Subject: Crimes and Punishment; Criminal Procedure; Law Enforcement Officers and Agencies

Bill Summary: The proposal prohibits an individual from owning or operating a sexual offender treatment facility for more than one person who is required to register on the sexual offender registry unless it is operated by a public or under contract with a public governmental body.

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

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	$0	$0	$0

Officials from the Department of Mental Health, Department of Health and Senior Services, and the Department of Public Safety – Director’s Office assume the proposal would have no fiscal impact on their agencies.

In response to a similar proposal from the 2007 Session (HB 578, LR # 1773-01), officials from the Department of Corrections and the Department of Public Safety – Missouri State Highway Patrol assumed the proposal would have no fiscal impact on their agencies.

Officials from the Office of State Courts Administrator assume the proposed legislation would have no fiscal impact on the courts.

In response to a similar proposal from the 2007 Session (HB 578, LR # 1773-01), officials from the Office of Prosecution Services assumed the proposal would not have a significant direct fiscal impact on county prosecutors or the Office of Prosecution Services.

Officials from the Office of the State Public Defender (SPD) assume this new crime will require more SPD resources. While the number of new cases (or cases with increased penalties) may be too few or uncertain to request additional appropriations for this specific bill, the SPD will continue to request sufficient appropriations to provide competent and effective representation in all its cases.

Oversight assumes the Office of the State Public Defender (SPD) could absorb the costs of the proposed legislation within existing resources. Oversight assumes any significant increase in the workload of the SPD would be reflected in future budget requests.

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

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