For years, state Sen. Mike Moon has criticized the unfairness of businesses being told they owe money when the Missouri Department of Revenue reviews the list of things covered by the state sales tax.
That happened after 2008, when the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that gyms were places of “amusement, entertainment or recreation” and must collect taxes on memberships and class fees. Subsequently, the audits resulted in Tax bills for thousands of dollars that companies had difficulty paying.
Moon has introduced bills Looking to force a refund And this year, for the second time, it has secured a specific $38,000 appropriation to refund money paid by the owner of a Kansas City gym. Gov. Mike Parson vetoed a $150,000 appropriation for the same purpose in 2021, arguing that the proposal violates the state Constitution’s prohibition against “refunding money lawfully paid to the treasury.”
Moon, in an interview with The Independent, said he would not be surprised if this happened again.
“I don’t know if the governor will leave it there,” Moon said. “It is known that he had already eliminated it before.”
Moon’s $38,000 proposal is one of more than 400 earmarks, spending more than $2.1 billion, spread across the $51.7 billion state budget approved by lawmakers this year. The total includes 284 new allocations, worth $1.7 billion, and 124 that will receive continuing allocations.
Last year, The Independent identified 275 earmarks, totaling around $1.1 billion. The number began to rise during the 2021 session, as the size of the growing state budget surplus became apparent.
Parson must take action on all 16 appropriations bills before the new fiscal year begins Monday. Whether the earmarks pass is not a question of money: The state has nearly $6.4 billion in surplus funds and revenues through Tuesday have already exceeded estimates for the current fiscal year with three more days for collections.
But despite that surplus, Parson has focused on earmarked funds in his veto messages in each of the past three years. Last year, he cut $550 million from the budget by vetoing or reducing 201 budget items.
Last year, the veto power fell on $650 million in spending lines.
In an analysis of the budget, The Independent defined an earmark as an item not originally requested by Parson and that is directed to a specific organization or region.
The largest example in this year’s budget is $727.5 million in general revenue and borrowed funds for improvements along Interstate 44 in southwest Missouri. The earmark was inserted by House Budget Committee Chairman Cody Smith, a Republican who represents Jasper County and is running for state treasurer.
Other major road projects include $150 million to widen US Highway 67 through Butler County and $48 million for work on US 65 between Buffalo and Warsaw.
Some of the items, like Moon’s refund money, are repeats of items Parson vetoed last year. One is $3.4 million for improvements to LeCompte Road on Springfield’s east side.
“This is a local responsibility with minimal impact at the state level,” Parson wrote of the project in last year’s veto message, a line that found its way into many vetoes.
There’s money to build hospitals in Kirksville and Dunklin County, to fund eight local water and sewer projects, to convert a University of Missouri-Columbia building into the State Wine and Grape Institute and to pay for a parking lot at the stadium where KC Current plays football.
The Urban League of St. Louis is set to receive a $1 million grant through the Department of Higher Education and the Boys and Girls Club of Poplar Bluff is set to receive a $2 million grant from federal COVID relief funds.
dark origins
Smith wanted to make sure everyone knew who was putting up the money for I-44 by holding a press conference to announce it. And Moon does not hesitate to say that he was looking for the money for tax refunds.
But finding sponsors for the remaining 406 assignments is more difficult. Unlike appropriation process in CongressThere are no legislative rules requiring members to make public their requests for allocations.
In their year-end news conferences, Missouri House Republican and Democratic leaders took opposing views on whether lawmakers should include their names in appropriations requests.
House Speaker Dean Plocher, a candidate for secretary of state, said the legislature as a whole has responsibility for the spending. There are no new allocations destined for Plocher’s St. Louis County district.
“We’re not here to get personal credit,” Plocher said. “I don’t think it’s about giving money back to your district.”
Each lawmaker who voted for the budget bills is responsible for the appropriations, Plocher said.
House Minority Leader Crystal Quade of Springfield, a candidate for governor, said lawmakers “absolutely” should have to identify the earmarks they seek.
