Fiscal Note & Local Impact Statement
127 th General Assembly of Ohio
|
BILL: |
DATE: |
|||||
|
STATUS: |
SPONSOR: |
|||||
|
LOCAL IMPACT
STATEMENT REQUIRED: |
|
||||||
Note: The state
fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
For example, FY 2009 is July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009.
·
Incarceration expenditures. If LSC
fiscal staff's assumptions relative to the bill's impact on criminal cases is
true, then the number of individuals that could be sentenced to prison
exclusively for conduct involving Salvia divinorum and/or Salvinorin A will be relatively small,
especially in the context of a prison population that currently totals around
50,000 inmates. However, while LSC
fiscal staff is unable to reliably project either the number of offenders that
could be so sentenced annually or the length of the prison terms that a
sentencing court might impose, it seems probable that the bill's fiscal effect
on the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction's (DRC) annual incarceration
costs could exceed minimal on an annual basis.
For the purposes of this fiscal analysis, an increase in excess of
minimal means an estimated cost of $100,000 or more per year for the state.
·
Court cost revenues. If, as expected, the number
of additional convictions annually statewide is relatively small, then the
amount of court cost revenue that will be deposited in the state treasury to
the credit of the GRF and the Victims of Crime/Reparations Fund (Fund 402) is
likely to be minimal at most. For the
purposes of this fiscal analysis, minimal means an estimated revenue gain of
less than $100,000 for either state fund per year.
|
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT |
FY 2008 –FUTURE YEARS |
|
Counties and
Municipalities |
|
|
Revenues |
Potential, likely no more
than minimal, annual gain in court costs and fines |
|
Expenditures |
Potential, likely no more
than minimal, |
Note: For most local governments, the fiscal year is the calendar year. The school district fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
·
Criminal offenses. Based on a number of
conversations that LSC fiscal staff conducted during research into the bill's
potential local fiscal effects, it appears that the number of individuals that
could be charged, prosecuted, and sanctioned for miscellaneous drug offenses
involving Salvia divinorum and/or Salvinorin
A will be relatively small in any given local jurisdiction. Assuming that were true, then the annual
costs for any affected county or municipal criminal justice system
(investigation, prosecution, adjudication, defense if the individual is
indigent, and sanctioning) to resolve these cases seems unlikely to exceed
minimal. For the purposes of this
fiscal analysis, a minimal cost means an estimated annual expenditure of no
more than $5,000 for any affected county or municipality.
· Court cost and fine revenues. In the matter of local revenues, as the likely number of cases that could be created by the bill in any given local jurisdiction appears to be relatively small, any resulting gain in annual court cost and fine revenues for any affected county or municipality would not be likely to exceed minimal. For the purposes of this fiscal analysis, a minimal revenue gain means an estimated increase of no more than $5,000 for any affected county or municipality.
|
|
Overview
The bill includes Salvia
divinorum (perennial herb of the mint family) and Salvinorin A (an active
ingredient of Salvia divinorum) as
Schedule I controlled substances.
According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's Office of
Diversion Control, "the herb and its products are abused for their ability
to evoke hallucinogenic effects, which, in general, are similar to those of
other scheduled hallucinogenic substances, including LSD, DMT, psilocybin, and
ketamine."[1]
Based on its research into
the use of Salvia divinorum and Salvinorin
A in Ohio, LSC fiscal staff discerned the following:
·
To
the degree that abuse of the herb is occurring, anecdotal evidence suggests
that it does not appear to be a widespread activity.
·
City
of Columbus law enforcement personnel have not yet seen a widespread emergence
of the use of the herb in their jurisdiction, and this appears to be the case
for other local jurisdictions in Ohio as well.
·
The
herb and its components are readily available for purchase via the Internet.
·
Since
purchase of the herb or its components are not regulated nor is possession or
use of the herb a criminal offense, it is difficult to gauge the prevalence of
abuse with much certainty or precision.
·
Generally,
drug offenses related to Schedule I controlled substances are felonies, most of
which carry either a presumption for prison or mandate a prison term.
For the purposes of this
fiscal analysis, LSC fiscal staff has assumed that the bill could affect local
criminal justice systems in two ways.
