I take my job as your state senator very seriously, and I see it as my responsibility to fight for the fair and equitable financial wellbeing of my district and its citizens. This is why I felt compelled to speak to you this week about the serious issues I have with some of the governor’s recent decisions that negatively affect the 33rd District. The main two grievances I have are the errant withholding of General Revenue funds and the lack of public discussion that occurred when the state announced plans to purchase 2,500 acres of Oregon County land, rendering it exempt from personal property and real estate taxes.

I know I have spoken to you about these issues before, but because of their potential impact to our lives in Southeastern Missouri, I feel the need to bring them forward again. First I would like to discuss the land-grab proposition that is occurring in Oregon County as well as the lack of public knowledge and input that surrounds the entire affair. The governor has called on the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to use settlement funds paid by an environmentally harmful lead mining company to restore areas in Southeastern Missouri affected by lead contamination. While that is all well and good for our part of the state, the governor has also decided the DNR should potentially purchase the Frederick Creek Ranch in Oregon County – land that has not been affected by lead mining – by using the same settlement funds to turn it into state park land. The worrisome aspect of all of this is how quietly this and other decisions have been made, and how little the public was informed or allowed to participate.

Missouri State Parks Director Bill Bryan has stated that $500 million is needed to repair and maintain the state parks we currently have, so why should the DNR be spending money set aside for repairs to add even more land to the 200,000 acres currently in the State Park system? And why weren’t the citizens affected by this proposal ever properly notified of the dealings going on?

It is for this reason that I have pre-filed SB 682 for the upcoming session. My bill would require the Commissioner of Administration to take certain actions, such as providing public notice on its website and holding public hearings in affected counties, whenever it seeks to purchase public land on behalf of a state department. My proposed legislation seeks to improve the communication between the state and its citizens and I hope it will make the entire process of governmental property purchasing more transparent, efficient and equitable for everyone involved.

I also wanted to discuss the governor’s announcement from late October when he called for the restriction of $46.1 million in General Revenue funding – money that would have been used to fund many programs and services aimed at helping the elderly, disabled, mentally ill, children and our state’s law enforcement.

The governor claimed the budget withholds were necessary to cover the cost of lost tobacco company settlement payments expected to be made to the state, which fell through. The truth of the matter is a very different story: These budget cuts are actually just an unnecessary killing of helpful new programs that would have otherwise improved the lives of at-risk Missourians. Instead of making up the lost incoming revenue by taking from the $325 million unspent state surplus, the governor has decided to terminate or cripple programs and services such as the following:

Nursing facilities provider rate increase – Funding withheld: $3,373,442
In-home services provider rate increase – Funding withheld: $2,852,991
Comprehensive psychiatric services provider rate increase – Funding withheld: $2,031,432
Community Health Access Programs (CHAPs) – Funding withheld: $1,250,000
Rural Health Clinical Dental – Funding withheld: $1,250,000
Missouri Area Health Education Centers – Funding Withheld: $250,000

These are just a few of the almost 50 programs and services that will be underfunded or canceled because of the governor’s nonsensical budget cuts. There is simply no reason why much-needed state programming should pay the price when this year’s surplus funds could easily cover the cost. I must make myself clear: I do not advocate needless spending of surplus dollars simply because they are available. However, I do believe our state’s budget surplus could be utilized in a fair and efficient manner to cover the loss of the tobacco company payments and prevent the damaging of state services for Missourians who need them most. After all, isn’t that what the surplus is for?

The bottom line is, the state government and the governor should always work for the betterment of Missourians. I believe that creating a fair state budget requires an efficient system of communication, and my new Senate bill looks to improve just that. I also believe that the citizens of this state who need help the most deserve to receive it, and that the governor could do a better job at providing an increased standard of living for at-risk citizens.