The Missouri Sunshine Law's power is the people's
The Missouri State Capitol in Jefferson City, as pictured September 26, 2023 (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).
No Missouri law is more important to holding government accountable than the state's Sunshine Law.
As a newspaper editor, I had a deep appreciation of the impact of the law as a reporting tool. But the Sunshine Law exists for ordinary citizens, not just journalists. Every Missourian should value the power of this law, which protects access to public records and meetings.
When the Sunshine Law took effect 52 years ago, it was broad and simple. It made clear that citizens have a right to know how their government operates, in large and small ways. In essence, any record the government kept or maintained was a record that should be considered open to the public's view. And the contents of meetings, with few exceptions, also were to be open to the public.
Over the years, though, legislators have passed dozens of exemptions — narrowly construed exceptions that allow public officials to keep certain documents secret. While the legislators who have pushed these exemptions often seem to be well-meaning, the net effect of all these exemptions is to chip away at this important law, diminishing the rights of citizens to look inside their government and its processes.
The efforts to create new loopholes around this law continue to this day.
After retiring last year as a journalism professor, former Missouri Press Association Director Doug Crews invited me to speak out on bills affecting public records access, and I had the chance to testify against two such bills earlier this year. In both instances, the sponsors of the bills were trying to close access to records under the guise of providing privacy to citizens.
One bill would close records regarding people who make reservations in state parks. The sponsor said information about park users needs to be private because criminals could discover when people would be camping, leaving their homes at risk of burglary. I asked the sponsor of the bill if this had ever happened. No, he said — but it could! I doubt the burglars in my community have the patience or stamina to file public records requests to identify potential targets.
The other bill would protect the identities of farmers and ag companies who are mega-users of water — those who pump 500,000 gallons of water or more from lakes, rivers or wells. The sponsor of this bill also was trying to provide privacy — in this case to the farmers who were mega-users.
We live in a state that struggles with drought conditions nearly every year. Drought and water shortages affect some portions of Missouri every year, and severe droughts have been experienced multiple times. It's hard to imagine a resource of higher public interest than water.
The public has a right to know about major water users — in any industry.
The state requires ag interests who pump more than 500,000 gallons of water a day to file reports about that use. Those records should not be hidden from taxpayers and citizens under a cloak of secrecy.
The way this bill was written, it would protect operations like Denali Water Solutions, which raised a literal stink last year when it spread a sludge made up of meatpacking waste mixed with water on farmland in several southwest Missouri counties. Why should we grant secrecy to an operation like that?
Aside from the interest the press may have in a public issue like the Denali story, private citizens have an interest in obtaining information about mega-users of water. If I'm a small farmer and my well runs dry, shouldn't I be able to find out which of my neighbors is pumping from the water table we share?
These two bills are examples of this continuing effort to close more records — an effort that needs to be challenged.
Transparency is vital to the effective functioning of government. Citizens of Missouri have a right to know how taxpayer dollars are spent and who is using public resources.
Transparency is essential to accountability, which lead to better-informed citizens — people who care and will be engaged in their government and the decision-making process.
