Capitol Report March 16th

House Budget Committee Unveils Spending Proposal that Fully Funds Education

Missouri’s public schools would be fully funded for the first time under the budget proposal unveiled by the House Budget Committee Chairman this week. The proposed spending plan would also restore a proposed cut to in-home care and nursing home services for senior and disabled Missourians.

In addition to the additional $48 million that will fully fund the School Foundation Formula, the House budget proposal restores proposed cuts to K-12 transportation funding. The plan also secures $6 million in funding to increase Internet access for Missouri schools. Additionally, the House budget plan restores $21.75 million in proposed cuts for the state’s institutions of higher learning.

The FY 2018 spending plan proposed by the House Budget Committee also restores approximately $52 million in proposed cuts that would have impacted 20,000 seniors and disabled Missourians who currently qualify for state-funded in-home care and nursing home services.

Other notable funding decisions in the House plan include $3.5 million to fulfill the state’s commitment to the Biodiesel Producer Incentive Fund, record levels of funding for the state employee pension plan, and $1.4 million to fund a system of voter identification in Missouri.

The House Budget Committee will work to finalize the budget bills and send them to the floor when the House returns from Spring Break. House Leaders plan discuss the bills on the House floor and have them out of the House by April 6. The Senate and House will then have until May 5 to agree to a spending plan and send it to the governor.

Charter School Expansion Bill Receives House Approval (HB 634)

This week the House gave approval to legislation meant to provide young people in failing schools with additional educational opportunities. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Roeber, would allow charter schools to expand to areas where at least one school is performing poorly. The legislation would also increase the accountability and academic requirements for not only new charter schools, but existing ones as well. The final version of HB 634 is very different than the original version. HB 634 reduces the amount of funding charter schools currently receive and makes it so that no more than 90% of the child’s operating costs go to the charter school. The remaining 10% will be stay in the student’s original school district. This means that public schools end up with more dollars per student. The funding guidelines set forth by HB 634 are contingent upon the K-12 formula being fully funded, which is now in the budget (see above). If the formula is not fully funded, then no charter school changes will go into effect. In other words, no charter school expansion is possible without a minimum of $48 million in additional funding being allocated to public schools.

Moreover, the final version of HB 634 has some of the highest accountability standards in the country. This bill will force underperforming charter schools to close. If a charter is underperforming other similar schools in their district for two of the past three years, they will be limited to a three-year charter renewal. During the three year probationary period, if a charter performs poorly during two of those three years, that charter school will be ineligible for renewal and will be forced to close. Along with this, charter schools have a built in accountability factor because enrollment is voluntary and they are always competing for students. Also, out-of-state individuals will never be allowed to serve on charter school boards in the Show-Me- State.

Under HB 634, new charter schools will only be able to enter a district if one of that district’s public schools is ten points below the provisionally accredited APR level. Even if a charter school opens in a district under these circumstances, it will no longer be able to expand once the public school obtains a 60% APR level. Finally, the district school board will still have the right of first refusal to sponsor a new charter school in the district. So, in closing, this bill provides these three strong features:

• —Increases charter school accountability

• — Fully funds the education formula

• — Only applies to failing schools

• House Approves Legislation to Put an End to Venue Shopping in Missouri (HB 460, HB 461, and HB 462)

• 0. Last week, the House continued tort reform efforts by passing legislation that will help put an end to “litigation tourism” and the many lawsuits that are filed in St. Louis by out-of-state parties. The bills approved last week were meant to stop the large number of lawsuits filed in the state by people who live outside Missouri, who are alleging injuries that didn’t occur within the state’s borders against companies that are not from Missouri.

     A 2016 study released by the American Tort Reform Foundation named St. Louis as the number one “judicial hellhole” in the country; calling it a “magnet for product liability lawsuits and consumer class actions.” The study noted that plaintiffs travel from out-of-state to file lawsuits in Missouri to take advantage of the state's weak venue law and low standards for what is considered expert testimony. A Bloomberg Businessweek article noted that Missouri has “developed a reputation for fast trials, favorable rulings, and big awards.”

     In order to help end Missouri’s reputation as the “Show Me Your Lawsuits State,” in February the Missouri House took up and passed a piece of legislation designed to strengthen the state’s expert witness standards. Last week we continued our tort form efforts by approving a series of bills that would prevent what is commonly referred to as venue or forum shopping in Missouri. Specifically, the legislation would change state laws governing where lawsuits may be filed and whether suits can be joined together.

