COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.:1937S.04C Bill No.:SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081 Subject:State Departments; Public Officers; Corporations; Law Enforcement Officers and
Agencies; Crimes and Punishment; Motor Vehicles
Type:Original Date:May 4, 2023Bill Summary:This proposal modifies provisions relating to privacy protections.
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUNDFUND AFFECTEDFY 2024FY 2025FY 2026General Revenue
Fund*
(Unknown, Could
exceed $33,653)$0 to (Unknown)$0 to (Unknown)
Total Estimated Net
Effect on General
Revenue
(Unknown, Could
exceed $33,653)$0 to (Unknown)$0 to (Unknown)
*Oversight is unclear on how many claims could occur against a state employee for violating this
proposal (476.1308). Oversight assumes the cost would not reach the $250,000 threshold.
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON OTHER STATE FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2024FY 2025FY 2026Various State FundsLess than $250,000Less than $250,000Less than $250,000Legal Expense
Fund** $0$0$0
Total Estimated Net
Effect on Other State
FundsLess than $250,000Less than $250,000Less than $250,000
**Indicates numbers that net to zero.
Numbers within parentheses: () indicate costs or losses. L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 2 of
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2024FY 2025FY 2026Total Estimated Net
Effect on All Federal
Funds $0$0$0
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)FUND AFFECTEDFY 2024FY 2025FY 2026Total Estimated Net
Effect on FTE 000
☐ Estimated Net Effect (expenditures or reduced revenues) expected to exceed $250,000 in any
of the three fiscal years after implementation of the act or at full implementation of the act.
☐ Estimated Net Effect (savings or increased revenues) expected to exceed $250,000 in any of
the three fiscal years after implementation of the act or at full implementation of the act.
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2024FY 2025FY 2026Local GovernmentLess than $250,000Less than $250,000Less than $250,000 L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 3 of
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
FISCAL ANALYSIS
ASSUMPTION
§105.1500 – Personal Privacy Protection Act
In response to a similar proposal from this year (HB 1064), officials from the Office of
Administration (OA) assumed the proposed legislation would have a positive impact on OA
Division of Purchasing as it would allow for the public to once again access needed procurement
records on the Awarded Bid and Contract Document Search Website and MissouriBUYS
Contract Board rather than having to submit an open records request to OA Purchasing in order
to gain access to do so. This would reduce the number of open record requests received and
reduce the number of hours needed by OA Purchasing to review bid and contract files for any
personal Information of a 501(c) entity in the requested records and in bid files prior to award
and in prior bid and contract files prior to the new solicitation’s issuance and to redact such
before providing the bid and contract documents to the public in order to maintain compliance
with the provisions of section 105.1500, RSMo.
While there would not be a direct monetary savings to OA Purchasing, the proposed legislation
would avoid Purchasing having to divert resources to completing the records reviews and
redactions.
In response to similar legislation, HB 667 from 2023, officials from the City of Kansas City,
City of O’FallonCity of Springfield each assumed the proposal will have no fiscal
impact on their respective organizations.
In response to similar legislation, HB 667 from 2023, officials from the Jackson County Board
of Elections, Platte County Board of Elections, and the St. Louis County Board of Elections
each assumed the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations.
In response to similar legislation, HB 667 from 2023, officials from the University of Central
Missouri assumed the proposal will have an indeterminate fiscal impact on their organization.
In response to similar legislation, HB 667 from 2023, officials from the St. Charles Community
College
Oversight notes that the Personal Privacy Protection Act was passed on HB 2400 in 2022. This
legislation is making amendments to include exemptions from the Act. The above mentioned
agencies have stated the proposal would not have a direct fiscal impact on their organizations.