The Sunshine Law is a valuable tool that should be protected from the addition of well-meaning exemptions that will remove public information from the public's view.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rudi 'splains it: How Kansas City stadium funding clears state constitutional hurdles
GEHA Field at Arrowhead Stadium, home of the Kansas City Chiefs, is pictured on Feb. 8, 2025 (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent). If Missouri lawmakers would provide the proper incentives, the promoters said, their project would vastly strengthen the economy of the state and enhance its national image as a place to do business. Without the incentives, they would go to another state. Those arguments persuaded the General Assembly to authorize $23.7 million of state-backed bonds to build railroads in the 1850s. Local governments also issued bonds to lure railroads to their counties. The railroads didn't keep their promise to repay the bonds and interest ballooned the debt to $32.3 million by the end of the Civil War. And at the State Convention of 1875, delegates voted to stop lawmakers from ever promising the state treasury as security for private debt. Over the last two weeks, history didn't repeat, but it did echo. The Missouri General Assembly listened to a modern group of promoters who convinced lawmakers to promise almost $1.5 billion over 30 years for bonds that will finance new or improved stadiums for the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals. The local government that wants to host the teams must also offer financial support. Professional sports are big business, and supporters warned the state would suffer economically if either or both teams move to Kansas. And, they said, the state's image would suffer. Welcome to the latest installment of Rudi 'splains it for a look at Missouri's history with economic development incentives. The 19th century aid to railroads is connected to the 21st century aid to sports stadiums because both times, lawmakers promised borrowers would be paid from tax revenues. The bill passed this week is a promise that future taxes will pay the bonds. That wasn't the case for the railroads, which were supposed to repay the debt from business profits but never did. When a State Convention met at the end of the Civil War, it put a question before voters: 'Shall the Railroad bonds be paid?' The ballot measure imposed a gross receipts tax on railroads and a statewide property tax. Voters approved it. The railroads never paid, but property owners did. The bond payments exceeded all other state government expenses. That's why the next State Convention voted to prevent a repeat of the financial fiasco. Missouri had learned its lesson. 'It was while listening to this delusive talk, to this cuckoo song, that the country was plunged into the enormous railroad debt which has been created for the state, the cities and counties and for individuals all through the land,' said delegate Thomas Gantt of St. Louis. 'People imagined that the benefit that was to come to the state, the city, county and the farm by the construction of those improvements was going to enrich all who were within hearing of the whistle of the locomotive.' The prohibition on lending state or local credit, or giving state or local public money, to private interests remains a part of the state Constitution. During debate on the stadium bill, opponents questioned whether the prohibition was being violated. 'The reason why the Constitution forbids that is because the drafters of that language knew that eventually the legislature would appropriate money to the people who we consider our friends, at the expense of everybody else in the state, instead of appropriate money or spend money for the good of all the general welfare of our state,' said state Rep. Bill Hardwick, a Republican from Dixon. Despite the prohibition, Missouri provides hundreds of millions annually in economic development incentives. In fiscal 2024, the state authorized $403 million in tax credits including $114 million for projects to rehabilitate old buildings, $84 million to build low-income housing and $101 million for new or expanding businesses through the Missouri Works program. Tax credit holders redeemed $904 million during the fiscal year, cashing in credits issued in past years. You may ask yourself, what makes one form of incentive legal and another illegal? The answer comes from the Missouri Supreme Court. When I was just a sprout of a reporter, still in journalism school, St. Louis had two daily newspapers, the Post-Dispatch and the Globe-Democrat. My professor, Phill Brooks, will tell you my reporting in the fall of 1986 is the reason there is only one today. The Globe-Democrat was a conservative newspaper and backed Republican Gov. John Ashcroft editorially. It was also failing, and businessmen John B. Prentis and William E. Franke, the owners, won approval of a $15 million state-backed loan to purchase a printing plant. I found, unsurprisingly, that both Prentis and Franke were contributors to Ashcroft's campaign. What was surprising is that only the five Republican members of the Missouri Industrial Development Board, also contributors to Ashcroft, attended the meeting that approved the Globe-Democrat loan. The loans were backed by a promise that, in the case of default, bondholders would receive tax credits equal to 50% of their loss. Ashcroft became concerned about the optics of the deal, didn't issue the loan and the newspaper folded. In a test case, involving a loan to a Joplin company, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled the program violated the Constitution. 