     The bills will clarify the venue laws in Missouri and ensure lawsuits are brought in the proper court. They note that in 2016 there were 140 aggregated mass tort cases pending in St. Louis, with 8,400 plaintiffs in the cases having nothing to do with Missouri. The fix approved by the House will prevent lawsuits brought by out-of-state interests from moving to St. Louis simply by including a plaintiff from the city.

  0. House Moves to Reduce Regulatory Burden on Missourians (HBs 480, 272, 413 & 609)

  0. Last week, the House also advanced part of the policy platform laid out by Speaker Todd Richardson, who called for the legislature to remove the unnecessary government regulations that stifle innovation and job creation in the state. House members approved legislation to ensure government engages in the licensing and regulation of occupations and professions only when it is necessary to protect the welfare of the public.

     The bill approved by the House would establish guidelines for the regulation of occupations and professions not currently regulated by the Division of Professional Registration, as well as guidelines for substantially increasing the scope of practice of currently regulated occupations and professions. The bill would also specify that the state may not impose a substantial burden on an individual's pursuit of his or her occupation or profession unless there is an important governmental interest for the state to protect the general welfare. If an interest exists, the regulation adopted by the state would have to be substantially related to the public interest to be protected.

     The bill also would establish a heightened level of review with specific criteria for all legislation that would seek to license an occupation or profession for the first time or to substantially expand the scope of a current professional license. Criteria would include determining whether unregulated practice could cause harm and endanger the general welfare, and whether the public could reasonably be expected to benefit from an assurance of personal qualifications. The bill will reduce the burdens placed on individuals trying to practice their professions. It will ensure new regulations are put in place only when they are necessary to protect the public.

  0. House Approves Legislation to Create Senior Service Protection Fund (HCB 3)

  The members of the Missouri House have approved a change to the state’s circuit breaker tax credit that will free up funds for vital in-home care and nursing home services for Missouri’s most vulnerable citizens.

  It was in early February that Governor Greitens unveiled a budget plan that proposed saving $52 million by changing the eligibility standards for home and community-based services. As a result, approximately 20,000 seniors and disabled Missourians would no longer qualify for state-funded care. House leaders responded by working toward a solution that would provide funding for the programs during a difficult budget year.

  The legislation approved this week would create the Missouri Senior Services Protection Fund to provide funding for services to low-income seniors and disable persons. To provide the funding, the legislation, sponsored by Budget Chair Fitzpatrick, ends the renter’s portion of the senior citizens property tax credit. The change would generate up to $56 million in funds that would be used to help provide health care services to Missouri’s most vulnerable citizens.

  In difficult budget years, tough decisions need to be made. Along with making difficult choices, having flexibility is a necessity. In essence, the Missouri Senior Services Protection Fund was created to provide funding for services that help Missouri’s most vulnerable. This will be funded by eliminating the circuit breaker tax credit and giving the savings to Missourians who need it most. This was a difficult decision, but in tough times, flexibility is a necessity.

  The change will return the credit to its intended purpose of providing property tax relief for seniors so they can afford to stay in their homes. The Senior Services Protection Fund will allow the state to reinvest money to more effectively serve low-income seniors and disabled Missourians. Important to note, the change will not diminish Missouri’s commitment to its most vulnerable citizens, and will instead ensure those who need care the most will receive it.

  Raising the Marriage Age to Protect Young People (HB 270)

  Finally, this week the House continued its fight against human trafficking by approving legislation to raise the minimum age for marriage from 15 to 17 years old.

  Missouri currently has a minimum age of 18 to obtain a marriage license without parental consent. Young people age 15 to 17 can receive a license with parental consent. Individuals of any age also have the option to get married without consent if they successfully petition the court to obtain a license.

  The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Evans and approved by the House, would raise the age requirement to 17. An earlier version of the bill had raised concerns that Missouri law would block a marriage and interfere in the decision of a family in situations in which no coercion or wrongdoing is present. The bill’s language was changed to require a hearing before a judge, so that parties can present evidence that the marriage is advisable. The bill also includes a provision to ensure no marriage license is issued to any person 21years of age or older if the other party to the marriage is less than 17 years of age.

  The goal of the bill is to prevent child marriages that are used to disguise abusive situations and human trafficking. Virginia recently raised its minimum age requirement after seeing a large number of underage girls marry men who were far older. According to one study, more than 7,300 teens under the age of 18 were married in Missouri from 2000 to 2014.