COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.: 4531-02
Bill No.: Truly Agreed To and Finally Passed HCS for SB 1002
Subject: Cities, Towns, and Villages: Codes, Zoning
Type: Original
Date: May 27, 2008
Bill Summary: Modifies provisions governing zoning violation remedies.
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUND |
|||
FUND AFFECTED |
FY 2009 |
FY 2010 |
FY 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Estimated Net Effect on General Revenue Fund |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON OTHER STATE FUNDS |
|||
FUND AFFECTED |
FY 2009 |
FY 2010 |
FY 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Estimated Net Effect on Other State Funds |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses.
This fiscal note contains 5 pages.
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS |
|||
FUND AFFECTED |
FY 2009 |
FY 2010 |
FY 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Estimated Net Effect on All Federal Funds |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE) |
|||
FUND AFFECTED |
FY 2009 |
FY 2010 |
FY 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Estimated Net Effect on FTE |
0 |
0 |
0 |
☐ 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).
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS |
|||
FUND AFFECTED |
FY 2009 |
FY 2010 |
FY 2011 |
Local Government |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
FISCAL ANALYSIS
ASSUMPTION
Officials of the City of St. Louis assume no fiscal impact.
Oversight assumes cities that have zoning codes, and enforcement of those codes, would be expected to have an increase in fine revenues from zoning code violations. The amount of increase in fine revenues would be determined by the courts. Income from fines on a statewide basis is indeterminable. Oversight will show the increase in fine revenues as a positive unknown to cities.
Oversight assumes no state fiscal impact.
FISCAL IMPACT - State Government |
FY 2009 (10 Mo.) |
FY 2010 |
FY 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government |
FY 2009 (10 Mo.) |
FY 2010 |
FY 2011 |
|
|
|
|
LOCAL GOVERNMENT: CITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income - To Cities |
|
|
|
From increase in zoning code violation fines. |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
|
|
|
|
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT: CITIES |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
|
|
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business
No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.
FISCAL DESCRIPTION
Currently, property owners violating certain zoning regulations in municipalities located in Jackson County shall be fined at least $10 but not more $500, or imprisoned for ten days, for each day of such violation.
DESCRIPTION (continued)
For second or subsequent offenses involving the same violation at the same place, the punishment shall be a fine of not less than $250 but not more than $1,000, or imprisonment for ten days, for each day of the violation. In all other municipalities, property owners shall be fined at least $10 but not more than $100 for each day of the violation, unless the offense was committed wilfully, in which case, the penalty shall be a fine of not less than $100 but not more than $250, or imprisonment for ten days, for each day of such violation.
Under this act, a property owner in any city with more than 300,000 inhabitants may be fined at least $10 but not more $500, or imprisoned for ten days, for each day of such violation. For second or subsequent offenses involving the same violation at the same place, the punishment shall be a fine of not less than $250 but not more than $1,000, or imprisonment for ten days, for each day of the violation.
In all other municipalities, property owners shall be fined not less than $10 but not more than $250, or imprisoned for ten days, for each day of the violation. For second or subsequent offenses involving the same violation at the same place, the punishment shall be a fine of not less than $100 but not more than $500, or imprisonment for ten days, for each day of the violation.
This act repeals the other version of Section 89.120, RSMo, which was doubly-enacted.
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
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
City of St. Louis
NOT RESPONDING
Kansas City Manager’s Office
Columbia
Maryland Heights
NOT RESPONDING (continued)
Florissant
Bridgeton
Raytown
Lees Summit
Belton
St. Charles
Springfield
St. Joseph
Cape Girardeau
Independence
Jackson County
St. Louis County
Mickey Wilson, CPA
Director
May 27, 2008