'This tax credit is as much a grant of public money or property and is as much a drain on the state's coffers as would be an outright payment by the state to the bondholder upon default,' the court ruled in January 1987. 'There is no difference between the state granting a tax credit and foregoing the collection of the tax and the state making an outright payment to the bondholder from revenues already collected.' More recently, in 2023, lawmakers put $8.5 million into the budget for a no-interest loan to help Magnitude 7 Metals keep its New Madrid smelter open. Then-Gov. Mike Parson vetoed the money, citing the constitutional prohibition. The reason the current tax credit programs are legal and the one the Globe-Democrat tried to use was not is, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in 2011, that the U.S. Supreme Court had decided that tax credits are not the same thing as a direct expenditure of public funds. But the stadium bill does promise a direct appropriation from the treasury. Neither the Chiefs nor the Royals, however, will issue the stadium bonds or be directly responsible for paying the debt. That will be the job of either the Jackson County Sports Complex Authority, a public entity that owns the stadiums, or a new public entity created for the location where a new stadium is built. That means the direct payments for the stadium probably don't violate the constitution. But don't rely on me. I am not a lawyer or a judge. I just play one in the newspaper.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Missouri special session ends with passage of KC stadium funding, disaster aid
State Rep. Chris Brown, R-Kansas City, speaks Wednesday in favor of the bill he handled that would finance new or improved professional sports stadiums in Kansas City (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent). The Missouri House closed the special legislative session Wednesday with votes to finance professional sports stadiums in Kansas City and provide tornado relief for St. Louis. Three special session bills, already approved in the state Senate, are now in the hands of Gov. Mike Kehoe. He is expected to sign them quickly, putting the decision on whether to stay in Missouri in the hands of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals, who are also considering an offer from Kansas to cross the state line. State Rep. Chris Brown, a Republican from Kansas City handling the stadium bill, asked his colleagues to do what they would do to retain any large employer. 'We really need to, or should, look at these franchises, not just as entertainment,' Brown said. 'They are entertaining, obviously, but it's an incredibly big business.' Opponents of the legislation said it improperly benefits wealthy team owners at the expense of other Missourians. They also contend the bill is unconstitutional. 'The middle class, everyday Missourian is expected to pay for this,' said state Rep. Richard West, a Republican from Wentzville. 'We've been promising for years for some form of tax relief or tax adjustment or something to ease the burden on what they have, and this is exactly the opposite of what we promised them to come up here to do.' The measure to finance new stadiums was the most controversial of the three bills, passing on a 90-58 vote, with 32 Democrats joining with 58 Republicans to provide the majority. There were 13 Democrats and 45 Republicans who voted against the bill. To finance the stadium construction, the bill sets aside tax revenue generated by the teams and economic activity at Arrowhead and Kauffman stadiums. Estimated at just under $1.5 billion over 30 years, the funding would pay for half the costs of improvements at Arrowhead and a new home for the Royals. The Kansas offer would cover 70% of the construction costs for new stadiums, but it expires at the end of the month. The bill passed Wednesday requires financing from local governments, either in Jackson County, where the teams currently reside, or Clay County, which is trying to lure the Royals. It is impossible to put a ballot measure before voters in the time remaining for the Kansas offer. House leaders from the Kansas City area had differing views on whether the teams should accept or reject Missouri's offer now that it is a firm commitment but without knowing what voters will approve in the Kansas City region. 'I don't know what the teams will do,' said House Speaker Jon Patterson, a Lee's Summit Republican. 'They have their own plan. I think that's very unlikely, but I'm just worried about the things I can control, and teams are on their own schedule and will act accordingly.' House Minority Leader Ashley Aune, a Democrat from Kansas City, said the teams should make a decision before June 30 'I would call on them to do so,' Aune said. 'We bent over backwards here in the Missouri legislature to deliver them something by the end of their imposed deadline of June 30. And I would very much like for them to hold true to that deadline and let us know where they're going before that.' Chiefs owner Clark Hunt issued a statement thanking the legislature but made no commitment. 'The passing of this legislation is an important piece of the overall effort,' Hunt said. 'While there's still work to be done, this legislation enables the Chiefs to continue exploring potential options to consider remaining in Missouri.' Patterson and Aune also disagreed on whether the extra disaster aid and property tax controls Kehoe added to the special session agenda had made the difference between success and failure on the stadium bill. Patterson said each bill was considered on its own merits and that the property tax provisions may have cost votes. The stadium legislation won 103 votes in the House in May but the bill died in the state Senate. 