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero
impact on the fiscal note for this section of the proposal. L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 4 of
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
§105.1675 – Anti-Surveillance and Foreign Intervention Act
In response to a previous version of HB 919, officials from the Department of Commerce and
Insurance, Department of Health and Senior Services, the Department of Corrections, the
Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, the Office of Administration the Attorney
General’s Office, the Department of Economic Development the Department of Natural
Resources, the Department of Public Safety (Capitol Police Alcohol & Tobacco Control,
Gaming Commission, Missouri Highway Patrol, Missouri National Guard), the Office of
the Governor, the Missouri Ethics Commission, the Office of the State Courts
Administrator, the Office of the State Auditor the Office of the State Public Defender, the
Office of the State Treasurer each assumed the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their
respective organizations.
Oversight notes that the above mentioned agencies have stated the proposal would not have a
direct fiscal impact on their organization. Oversight does not have any information to the
contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact on the fiscal note for this section.
§§476.1300 - 476.1313 - Judicial Privacy Act
Officials from the Department of Revenue (DOR) assume the following:
§476.1302.1
DOR assumes this subsection requires the Department to not publicly post or display publicly
available content that includes a judicial officer’s personal information provided the government
agency has received a written request that the agency refrain from disclosing the judicial
officer’s personal information.
§476.1310.1
DOR assumes this subsection deems that no government agency, person, business, or association
shall be found to have violated any provision of sections 476.1300 to 476.1312 if the judicial
officer fails to submit a written request calling for the protection of the judicial officer’s personal
information.
§476.1302.2
A written request shall be valid if:
(1.) The judicial officer sends a written request directly to a government agency, person,
business, or association; or
(2.) If the judicial officer complies with a Missouri Supreme Court rule for a state judicial officer
to file the written request with the clerk of the Missouri Supreme Court or the clerk’s designee to
notify government agencies and such notice is properly delivered by mail or electronic format.
§476.1302.3
DOR assumes this subsection the clerk of the Missouri Supreme Court or the clerk’s designee to L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 5 of
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
provide a list of all state judicial officers who have submitted a written request under this section
to the appropriate officer with ultimate supervisory authority for a government agency. The
office shall promptly provide a copy of the list to all government agencies under his or her
supervision. Receipt of the written request list compiled by the clerk of the Missouri Supreme
Court or the clerk’s designee by a government agency shall constitute a written request to that
agency for the purposes of sections 476.1300 to 476-1312.
§476.1302.5
DOR assumes this subsection deems a judicial officer’s written request shall specify what
personal information shall be maintained as private. If a judicial officer wishes to identify a
secondary residence as a home address, the designation shall be made in the written request. A
judicial officer shall disclose the identity of his or her immediate family and indicate that the
personal information of those members of the immediate family shall also be excluded to the
extent that it could reasonably be expected to reveal the personal information of the judicial
officer.
§476.1302.6
DOR assumes this subsection deems a judicial officer’s written request is valid until the judicial
officer provides the government agency, person, business, or association with written permission
to release the personal information. A judicial officer’s written request expires on such judicial
officer’s death.
Administrative Impact
To implement the proposed change, the Department would be required to:
• Project development and oversight tasks;
• Coordinate with the Missouri Supreme Court to develop requirements for the data file
specifications for electronic transfer of data;
• OA-ITSD to develop a secure process that is a format compatible with the Missouri Supreme
Court system for the court to send the request with personal information attached;
• Complete programming and user acceptance testing of MODL to verify file transfer from
Missouri Supreme Court and update confidential record indicators as required to restrict release
of information;
• OA-ITSD Test the file generation and secure transfer process to ensure all required data
elements are received as required;
• Obtain format and procedure approvals from Missouri Supreme Court as applicable;
• Test file transfer process, record updates, record sales and law enforcement inquiries to ensure
accurate handling of these newly restricted record types;
• Update policies and procedures;
• Update forms, manuals, and the Department website;
• Complete training as required.
