COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.:5403H.03P Bill No.:Perfected HCS for HB Nos. 2628 & 2603Subject:Elections; Science and Technology; Crimes and Punishment Type:Original Date:March 6, 2024Bill Summary:This proposal modifies provisions relating to electronic communications.
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUNDFUND AFFECTEDFY 2025FY 2026FY 2027General Revenue($8,074)($19,766)($20,161)Total Estimated Net
Effect on General
Revenue ($8,074)($19,766)($20,161)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON OTHER STATE FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2025FY 2026FY 2027Merchandising
Practices Revolving
Fund (0631)*
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
Total Estimated Net
Effect on Other State
Funds
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
*Oversight assumes this proposal could increase collections by the AGO from offenders, but
assumes the amount of collections would not reach the $250,000 threshold.
Numbers within parentheses: () indicate costs or losses. L.R. No. 5403H.03P
Bill No. Perfected HCS for HB Nos. 2628 & 2603
Page 2 of
March 6, 2024
DD:LR:OD
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2025FY 2026FY 2027Total Estimated Net
Effect on All Federal
Funds $0$0$0
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)FUND AFFECTEDFY 2025FY 2026FY 2027Total 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 2025FY 2026FY 2027Local Government$0$0$0 L.R. No. 5403H.03P
Bill No. Perfected HCS for HB Nos. 2628 & 2603
Page 3 of
March 6, 2024
DD:LR:OD
FISCAL ANALYSIS
ASSUMPTION
§115.645 – Certain political advertisements
Officials from the Department of Corrections (DOC) state this proposal creates the offense of
distribution of synthetic media relating to elections or candidates for public office. Section
115.645 creates penalties for distributing a synthetic media message with content about a
candidate that is deceptive and fraudulent within ninety days of an election. The penalty for this
offense is a class B misdemeanor, unless the violation includes intent to cause violence or bodily
harm, in which case it is a class A misdemeanor. The penalty is a class E felony if the person
commits the violation within five years of one or more prior convictions for this offense.
Misdemeanors fall outside the purview of the department, and there is no expected impact from
that portion of the bill.
As these are new crimes, there is little direct data on which to base an estimate, and as such, the
department estimates an impact comparable to the creation of a new class E felony.
For each new nonviolent class E felony, the department estimates one person could be sentenced
to prison and two to probation. The average sentence for a nonviolent class E felony offense is
3.4 years, of which 2.1 years will be served in prison with 1.4 years to first release. The
remaining 1.3 years will be on parole. Probation sentences will be 3 years.
The cumulative impact on the department is estimated to be 2 additional offenders in prison and
7 additional offenders on field supervision by FY 2027.
C
hange in prison admissions and probation openings with legislation-Class E Felony (nonviolent)
F
Y2025
F
Y2026
F
Y2027
F
Y2028
F
Y2029
F
Y2030
F
Y2031
F
Y2032
F
Y2033
F
Y2034
N
ew Admissions
C
urrent Law
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
A
fter Legislation
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
P
robation
C
urrent Law
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
A
fter Legislation
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
C
hange (After Legislation - Current Law)
A
dmissions
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
P
robations
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
C
umulative Populations
P
rison
1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
P
arole
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
P
robation
2 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
I
mpact
P
rison Population
1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
F
ield Population
2 4 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
P
opulation Change
3 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 L.R. No. 5403H.03P
Bill No. Perfected HCS for HB Nos. 2628 & 2603
Page 4 of
March 6, 2024
DD:LR:OD
# to
prison
Cost per
year
Total Costs for
prison
Change in
probation
& parole
officers
Total cost
for
probation
and
parole
# to
probation
& parole
Grand Total -
Prison and
Probation
(includes 2%
inflation)
Year 11($9,689)($8,074)0$02($8,074)Year 22($9,689)($19,766)0$04($19,766)Year 32($9,689)($20,161)0$07($20,161)Year 42($9,689)($20,564)0$07($20,564)Year 52($9,689)($20,975)0$07($20,975)Year 62($9,689)($21,395)0$07($21,395)Year 72($9,689)($21,823)0$07($21,823)Year 82($9,689)($22,259)0$07($22,259)Year 92($9,689)($22,704)0$07($22,704)Year 102($9,689)($23,159)0$07($23,159)
If this impact statement has changed from statements submitted in previous years, it could be due
to an increase/decrease in the number of offenders, a change in the cost per day for institutional
offenders, and/or an increase in staff salaries.
If the projected impact of legislation is less than 1,500 offenders added to or subtracted from the
department’s institutional caseload, the marginal cost of incarceration will be utilized. This cost
of incarceration is $26.545 per day or an annual cost of $9,689 per offender and includes such
costs as medical, food, and operational E&E. However, if the projected impact of legislation is
1,500 or more offenders added or removed to the department’s institutional caseload, the full
cost of incarceration will be used, which includes fixed costs. This cost is $99.90 per day or an
annual cost of $36,464 per offender and includes personal services, all institutional E&E,
medical and mental health, fringe, and miscellaneous expenses. None of these costs include
construction to increase institutional capacity.
DOC’s cost of probation or parole is determined by the number of P&P Officer II positions that
are needed to cover its caseload. The DOC average district caseload across the state is 51
offender cases per officer. An increase/decrease of 51 cases would result in a cost/cost avoidance
equal to the salary, fringe, and equipment and expenses of one P&P Officer II.
Increases/decreases smaller than 51 offender cases are assumed to be absorbable.
In instances where the proposed legislation would only affect a specific caseload, such as sex
offenders, the DOC will use the average caseload figure for that specific type of offender to
calculate cost increases/decreases.