'I'd like to think that people took a look at both those things on their own,' Patterson said. 'I don't think anybody here voted for one thing just because of the other.' The House voted down two amendments so the bill did not require another vote in the state Senate. Patterson said it would have failed the second time around. 'A second Senate vote on the (stadium bill) would have been impossible, just the political climate after that vote,' Patterson said. 'So we were very mindful of that. I thought if it goes back, it's not going to pass.' Aune said the additional disaster aid was essential to securing Democratic votes. 'If he wanted to get this stadium done, which is an economic development opportunity for the state and a priority of our governor, it was necessary to make sure that he could shore up those votes by making folks happy in other ways,' Aune said. During debate on the special session spending bill, the House fell silent as state Rep. Kimberly-Ann Collins, a St. Louis Democrat, described the devastation of her north St. Louis legislative district. Collins was home on May 16 because the General Assembly adjourned early instead of working to the final day allowed by the Missouri Constitution. She was in her car, preparing to attend a high school graduation when the tornado hit, she said. 'I watched a tornado rip through the middle of my house district,' Collins said. 'I also watched it rip off my roof, and I watched the tornado rip off my neighbor's roof. To this day, debris still sits in my front yard, and I'm a girl that has no insurance.' Four of the five Missourians who died in the tornado lived in her district, Collins said. The disaster relief provisions in the legislation address both the devastation of the May 16 tornado in St. Louis and the damages suffered by other Missourians in storms and flooding earlier in the year. They are: $100 million in the spending bill for storm recovery in the city of St. Louis; $25 million for home repairs and other housing needs through programs of the Missouri Housing Development Commission, available in any county included in a request for federal disaster aid; A tax credit worth up to $5,000 for insurance deductibles paid for residential damage in an area included in a request for federal disaster aid. The legislation would allow $90 million in claims this year and $45 million per year for future years. The provisions were demanded before the Senate vote because of uncertainty about the federal response to the tornado. Kehoe asked President Donald Trump for a federal disaster declaration for the tornado on May 25 and for April 29 storms in Scott on May 19. Trump approved both late Monday, making federal aid for emergency housing and rebuilding available to individuals and providing money to reimburse the state and local governments for recovery costs. State Rep. Raychel Proudie, a Democrat from Ferguson who is in her last term in the House, asked her colleagues to stand by St. Louis for the long-term. 'For those of us who will be termed-out next year,' Proudie said, 'we need the rest of you who will be here five years later to continue to remember this day, to remember this time, to remember these last three weeks, to continue to pour help into these communities, into these people.' The property tax cap in the stadium bill will be imposed in 97 counties. There would be 75 counties where basic tax bills would not increase more than 5% per year and 22 where no increase would be allowed. The list excludes most of the largest counties of the state and many members opposed it because the Missouri Constitution requires property taxes to be 'uniform upon the same class or subclass of subjects.' Another constitutional objection was raised that the bill improperly aids a private entity by giving state support to the Chiefs and Royals, in violation of a provision added to the Constitution in 1875. 'I haven't heard an argument yet that this bill is going to be upheld,' said state Rep. Bill Hardwick, a Republican from Dixon. 'I've only heard arguments that we should ignore the fact that it's unconstitutional.' The likelihood of the property tax provisions being blocked by the courts led at least one Democrat to vote for the bill. State Rep. Kathy Steinmetz of Columbia, speaking at a news conference after the vote, said she sees the cap as shifting the tax burden for schools to state taxpayers. 'They're ending up paying more,' she said, 'so that we can help the school districts that are not putting forth that local tax effort.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Stadium bill, disaster aid sail through Missouri House committees