FY2024-Driver License Bureau
Research/Data Analyst 80 hrs. @ $25.63 =$2,050 L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 6 of
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
Administrative Manager 60 hrs. @ $27.82 =$1,669
Total $3,719
FY 2024-Public Service Bureau
Associate Research/Data Analyst 20 hrs. @ $17.20 =$344
Total $4,063
MVB:
Chapters in 476
• This bill creates the “Judicial Privacy Act,” which functions as a way for judges to request that
their personal information not be posted or released. Judicial officers have to make a written
request either directly to each agency, person, business, or association; or file through a clerk of
the Supreme Court, asking them to refrain from disclosing the judicial officer’s personal
information. The bill also requires that no one uses a judicial officer’s personal information in
any way for the purposes of tampering with a judicial officer; being guilty of which would result
in a class D felony.
Administrative Impact
To implement the proposed legislation the department will be required to:
• Update procedures, correspondence letters and the Department website;
• Update the Missouri Titling Manual and Forms;
• Send Communications to License offices and other Contracted stakeholders; and
• Train Staff
FY 2023 – Motor Vehicle Bureau
Associate Research/Data Analyst 40 hrs. @ $19.90/hr. = $796.00
Lead Administrative Support Asst. 20 Hrs @ $17.05 = $341.00
Administrative Manager 5 Hrs @ $26.96 = $134.80
FY 2024 – Strategy and Communications Office
Associate Research/Data Analyst 20 hrs. @ $19.90/hr. = $ 398
Total Cost = $1,669.80
The Department anticipates being able to absorb these costs and that there will be Minimal
Impact. If multiple bills are passed that require Department resources, FTE may be requested
through the appropriations process.
Based on the assumption that the eligible record holders will be updated through a secure file
process and not by processing of individual applications, the department does not expect to
require additional FTE. The volume of potential individual requests for removal is unknown. If
the volume of request increases beyond current staffing abilities, the department will be required L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 7 of
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
to request appropriations for FTEs.
The fiscal impact estimate in this response is based on changes in the current MO Driver License
System environment. The Department is pursuing an upgraded Motor Vehicle and Driver
Licensing system and to reduce duplicative development and reduce cost the sponsor may want
to consider an delayed effective date that would allow the proposed changes be developed within
the new proposed environment.
Oversight notes DOR anticipates having a one-time IT cost of $33,653 for 354.24 hours of work
at $95 per hour in FY 2024.
Oversight is unclear on the timeframe for updating DOR’s Motor Vehicle and Driver Licensing
software system and will, therefore, reflect costs estimates as provided by DOR as if the changes
were implemented starting in FY24.
Officials from the Office of Administration (OA) state this proposal provides restrictions on the
use of a judicial officer’s personal information and establishes civil remedies for violation,
including costs and attorney fees. These provisions have the potential to increase costs to the
Legal Expense Fund (LEF) if a claim were successfully brought against a state employee for
violation of this legislation.
Oversight does not have information to the contrary and therefore, Oversight will reflect a $0 to
unknown cost to General Revenue (as reimbursement to the Legal Expense Fund) and the LEF
as provided by the OA.
§565.260 – Unlawful Tracking of a Motor Vehicle
In response to a similar proposal from this year (HB 1081), officials from the Office of the State
Public Defender (SPD) stated the proposed legislation creates new offenses under sections
542.402 and 565.260 which could result in additional cases eligible for SPD representation. The
number of additional cases is unknown and as a result the fiscal impact is unknown. However, if
the offenses, which are classified as misdemeanors, were class D misdemeanors, jail time would
not be a possible sentence and the offense, therefore, would not be eligible for SPD
representation.
Oversight notes in FY22 the SPD was appropriated moneys for 53 additional FTE. Oversight
assumes this proposal will create a minimal number of new cases and that the SPD can absorb
the additional caseload required by this proposal with current staff and resources. Therefore,
Oversight will reflect no fiscal impact to the SPD for fiscal note purposes. However, if multiple
bills pass which require additional staffing and duties, the SPD may request funding through the
appropriation process.
