COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH

OVERSIGHT DIVISION

FISCAL NOTE

L.R. No.:         5988-06

Bill No.:          Truly Agreed To and Finally Passed SCS for SJR 51

Subject:           Boards, Commissions, Committees, Councils; Governor and Lt. Governor; Judges

Type:              Original

Date:               May 22, 2012

Bill Summary:            This proposal modifies the composition of nonpartisan judicial commissions.

FISCAL SUMMARY

Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses.

This fiscal note contains 6 pages.

☐ 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).

FISCAL ANALYSIS

ASSUMPTION

Officials from the Secretary of State’s Office assume each year, a number of bills may be considered by the General Assembly that would refer to a vote of the people the issue in the legislation.  Unless a special election is called for the purpose, Joint Resolutions are submitted to the people at the next general election.  If a special election is called to submit a Referendum to a vote of the people, Section 115.063.2 RSMo. requires the state to pay the costs.  Article III section 52(b) of the Missouri Constitution authorizes the General Assembly to order a special election for measures referred to the people.

The Secretary of State’s office is required to pay for publishing in local newspapers the full text of each statewide ballot measure as directed by Article XII, Section 2(b) of the Missouri Constitution and Section 116.230-116.290, RSMo.  The Secretary of State’s office is provided

with core funding to handle a certain amount of normal activity resulting from each year’s legislative session.  Funding for this item is adjusted each year depending upon the election cycle with $1.3 million historically appropriated in odd numbered fiscal years and $100,000 appropriated in even numbered fiscal years to meet these requirements.  The appropriation has historically been an estimated appropriation because the final cost is dependent upon the number of ballot measures approved by the General Assembly and the initiative petitions certified for the ballot.  In FY 2011, at the August and November elections, there were 6 statewide Constitutional Amendments or ballot propositions that cost $1.02 million to publish (an average of $170,000 per issue). Therefore, the Secretary of State’s office assumes, for the purposes of this fiscal note, that it should have the full appropriation authority it needs to meet the publishing requirements. However, because these requirements are mandatory, we reserve the right to request funding to meet the cost of our publishing requirements if the Governor and the General Assembly change the amount or eliminate the estimated nature of our appropriation.

Oversight has reflected in this fiscal note, the state potentially reimbursing local political subdivisions the cost of having this joint resolution voted on during a special election in fiscal year 2013. This reflects the decision made by the Joint Committee on Legislative Research, that the cost of the elections should be shown in the fiscal note. The next scheduled general election is in November 2012 (FY 2013). It is assumed the subject within this proposal could be on that ballot; however, it could also be on a special election called for by the Governor. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a potential election cost reimbursement to local political subdivisions in FY 2013.

To estimate the expense the state would incur for reimbursing local political subdivisions for a special election, Oversight requested expense estimates from all election authorities for an

ASSUMPTION (continued)

election. Eighty-six out of the one hundred fifteen election authorities responded to Oversight’s request. From these respondents, the total election expense that would have to be reimbursed by the state government is over $7 million. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a potential cost borne by the state in FY 2013 of over $7 million for reimbursement to the local political subdivisions. Oversight assumes the Governor could call for a special election to be held prior to November 2012 regarding this joint resolution; however, if a special election is not called, the subject will be voted on at the general election in November, 2012.

Officials from the Governor’s Office assume there should be no added cost to their office as a result of this measure. However, if additional duties are placed on the office related to appointments in other TAFP legislation, there may be the need for additional staff resources in future years.

Officials from the Office of the State Courts Administrator assume the proposal would not fiscally impact the courts.

FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business

No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.

FISCAL DESCRIPTION

This constitutional amendment, if approved by the voters, would modify the composition of the Appellate Judicial Commission and the selection process for judges to the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals.

This act increases the number of individuals that the Appellate Judicial Commission nominates for vacancies in the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals from three to four.

Currently, the Appellate Judicial Commission consists of seven members as follows: one Supreme Court judge, a member of the bar from each appellate district elected by members of the bar in that district, and a non-bar member citizen from each appellate district appointed by the Governor. This act replaces the judge member of the commission with an additional member appointed by the Governor. Members appointed by the Governor no longer must be non-bar members. The Governor will appoint one member from each appellate district and one from the state at large. The appointed members will serve terms of four years. Their terms will be staggered so that a Governor will appoint two when taking office and two during the middle of his or her term. The Supreme Court will appoint a former Supreme Court or Court of Appeals judge to serve as a nonvoting member of the commission. The former judge cannot have been removed for cause or failed to be retained in a retention election. The changes to the Appellate

FISCAL DESCRIPTION (continued)

Judicial Commission will take effect on January 15, 2013.

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 Secretary of State

Office of the State Courts Administrator

Office of the Governor

                                                                                                Mickey Wilson, CPA

                                                                                                Director

                                                                                                May 22, 2012