St. Louis Mayor Cara Spencer listens to a question Tuesday as she testifies on the need for tornado relief funds alongside city policy director Casey Millburg. (Rudi Keller/Missouri Independent) The special session bills to fund professional sports stadiums in Kansas City and provide disaster relief to St. Louis passed House committees easily on Tuesday, setting up final votes that will send them to Gov. Mike Kehoe. There were no changes from the Senate-approved versions as the stadium financing bill passed the House Economic Development Committee on an 11-2 vote and a spending bill with $100 million for storm cleanup in St. Louis by a unanimous vote. As long as there are no amendments passed on the floor, those two bills and another to authorize disaster housing support will be finished Wednesday. If there are any changes, they will have to be approved by the state Senate, which passed all three bills last week. The immediate purpose of the special session was to get state lawmakers on record with an offer to the NFL's Kansas City Chiefs and MLB's Royals before the teams had to make a decision on whether to jump the state line to take a deal offered by Kansas. The Kansas offer, with a deadline at the end of the month, is a serious proposal and Missouri will lose the teams — and the economic activity associated with them — if it does not put up a counter-offer, said state Sen. Kurtis Gregory, a Republican from Marshall. Under the stadium bill, Missouri would calculate the tax revenue generated by activities in Arrowhead and Kauffman stadiums — home of the Chiefs and Royals, respectively, since the early 1970s — and dedicate the money to bond payments. 'This isn't using tax dollars off of the income tax that's collected from someone that's working at Dollar General or a feed store or a fertilizer shop or a clothing store or wherever,' Gregory said. 'This is using the taxes that are generated at the stadiums themselves, off of Joe Burrow when he comes to play in Kansas City, we collect taxes off his paycheck, or when Taylor Swift has a concert at Arrowhead Stadium.' Backers of the bill estimate that close to $1.5 billion would be spent over 30 years. The money would pay about half the cost of upgrades at Arrowhead and a brand new stadium for the Royals. Opponents of the plan tried to persuade the committee to wait. The Chiefs and Royals have not accepted the Kansas offer and haven't promised to stay if Missouri makes a firm financial commitment, said Patrick Tuohey, a senior fellow at the conservative Show-Me Institute. 'This entire special session and this deal is an absolute hustle,' Tuohey said. The Kansas offer is dependent on investors being willing to buy bonds backed only by the new tax revenue generated in a district around the stadiums, Tuohey said. That won't be enough money to service the debt, he said. 'This deadline simply means that the Kansas offer ends,' Tuouhey said. 'The absolute worst time for Missouri to offer, to make an offer is during that time. You should wait until after the 30th and see if Kansas wants to extend. But the idea that the Chiefs and the Royals are dictating deadlines to the Missouri Legislature is crazy.' Under the legislation, Missouri would keep money received that exceeds the current tax revenue, Gregory said. And if the teams move, he added, the state loses both. 'We're not talking just about the potential revenue loss for the team moving across the state lines,' he said. 'I think we are talking about jobs and tax revenue coming from a lot of different places across the Kansas City metro area.' The property tax cap in the legislation would apply to 97 counties, 75 where base bills could not increase more than 5% per year and 22 more where no increase would be allowed. The bill exempts additions to the tax bill for newly voted levies and the additional value of home improvements. The bill includes two other major provisions, with the most expensive being a tax credit for people living in areas where a federal disaster declaration has been requested. The credit would be equal to their insurance deductible and available regardless of whether the disaster request is approved. The other provision would renew a tax credit program that supports major amateur sporting events. The disaster tax credit, only for damage occurring this year, would be capped at $5,000 per person and $90 million total this year. For people who cannot use their full tax credit, the bill would allow them to carry the loss forward for another 29 years and cap the total allowed at $45 million per year. The provision could eventually cost state taxpayers about $600 million, Dan Haug, state budget director, said in testimony to the House Budget Committee. 'That is what I would call an upper limit,' he said. In the spending bill, Kehoe initially sought $25 million for housing assistance grants, adding it to the core items he wanted from a construction bill spiked in the House just before a final vote in the regular session. Under pressure from Democratic lawmakers in the Senate — votes vital to passing the stadium package — Kehoe agreed to add $100 million to help St. Louis recover from a devastating tornado that hit May 16. The bill spends $360 million overall — $175 million of general revenue and $185 million from other funds. Despite grumbling that many items in the bill spiked during the regular session were badly needed, House Budget Committee Chairman Dirk Deaton, a Republican from Noel, said nothing would be added. When Kehoe agreed to the additional money, federal recovery aid for St. Louis was uncertain. That changed Monday when President Donald Trump approved the request for a disaster declaration, making federal help to the state and local governments available as well as aid to individuals with damaged property. The federal recovery aid is welcome but the state funding should be maintained, Haug said to the budget committee. 'These disasters are so expensive that without federal help, there's no way we can cover all of this,' Haug said. 'We just don't have the general revenue resources to do that.' Just in the city of St. Louis, Mayor Cara Spencer told the committee, the tornado damaged 23,000 homes and affected 48,000 people. 'Many of the homes that are so badly damaged are generational homes,' Spencer said. 'These are homes that represent all the most that many of these families have.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
