Fiscal Note & Local Impact Statement
127 th General Assembly of Ohio
|
BILL: |
DATE: |
||||
|
STATUS: |
SPONSOR: |
||||
|
LOCAL IMPACT
STATEMENT REQUIRED: |
|
|||||
|
STATE FUND |
FY 2007 |
FY 2008 |
FUTURE YEARS |
|
General Revenue Fund –
Department of Agriculture |
|||
|
Revenues |
- 0 - |
- 0 - |
|
|
Expenditures |
Potential increase of
around $68,400 per year |
Potential increase of
around $68,400 per year |
Potential increase of
around $68,400 per year |
Note: The state
fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
For example, FY 2007 is July 1, 2006 – June 30, 2007.
·
The
bill permits the Director of the Department of Agriculture to conduct
investigations and inspections and take other actions necessary to enforce the
bittering agent requirements. According
to staff at the Department of Agriculture, the Weights and Measures Division
would experience an annual increase of approximately $68,400 in expenditures
due to extra workload, lab costs, and violation enforcement.
|
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT |
FY 2007 |
FY 2008 |
FUTURE YEARS |
|||
|
Counties |
||||||
|
Revenues |
Potential minimal gain |
Potential minimal gain |
Potential minimal gain |
|||
|
Expenditures |
Minimal effect |
Minimal effect |
Minimal effect |
|||
Note: For most local governments, the fiscal year is the calendar year. The school district fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
·
The
bill requires violators to be fined not more than $1,000 and to be guilty of a
misdemeanor.
·
It
appears that the number of offenders that could be affected by the bill in any
given county or municipal criminal justice system annually will likely be
relatively small. Assuming that were
true, and given the likelihood that a court rarely imposes, or if imposed
rarely collects, the maximum possible fine for an offense, a given county or
municipality seems unlikely to gain more than a minimal amount of additional
court cost and fine revenue annually, if that, from offenders convicted of
criminal offenses.
|
|
Requirements of the bill
Beginning
July 1, 2007, the bill requires manufacturers, packagers, distributors,
recyclers, and sellers of engine coolant or antifreeze, in Ohio, to include a
bittering agent in engine coolant or antifreeze that contains more than 10%
ethylene glycol and was manufactured after December 1, 2006. The bill also requires a manufacturer or
packager of engine coolant or antifreeze to maintain a record of the trade
name, scientific name, and active ingredients of the bittering agent.
Exceptions. The bill does not apply to the sale of a
motor vehicle that contains engine coolant or antifreeze, or to a wholesale container
of engine coolant or antifreeze containing 55 gallons or more of antifreeze.
Department of Agriculture
The
bill authorizes the Director of the Department of Agriculture to investigate
and inspect in order to enforce the requirements as laid out in the bill. The Department of Agriculture's Weights and
Measures Division would likely experience an increase in expenditures of around
$68,400 per year to cover staffing, lab costs, and violation enforcement.
Local fiscal effects
Municipal courts
The
bill prohibits manufacturers, packagers, distributors, recyclers, and sellers
of engine coolant or antifreeze from failing to comply with its requirements by
either offering or distributing engine coolant or antifreeze that does not
include a bittering agent or failing to comply with record keeping
requirements. Persons violating the
bill are guilty of a misdemeanor and must be fined not more than $1,000.
It appears that the number
of offenders that could be affected by the bill in any given county or municipal
criminal justice system annually will likely be relatively small. Assuming that were true, and given the
likelihood that a court rarely imposes, or if imposed rarely collects, the
maximum possible fine for an offense, a given county or municipality seems
unlikely to gain more than a minimal amount of additional court cost and fine
revenue annually, if that, from offenders convicted of criminal offenses
LSC fiscal staff: Deborah Hoffman, Budget Analyst