In response to a similar proposal from this year (HB 1081), officials from the from the Kansas
City Police Department, the St. Joseph Police DepartmentSt. Louis County Police L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 8 of
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
Department, the Phelps County Sheriff’s Department, the Fruitland Area Fire Protection
District, and the Cole Camp Ambulance District assumed the proposal will have no fiscal
impact on their respective organizations.
In response to a similar proposal from this year (HB 1081), officials from the Branson Police
Department stated as for the vehicle tracking changes, there are no anticipated negative impacts
and are in line with applicable case law.
Oversight also notes a violation of the provisions of section 565.260 is a class A misdemeanor
which carries a fine not to exceed $2,000 in addition to any individual county/municipal fees and
court costs. The fine revenue for the ticket goes to local school funds and court costs go to
various state and local funds. Oversight assumes there will be some (less than $250,000) fine
revenue from violations of the statute. Therefore, the impact to various state funds and local
governments will be presented as less than $250,000. For simplicity, Oversight will not reflect
the possibility that fine revenue paid to school districts may act as a subtraction in the foundation
formula.
Below are examples of some of the state and local funds which court costs are distributed:
Fee/Fund NameFee AmountBasic Civil Legal Services Fund$8.00Clerk Fee$15.00 ($12 State/$3 County)County Fee$25.00State Court Automation Fund$7.00Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund$7.50DNA Profiling Analysis Fund$15.00Peace Officer Standards and Training
(POST) Fund
$1.00Motorcycle Safety Trust Fund$1.00Brain Injury Fund$2.00Independent Living Center Fund$1.00Sheriff’s Fee$10.00 (County)Prosecuting Attorney and Circuit Attorney
Training Fund
$4.00Prosecuting Attorney Training Fund$1.00 ($0.50 State/$0.50 County)Spinal Cord Injury Fund$2.00
Oversight only reflects the responses received from state agencies and political subdivisions;
however, other ambulance/EMS, fire protection districts, and local law enforcement were
requested to respond to this proposed legislation but did not. A listing of political subdivisions
included in the Missouri Legislative Information System (MOLIS) database is available upon
request. L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 9 of
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
Bill as a whole:
Officials from the Attorney General’s Office, the Office of Administration - Budget and
Planning, the Department of Economic Development, the Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education, the Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development,
the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of
Public Safety (Alcohol and Tobacco Control, Fire Safety, Gaming Commission, Highway
Patrol, Veterans Commission, State Emergency Management Agency), the Missouri Ethics
Commission, the Missouri National Guard, the Office of the State Auditor, the Joint
Committee on Administrative Rules, the Oversight Division, the Missouri Senate, the
Missouri Lottery Commission, the Missouri Consolidated Health Care Plan and the State
Tax Commission each assume the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their respective
organizations.
In response to a previous version, officials from the Office of Administration - Administrative
Hearing Commission, the Department of Commerce and Insurance, the Department of
Health and Senior Services, the Department of Corrections, the Department of Labor and
Industrial Relations, the Department of Public Safety – Capitol Police, Directors Office, the
Office of the Governor, the Missouri Department of Conservation, the Missouri
Department of Transportation, the MoDOT & Patrol Employees’ Retirement System, the
Office of the Lieutenant Governor, the Missouri House of Representatives, the Legislative
Research, the Office of the State Courts AdministratorMissouri Office of
Prosecution Services each assumed the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their respective
organizations.
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero
impact in the fiscal note for these agencies.
