Springfield lawmaker targets 1997 agreement that funds the Greene County Jail

JEFFERSON CITY—Almost 20 years after Greene County and Springfield agreed to share sales tax revenue to build and run a jail, a local lawmaker has filed a bill to end that deal.

Rep. Steve Helms, R-Springfield, filed House Bill 874 on Monday, which would nullify any existing tax revenue distribution agreements between first-class counties (such as Greene) and charter cities with populations greater than 140,000 (such as Springfield), effective Jan. 15, 2019.

The bill appears tailored to toss out the 1997 agreement between the city and the county which says the two entities will share the proceeds of a 1/4-cent law enforcement sales tax, approved that year by county voters, designed to fund a new jail — which could house city inmates — and support local police departments.

The jail opened in 2001, and the city continued sending suspects to the county lock-up until 2015, when Sheriff Jim Arnott decided the jail was too crowded to cage those written up on municipal charges. The city sued the county and that lawsuit continues as the two sides have struggled to compromise.

Helms wouldn't call his bill the "nuclear option" for the jail dispute, but he had no shortage of criticism for the agreement, which was in place before voters approved the sales tax.

The city was guilty of "thuggery or coercion or just being a bad neighbor" when it forced the county to agree to the deal, Helms said.

"They said, 'We're not going to support your tax unless you give us some money,'" he said. "I find that distasteful, and I'm really disappointed that was ever done."

Under the voter-approved agreement, Greene County receives about 40 cents of every $1 the tax collects. The rest goes to Springfield and other cities and towns in the area. In Greene County's most recent budget, the city was to receive about $7.8 million while the county held onto $5 million. The city's budget reflects an expectation that it would receive about $500,000 more than in Greene County's spending plan.

The county takes about $3.8 million to pay for jail expenses and also uses its share of the tax revenue to pay for juvenile justice services and staffing.

Ash Grove, Battlefield, Fair Grove, Republic, Strafford, Walnut Grove and Willard also receive money as part of the agreement. Springfield receives far and away the most money from the arrangement, with Greene County receiving the next biggest chunk of change. Republic is a distant third with about $400,000 while Walnut Grove receives the least with $12,504, according to the county's budget.

Helms said the agreement was a "terrible giveaway" on Greene County's part. He thinks the county should receive 100 percent of the money and believes the city has other avenues to get law enforcement funding. He also said there are constitutional issues and tax revenue circumvention issues at stake, though he could not reference the relevant laws.

Helms' contention that the money should be used exclusively by the county is in contradiction to the plan pitched to voters, however. Archived News-Leader coverage from 1997 shows the sales tax was presented as a way to fund several law enforcement initiatives, not just the jail. A reduction in response times thanks to improved communication equipment and the addition of more and better-equipped police officers in Springfield and surrounding small towns were among the promised benefits of the tax, which was approved by 53 percent of voters.

Helms, a former Greene County Circuit Clerk, said the county did not ask him to file the bill, though he forwarded them a copy before he filed it. He said he did not talk to the city before proposing the change.

"The two entities should have worked this out a long time ago," Helms said.

City spokeswoman Cora Scott provided a statement from City Manager Greg Burris, who said he was not aware of the bill until the News-Leader requested comment.

"HB 874 clearly falls under the category of undermining a vote of local residents, and as such, attempts to preempt the will of local voters," Burris said. "The City is opposed to any state measure that preempts local laws and agreements. In this particular case, the measure could serve to undermine current and future cooperation between the City of Springfield and Greene County."

It was not immediately clear whether Helms' bill would nullify any other agreements between Springfield and Greene County, or contracts involving other local governments in Missouri.

County spokeswoman Trysta Herzog provided a joint statement from the Greene County Commission, acknowledging that Helms had contacted them before filing.

"Greene County enjoys a positive and collaborative relationship with the City of Springfield, and we believe in working on and supporting legislation that serves to strengthen that partnership from which our citizens benefit," the commission said. "...This was not an item requested by the County, and as with any legislation concerning our County, we will be watching it closely as it moves through the House."