Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateMissouriEnacted
SB 937: Conveys certain state property
Mike Bernskoetter
SB 937 status: Enacted — Signed by Governor (updated Jul 13, 2026).
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
58OUT OF 100
Score:58/100 civic fit
Risk:Low Risk
Impact:Moderate Impact 40/100
Constitutionality90%
Bipartisan75%
Public opinion50%
Bill summary
HCS/SS/SB 937 - The act authorizes the conveyance of state property located in: - the City of Harrisonville, Cass County; - the City of Kirksville, Adair County; - the City of Springfield, Greene County; - the City of Festus, Jefferson County; - the City of Doniphan, Ripley County; - the City of Higginsville, Lafayette County; - the City of Jefferson, Cole County; - the City of Richwoods, Washington County; - Jackson County; - Nodaway County; - the City of Marshall, Saline County; - the City of Bowling Green, Pike County; - the City of Joplin, Jasper County; - the City of Potosi, Washington County; - the City of Springfield, Greene County. The act has provisions identical to SB 1523 (2026). JULIA SHEVELEVA
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
Positive outlook
60%
Benefits
- Potential for economic development on transferred land
- Reduction in state property maintenance expenses
- Expansion of municipal or county tax bases
Risks
- Potential loss of state-owned asset value
- Administrative costs associated with property transfer
- Maintenance and operational burden on local governments
Society
Mixed / Neutral
55%
Benefits
- Opportunity for local community usage of space
- Repurposing of land for local public amenities
- Increased alignment with local community needs
Risks
- Potential disruption to current land usage
- Risk of privatization of previously state-held sites
- Loss of state-wide access or oversight on sites
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
Positive outlook
60%
Benefits
- Legislative authorization ensures clear disposal processes
- Public record established for state property changes
- Transparency in listing specific property locations
Risks
- Complexity in tracking individual status of multiple parcels
- Limited public deliberation on specific site disposals
- Potential lack of ongoing state oversight on future use
Public Health & Safety
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Confidence
Medium
Information is useful, with some gaps.
Analysis basis
LegiScan summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
LegiScan returned a PDF-only document. PDF extraction is not enabled in this build, so the pipeline used a safer fallback.
Analysis scope
Source provided is a summary and does not include full statutory text.
04
Where it stands
Official recordSigned by Governor
- IntroducedComplete
- CommitteeComplete
- Chamber votesComplete
- Final agreementComplete
- GovernorComplete
- EnactedComplete
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.