Oversight does not have any information contrary to that provided by DOC. Therefore,
Oversight will reflect DOC’s impact for fiscal note purposes. L.R. No. 5403H.03P
Bill No. Perfected HCS for HB Nos. 2628 & 2603
Page 5 of
March 6, 2024
DD:LR:OD
Officials from the Office of the State Public Defender (SPD) state per the recently released
National Public Defense Workload Study, the new charge contemplated by this change to
Section 115.645, which will impact SPD’s child clients, would take approximately fourteen
hours of SPD work for reasonably effective representation. If one hundred cases were filed under
this section in a fiscal year, representation would result in a need for an additional attorney.
Because the number of cases that will be filed under this statute is unknown, the exact additional
number of attorneys necessary is unknown. Each case would also result in unknown increased
costs in the need for core staff, travel, and litigation expenses. However, if the charge was
classified as a class D misdemeanor no jail time would be authorized and the cases would not
qualify for SPD representation.
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.
Officials from the Missouri Office of Prosecution Services (MOPS) assume the proposal will
have no measurable fiscal impact on MOPS. The enactment of a new crime [115.645] creates
additional responsibilities for county prosecutors and the circuit attorney which may, in turn,
result in additional costs, which are difficult to determine.
§§407.1095, 407.1098, 407.1101, 407.1104, and 407.1115 – Caller Identification Spoofing
In response to similar legislation from 2024 (HB 2603), officials from the Office of Attorney
General (AGO) did not respond to our request for fiscal impact. However, in response to a
similar proposal (SB 963), the AGO assumed any potential litigation costs arising from this
proposal can be absorbed with existing resources. The AGO stated they may seek additional
appropriations if the proposal results in a significant increase in litigation or investigation.
Oversight inquired of the AGO regarding the number of cases resolved in the past and the
amount collected in judgements. The money received for judgements goes to the Merchandising
Practices Revolving Fund (0631). This is the information they provided:
Year # of cases Judgements # of collections Collections
2014 17 $758,000 12 $260,500
2015 7 $1,109,000 4 $605,917
2016 6 $43,000 4 $18,000
2017 11 $805,433 6 $305,433
2018 1 $500,133 1 $135
2019 1 $85,000 1 $8,500
2020 0 $0 0 $0
2021 0 $0 0 $0
2022 0 $0 0 $0 L.R. No. 5403H.03P
Bill No. Perfected HCS for HB Nos. 2628 & 2603
Page 6 of
March 6, 2024
DD:LR:OD
2023 3 $244,753,640 2 $15,000
Oversight assumes this proposal may increase the number of cases referred to
the AGO and could result in an increase in fine collections under this chapter. Oversight will
reflect a $0 or Unknown (assumed to be less than $250,000 in additional collections resulting
from these changes) positive fiscal impact to the Merchandising Practices Revolving Fund.
DOC states the penalties in section 407.1115 are all misdemeanors. As misdemeanors fall
outside the purview of the department, there is no expected impact from that portion of the bill.
Officials from the Office of the State Public Defender (SPD) state per the recently released
National Public Defense Workload Study, the new charge contemplated by this change to
Section 407.1115 would take approximately fourteen hours of SPD work for reasonably effective
representation. If one hundred cases were filed under this section in a fiscal year, representation
would result in a need for an additional attorney. Because the number of cases that will be filed
under this statute is unknown, the exact additional number of attorneys necessary is unknown.
Each case would also result in unknown increased costs in the need for core staff, travel and
litigation expenses. However, if the charge was classified as a class D misdemeanor no jail time
would be authorized and the cases would not qualify for SPD representation.
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.
Responses regarding the proposed legislation as a whole
Officials from the Office of State Courts Administrator (OSCA) state there may be some
impact but there is no way to quantify that currently. Any significant changes will be reflected in
future budget requests.
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. 5403H.03P
Bill No. Perfected HCS for HB Nos. 2628 & 2603
Page 7 of
March 6, 2024
DD:LR:OD
Officials from the Department of Public Safety - Missouri Highway Patrol and the Missouri
Ethics Commission each assume 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.
FISCAL IMPACT – State GovernmentFY 2025
(10 Mo.)
FY 2026FY 2027GENERAL REVENUECosts – DOC (§115.645) Increased
incarceration costs($8,074)($19,766)($20,161)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON
GENERAL REVENUE($8,074)($19,766)($20,161)
MERCHANDISING PRACTICES
REVOLVING FUND (0631)
Revenue - AGO (§§407.1095 –
407.1110) Potential increase in
judgement collections for expansion of
Telemarketing No-Call statutes
.
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO
THE MERCHANDISING
PRACTICES REVOLVING FUND
(0631)
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
FISCAL IMPACT – Local GovernmentFY 2025
(10 Mo.)
FY 2026FY 2027$0$0$0
FISCAL IMPACT – Small Business
Small businesses may desire to be placed on the no-call list as a result of this proposal. L.R. No. 5403H.03P
Bill No. Perfected HCS for HB Nos. 2628 & 2603
Page 8 of
March 6, 2024
DD:LR:OD
FISCAL DESCRIPTION
The proposed legislation modifies provisions relating to electronic communications.
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 Corrections
Department of Public Safety - Missouri Highway Patrol
Missouri Ethics Commission
Missouri Office of Prosecution Services
Office of the Secretary of State
Office of the State Courts Administrator
Office of the State Public Defender
Julie MorffRoss StropeDirectorAssistant DirectorMarch 6, 2024March 6, 2024