First, individuals, who in the future would have been charged and prosecuted
for the violation of various drug-related offenses under current law, may face
additional charges if their conduct also involves Salvia divinorum and/or
Salvinorin A. Second, new criminal
cases may be generated, as individuals may be charged and prosecuted solely for
the use, possession, trafficking, or manufacturing of the herb or its component
Salvinorin A. As of this writing, the
number of criminal cases that might be affected in either of the above-noted
ways appears, based largely on anecdotal evidence, likely to be relatively
small in any given local jurisdiction.
If, however, demand and related use of the herb and/or its components
increases, then the number of criminal cases that could be created or affected
in some manner may be significantly larger in certain jurisdictions.
Local fiscal effects
Criminal
justice system expenditures
It appears that,
at least initially, the number of individuals that could be arrested, charged,
and prosecuted in any given local jurisdiction for violating any number of
drug-related offenses (i.e., possession, use, trafficking, and/or
manufacturing), associated with the inclusion of Salvia divinorum and
Salvinorin A as controlled substances will be relatively small. Assuming that were true, then the annual
costs for any affected county or municipal criminal justice system
(investigation, prosecution, adjudication, defense if the individual is
indigent, and sanctioning) to resolve these cases seems unlikely to exceed
minimal. For the purposes of this
fiscal analysis, a minimal cost means an estimated annual expenditure of no
more than $5,000 for any affected county or municipality.
Court cost and fine revenues
In the matter of local
revenues, as the likely number of cases that could be created by the bill in
any given local jurisdiction appears to be relatively small, any resulting gain
in annual court cost and fine revenues for any affected county or municipality
would not be likely to exceed minimal.
For the purposes of this fiscal analysis, a minimal revenue gain means
an estimated increase of no more than $5,000 for any affected county or
municipality.
State fiscal effects
Incarceration expenditures
If LSC fiscal staff's
assumptions relative to the bill's impact on criminal cases were true, then the
number of individuals that could be sentenced to prison exclusively for conduct
involving Salvia divinorum and/or Salvinorin A will be relatively small,
especially in the context of a prison population that currently totals around
50,000 inmates.
However, at the time of this
writing, LSC fiscal staff is unable to reliably project either the number of
offenders that could be so sentenced annually or the length of the prison terms
that a sentencing court might impose.
This means that whether the bill's fiscal effect on the Department of
Rehabilitation and Correction's (DRC) annual incarceration costs will exceed
minimal is uncertain. For the purposes
of this fiscal analysis, a minimal increase means an estimated cost of less than
$100,000 per year for the state.
To put that $100,000 cost
threshold in perspective, DRC's average annual incarceration cost per inmate
(fixed plus marginal expenses) is, as of April 2008, budgeted at $25,192. LSC fiscal staff estimates DRC's marginal
cost of adding an additional individual to the prison system at between $3,500
and $4,000 per year. Thus, depending
upon whether one works from the full versus marginal cost figure, it could take
as few as four additional individuals being sentenced to a prison term of at
least one year ($25,192 average annual incarceration cost per inmate times four
prison-bound offenders), or as many as two dozen or so individuals being
sentenced to a prison term of at least one year ($3,500 to $4,000 marginal
annual incarceration cost per inmate times 25 to 29 prison-bound offenders) to
increase DRC's incarceration costs by more than $100,000 per year.
Court cost revenues
If individuals are convicted
of criminal conduct involving Salvia divinorum and/or Salvinorin A, then the
state potentially collects state court costs that the court is generally
required to impose on that individual.
Those locally collected court costs are forwarded for deposit in the
state treasury to the credit of the GRF and the Victims of Crime/Reparations
Fund (Fund 402). The state court costs
for a felony offense total $45, of which the GRF receives $15 and Fund 402
receives $30. The state costs for a
misdemeanor offense total $24, of which the GRF receives $15 and Fund 402
receives $9.
If, as expected, the number
of additional convictions annually statewide is relatively small, then the
amount of revenue that will be collected by the state is likely to be minimal
at most. For the purposes of this
fiscal analysis, minimal means an estimated revenue gain of less than $100,000
for either state fund per year.
LSC fiscal staff: Jamie L. Doskocil, Senior Budget Analyst