The Independent identified eight allocations going to its district, totaling $45.8 million, for items ranging from $250,000 for the Springfield Sports Commission to $15 million for an alliance of health care providers to expand medical training.
“I feel proud to be able to bring money to my district,” Quade said. “I wouldn’t ask for something that I was ashamed of and that I didn’t think Missourians would be happy with that money for.”
The transparency of requiring earmarks to have sponsors, Quade said, would help Missourians understand the legislature.
This year’s budget process, derailed by filibusters and completed with hours to spare within the constitutional deadline, was particularly dark, with Smith and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Lincoln Hough reaching final agreement on every issue behind closed doors. .
“We must be responsible and accountable to the people of Missouri, and they must know how we are making those decisions,” Quade said.
For more than 250 of the new allocations, The Independent was able to identify the House or Senate district where the allocation will be spent, either by decoding the legislative language describing the item or by allocating it based on the particular address of the organization that will receive it. funds.
Moon said he often has trouble determining where a spending item goes.
“When a particular area, a county, is mentioned in a bill, it talks about counties with a certain population, but not less or more than a certain amount, and of course, that is a way to get around the prohibition of the special law. ,” he said.
In Moon’s view, many of the allocations violate the Constitution’s long-standing provision against granting state money or credit to private entities. He raised constitutional objections, printed in the Senate Journalspecifically questioning 64 allocated items for a total of $131.9 million.
The most important item on Moon’s list is $17.5 million to support the Kansas City organization. preparing for the 2026 World Cup matches at Arrowhead Stadium. In Moon’s letters, he encouraged Parson to veto the earmarks.
The constitutional limit only applies to state funds and includes an exception for the use of federal funds for designated public purposes. Many of the items on Moon’s list for the Department of Social Services use money the state receives for the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, or TANF, program.
Since the enactment of federal welfare reform in 1996, Missouri has received about $200 million annually as a block grant intended to match the amount used for cash benefits before the law.
Because Missouri only paid $16.5 million in direct benefits in fiscal year 2023, the remainder is available for anti-poverty program grants. Appropriations in this year’s budget for TANF funds total $29.4 million.
Questions about expenses
Some allocations began to come under fire before final budget votes.
democrats criticized 12.5 million dollars buy land for a state park in McDonald County, in the district of House Budget Committee Vice Chairman Dirk Deaton.
And Northeast Regional Medical Center in Kirksville attacked a $15 million allocation to Hannibal Regional Health System to build a radiation oncology center in Kirksville. Northeast Regional attorney Chuck Hatfield said in an April letter to Hough that the allocation is inappropriate because it allows Hannibal Regional to open a competing hospital where no need has been established.
Missouri requires medical providers to obtain a Certificate of need for large capital investments. Hannibal Regional hasn’t even started the process to obtain the certificate, Hatfield said.
“It would be inappropriate for the legislature to provide funding for a project that has not been provided or demonstrated need under Missouri law,” Hatfield wrote.
If the Kirksville facility is not licensed as an inpatient hospital or long-term care facility, it would not need a certificate of need, Lisa Cox, a spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Senior Services, said in an email.
You might need a certificate for capital purchases of $1 million or more, he said.
There are $57 million in appropriations earmarked for hospital construction or capital equipment in the budget plan on Parson’s desk. The largest is $25 million for an acute-care inpatient behavioral health center at KC Children’s Mercy and the smallest is $425,000 for a CT scanner at Golden Valley Memorial Hospital in Clinton.
The increase in the number of allocations is likely to continue, while the State enjoys a large surplus. Requiring legislative sponsors to be public for each item could reduce special spending, Moon said.
“This would make it much more transparent,” Moon said. “Most people, especially those who oppose earmarks, would like it. However, those who want earmarks may not be so keen to like it.”
Keynote USA
For the Latest Local News, Follow Keynote USA Local on Twitter.