Officials from the Department of Social Services and the Missouri Department of
Agriculture
Officials from the Office of the Secretary of State (SOS) note many bills considered by the
General Assembly include provisions allowing or requiring agencies to submit rules and
regulations to implement the act. The SOS is provided with core funding to handle a certain
amount of normal activity resulting from each year's legislative session. The fiscal impact for
this fiscal note to the SOS for Administrative Rules is less than $5,000. The SOS recognizes that
this is a small amount and does not expect that additional funding would be required to meet
these costs. However, the SOS also recognizes that many such bills may be passed by the
General Assembly in a given year and that collectively the costs may be in excess of what the
office can sustain with its core budget. Therefore, the SOS reserves the right to request funding
for the cost of supporting administrative rules requirements should the need arise based on a
review of the finally approved bills signed by the governor. L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 10 of 12
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
FISCAL IMPACT – State
Government
FY 2024
(10 Mo.)
FY 2025FY 2026GENERAL REVENUECost – DOR
One-time IT cost
§§476.1300-476.1313 p. 4-7($33,653)$0$0
Cost – OA
Potential payout of claims to LEF
against a state employee for violating
the Judicial Privacy Act
§§476.1300-476.1313 p. 4-7
($0 to
Unknown)($0 to Unknown)
($0 to
Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO
THE GENERAL REVENUE FUND
(Unknown,
Could exceed
$33,653)($0 to Unknown)
($0 to
Unknown)
LEGAL EXPENSE FUND (0692)Transfer In – increase in
appropriations to cover additional
payouts
§§476.1300-476.1313 p. 4-7
$0 to
Unknown$0 to
Unknown
$0 to Unknown
Cost – OA – potential payout claims
against a state employee for violating
this proposal
§§476.1300-476.1313 p. 4-7
$0 to
(Unknown)
$0 to
(Unknown)
$0 to (Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON
LEGAL EXPENSE FUND$0$0$0
VARIOUS STATE FUNDSRevenue – (§565.260) Court costs
paid in p. 7-8
Less than
$250,000
Less than $250,000Less than
$250,000
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON
VARIOUS STATE FUNDS
Less than
$250,000
Less than
$250,000
Less than
$250,000 L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 11 of 12
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
FISCAL IMPACT – Local GovernmentFY 2024
(10 Mo.)
FY 2025FY 2026LOCAL POLITICAL
SUBDIVISIONS
Revenue – (§565.260) Court costs
p. 7-8
Less than
$250,000
Less than
$250,000
Less than
$250,000
Revenue - (§565.260) Fine revenue
p. 7-8
Less than
$250,000
Less than
$250,000
Less than
$250,000
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON
LOCAL POLITICAL
SUBDIVISIONS
Less than
$250,000
Less than
$250,000
Less than
$250,000
FISCAL IMPACT – Small Business
Small businesses which do not follow the provisions of the proposal could be fiscally affected
and could be charged criminally.
FISCAL DESCRIPTION
This proposal modifies provisions relating to privacy protections.
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
Attorney General’s Office
Department of Commerce and Insurance
Department of Economic Development
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development
Department of Health and Senior Services
Department of Mental Health
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Corrections
Department of Labor and Industrial Relations
Department of Revenue
Department of Public
Department of Social Services L.R. No. 1937S.04C
Bill No. SCS for HCS for HB Nos. 919 & 1081
Page 12 of 12
May 4, 2023
KC:LR:OD
Office of the Governor
Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement
Joint Committee on Administrative Rules
Missouri Lottery Commission
Legislative Research
Oversight Division
Local Government Employees Retirement System
Missouri Consolidated Health Care Plan
Missouri Department of Agriculture
Missouri Department of Conservation
Missouri Ethics Commission
Missouri House of Representatives
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Missouri Department of Transportation
Missouri State Employee's Retirement System
MoDOT & Patrol Employees’ Retirement System
Missouri Office of Prosecution Services
Office of Administration
Facilities Management, Design and Construction
Office of the State Courts Administrator
Office of the State Auditor
Missouri Senate
Office of the Secretary of State
Office of the State Public Defender
Office of the State Treasurer
Public Schools and Education Employee Retirement Systems
State Tax Commission
Julie MorffRoss StropeDirectorAssistant DirectorMay 4, 2023May 4, 2023