest tax of up to 5% on hotel and motel rooms to be used for the promotion of tourism.

67.1360 allows the City of Sullivan and the portion of the Sullivan C-2 School District located in Franklin County to levy a transient guest tax on charges for sleeping rooms paid by guest of hotels, motels, bed and breakfast inns, and campgrounds or docking facilities. The proposed tax must be approved by the voters and could not be less than 2% or greater than 5% per occupied room per night.

Section 67.1360 amended by Senate Amendment 27 adds the City of Hollister to the list of cities that can levy a voter approved transient guest tax.

Section 67.2040 allows Pulaski County to impose, upon voter approval, a sales tax of one-eight of 1% to fund construction of a women’s and children’s shelter.

Sections 67.2500 and 67.2510 allows cities, towns, and villages within Clay County, Franklin County, and Jackson County to form a Theater, Cultural Arts, and Entertainment District. St. Charles County may also form a district. The current law provides for funding by a voter approved sales tax. Senate Amendment 17 adds Boone County to the counties that could establish an entertainment district.

Currently, there is a Kansas and Missouri Regional Investment District Compact. Under, this act, if the state of Kansas has not enacted the compact by August 28, 2007, the district shall still be created and shall be entitled the "Missouri Regional Investment District".

This act adds Buchanan County to the list of political subdivisions which are considered regional investment districts. The act also provides the areas of Kansas which will be included in the district if Kansas adopts the compact.

All members of the commission governing the Regional Investment District shall be from a jurisdiction in a state that has adopted the compact.

Currently, counties in the district may, upon voter approval, submit a sales tax not to exceed

one-half of one percent to support a regional program for a public transit system. This act removes a provision stating that such a sales tax shall not be levied by any county unless a majority of the qualified electors of at least Johnson and Wyandotte Counties in Kansas and Jackson County in Missouri approve the such a levy.

Section 92.500 allows the City of St. Louis to impose, upon voter approval, a sales tax for public safety.

Senate Amendment 13 Section 94.660 This section provides that the “coupling provision of section 94.660" (requires both the city and county to approve a transportation sales tax before a transportation sales tax can go into effect in either jurisdiction) shall not apply to any transportation sales tax approved by the voters in such city or such county on or after August 28, 2007.

Section 94.950 allows the City of Joplin to impose, upon voter approval, a sales tax of up to 0.5% to be used for operation, renovation, and construction of historical locations and museums for the purpose of tourism.

Section 137.1040 allows County Commissions to at their discretion to seek voter approval to levy an additional tax, not to exceed one half cent on each one hundred dollars assessed valuation, on all taxable real property in the county. The tax proceeds could only be used for the upkeep and maintenance of cemeteries located in the county.

Sections 144.757, 144.759, 650.396 and 650.399 - Currently, any county or municipality, except those within St. Louis County, may impose a local use tax for economic development and local government services. This amendment would provide that 50% of the tax is to be used for enhancing county and municipal public safety, parks, and job creation, rather than economic development. The remaining 50% shall continue to be used for local government services.

Section 163.011 (Senate Amendment 24) grants school districts, located at least partially within a county, an additional payment equal to the decrease, if any, in the amount the district receives from fines in the current year from revenue the district received in fiscal year 2005.

Section 190.053 requires members of ambulance district boards first elected after January 1, 2008, to complete educational training. The training shall be offered by a statewide association organized for the benefit of ambulance districts or approved by the State Advisory Council on Emergency Medical Services. The content of the training must include the duties of the ambulance district director, all ambulance district statutes and regulations, ethics and sunshine laws, financial and fiduciary responsibilities, and laws relating to the setting of tax rates and revenue limitations. If a board member does not receive the required training within one year of taking office, the board member shall not receive an attendance fee until the training is completed

Section 247.060 modifies the length of term for directors of public water supply districts elected in 2008, 2009, and 2010, due to a change in the date of their election from June to April in statute.

Section 250.140 Currently, a St. Louis City property owner is only liable for an occupant’s delinquent water or sewer bill for up to 90 days of service.

Under this section, as of the effective date of this section a St. Louis City property owner would be liable for up to 120 days of service when the occupant’s bill is delinquent

Section 319.400 (Senate Amendment 22) provides that in Jackson County and in areas where residential properties, schools, or churches are located, the maximum vibration at the property line of such properties shall be .20 inches per second or five millimeters per second peak particle velocity. A minimum set back from property lines of 1000 feet shall be maintained. A maximum is set for aboveground blasting. Monitoring of vibration levels and air blast shall be conducted by an independent seismologist, and the cost of the monitoring shall be paid by the company conducting the blasting. The number of seismographs shall be determined by the seismologist but shall not be fewer than one per 1000 feet of the property line. Weekly reports shall be given to local government and neighborhood organizations. Fines are established for violations of this section. A portion of the fines, as determined by the local government, would go to the school districts or neighborhood organizations to provide public benefits, including scholarships, and community improvements.

Section 321.162 requires members of fire protection district (FPD) boards first elected after January 1, 2008, to complete educational training. The content of the training will be determined by the State Fire Marshal but must include the duties of the FPD director, all FPD statutes and regulations, ethics and sunshine laws, financial and fiduciary responsibilities, and laws relating to the setting of tax rates and revenue limitations.

If a board member does not receive the required training within one year of taking office, the board member shall not receive an attendance fee until the training is completed.

Sections 644.597, 644.598, and 644.599 (Senate Amendment 5) authorizes the Board of Fund Commissioners to issue additional bonds for the purposes of stormwater and water pollution control, clean drinking water and other projects in Section 640, RSMo.. A total of $40 million was authorized.

Section 1, (Senate Amendment 11) authorizes the conveyance of certain state property located in Jackson County to the City of Kansas City and may have an effect on the Road Fund.

Section 1 (Senate Amendment 14) For any school district located in more than one county and whose headquarters are located within Monroe City and located in more than one county, the county signified in the school district number shall be the county in the district with the highest dollar value modifier.

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

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUND
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010
General Revenue	($286,604) to Unknown	($153,258) to Unknown	($150,657) to Unknown

Total Estimated Net Effect on General Revenue Fund	($286,604) to Unknown	($153,258) to Unknown	($150,657) to Unknown

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON OTHER STATE FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010
Board of Fund Commissioners	$0	$0	$0
State School Monies	$0	$0	$0
Road	($6,000,000)	$0	$0
Total Estimated Net Effect on Other State Funds	($6,000,000)	$0	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010


Total Estimated Net Effect on All Federal Funds	$0	$0	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010


Total Estimated Net Effect on FTE	0	0	0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010
Local Government	Unknown to (Unknown)	Unknown to (Unknown)	Unknown to (Unknown)