Nixon touts jobs even while cutting state employee positions

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon, left, gives his state of the state address as Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, right, and Speaker of the House Steven Tilley, center, listen Wednesday during a joint session of the House and Senate at the Capitol. Photo by The Associated Press.

By The Associated Press

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon tried to make sure everyone knows he likes job growth, be it 800 workers promised by global technology company IBM or three additional employees at a rural sawmill.

Nixon cited numerous business expansions helped along by his administration and used the word “jobs” about three dozen times Wednesday night in a State of the State speech that sought to highlight his efforts to aid Missouri’s economy.

It was the governor’s attempt to put a positive spin on a shrinking state budget that would cut aid for colleges, hold public school spending flat, eliminate about 860 full-time state employees and scrap or cap some of Missouri’s many tax credit programs for businesses and developers.

“Times are tough. Too many folks can’t make ends meet, can’t find the jobs they want, or worry they’ll lose the jobs they have,” the Democratic governor acknowledged in his speech to a joint session of the Republican-led House and Senate.

But “my focus is crystal clear,” Nixon added. “By fighting every day for every job, we will turn this economy around.”

Nixon’s potential Republican challenger — Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder — countered that the governor was merely “showboating and grandstanding” by flying around the state to nearly every local job announcement possible.

“Governor Nixon has been AWOL on the issues that matter most to you and your family,” Kinder said in a rebuttal. “Sure, he loves the perks of the job — the ribbon cuttings, the prime seats at sporting events, the taxpayer-funded airplane — but he’s nowhere to be found on the troubles facing our state.”

Nixon proposed a $23.1 billion operating budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1 — down at least a couple hundred million dollars from the budget lawmakers approved for the current fiscal year.

His plan would provide K-12 schools an additional $112 million during the current year, thanks to an influx of federal money that must be spent this school year. But it would cut schools by that same amount next year. Nixon’s budget director, Linda Luebbering, says schools will be asked to carry over some of this year’s additional money into next year.

Even so, schools would be getting far less than the amount they are due. Schools were budgeted to get about $3 billion in basic aid this year. They would be due an increase of about $233 million next year if Missouri were to provide the full amount called for by its funding formula.

Some school officials were happy just to avoid a cut in basic aid. School busing aid, which Nixon cut by nearly half this year, would rise slightly under his plan for next year.

“Overall, given the state’s fiscal situation, this is good news,” said Brent Ghan, a spokesman for the Missouri School Boards’ Association.

Public colleges and universities would take a 7 percent cut next year under Nixon’s proposal — an additional $64 million reduction on top of the $50 million cut they received this year.

But Nixon proposed to reverse a small portion of the cuts he made this year to Missouri’s main college scholarship programs. He proposed a bonus college scholarship to high school students who score well on certain math and science tests. And Nixon said he wants to expand a community college scholarship to graduates of all high schools, instead of only some schools — receiving bipartisan applause while reviving a pledge from his 2008 gubernatorial campaign.

The governor’s budget plan estimates the expanded scholarship would cost $8 million. It was one of the few new programs in his budget.

Nixon proposed using private contractors to replace some of the several hundred state employee positions he is seeking to eliminate.

Senate Appropriations Chairman Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, who has many state employees in his district, said the proposed job cuts were concerning.

“We’ve got a lot of hard-working Americans and Missourians that work for state agencies and work for the public school system and work for higher education,” Schaefer said. “You can’t discount a job simply because it’s a job in the public sector.”

The Communications Workers of America, Local 6355, which represents employees in the health and social services departments, said it was “flabbergasted and outraged” that Nixon was proposing “massive cuts” instead of proposing ways to raise state revenues.

Nixon’s budget includes about $45 million of assumed savings that are dependent upon legislators changing state laws.

One such change would provide an amnesty period for taxpayers who owe Missouri money but have not yet been cited by the Department of Revenue. If the businesses or individuals pay up, they can avoid penalties and be charged only half the interest they otherwise would owe. The governor’s budget assumes the program will bring in $20 million that otherwise would not have been paid.

Nixon also assumes savings from the elimination of several tax credits, including ones for filmmakers and another for wine and grape producers. He also wants lawmakers to reduce the amount of annual tax credits that can be issued for the renovation of historic buildings — a tool that developers have used extensively in older parts of St. Louis.

House Speaker Steven Tilley said he was willing to consider eliminating tax credit programs that are not working but opposed shrinking the historic tax credit program.

“That will be a nonstarter in the House,” said Tilley, R-Perryville.

More like this story

herewego 2 years, 4 months ago

Wonder by how many he is reducing HIS staff?

JMO 2 years, 4 months ago

I can't get over the constant cutting of state jobs. Am I less deserving of a job because I've chosen to be a civil servant instead of working in the private sector? Job growth is a good thing, but getting rid of state employees to give private contractors work makes no sense.

usmc00 2 years, 4 months ago

It makes great sense. State wont have to fund retirement and the private sector will do the job better for less manpower. They just need to trim everywhere not just the little guys end.

gofish 2 years, 4 months ago

You're wrong USMC00. Contracting jobs out to the private sector costs the state MORE money and the job is done less efficiently with fewer means of quality control. Example, the courts did not uphold the state's effort to terminate the cleaning contract for a company that had over a dozen illegals working in state office buildings. When long term state employees leave or retire early to work for a contractor the state is left with a less experienced staff which burdens everyone.

bluesfan13 2 years, 4 months ago

Yes, that worked so well with all the Deparment of Revenue contract offices that changed hands during the Blunt administration...

You don't seem to understand that state employees are AT A MINIMUM STAFFING LEVEL now for the level of benefits that the state is providing. ANY privatization of those duties will result in higher costs. Higher because the contractor will be earning a profit, and the wages for those doing the work can't get any lower than what they are already.

bluesfan13 2 years, 4 months ago

So the millions of dollars spent on overtime last year is just because the work is being done by lazy people bleeding the public dry?

bluesfan13 2 years, 4 months ago

That's an entirely different subject than saying that they're not staffing to minimum levels currently.

The state doesn't employ enough people to do the things that the legislature appropriates money for. i.e., minimum (or lower) staffing levels.

You can't cut more employees without first cutting services or programs, which is a larger expense savings than just "cutting 863 jobs". Nixon doesn't want to cut services because those beneficiaries are the ones who may still vote for him, so he's got to try and balance the budget another way.

usmc00 2 years, 4 months ago

Then we need to cut benifits then.

usmc00 2 years, 4 months ago

The we need to cut benifits then dont we.

JMO 2 years, 4 months ago

sorry, duplicate post

usmc00 2 years, 4 months ago

Cut out going benifits is what I am saying. The state can no longer afford to baby set. Cut them will reduce the need for so many state employees to service people reaping all the free handouts from the state. I think its a great idea. I see people at the food pantrys, samariton centers and comming out of the unemployment office on Flora drive that have alot nicer vehicle newer then I can afford driving away. They get all the nice free hand outs and have no exspenes.

JMO 2 years, 4 months ago

Ah, I misunderstood. I don't know that I agree with you, but I am sure there should be tighter guidelines on certain types of assistance.

JMO 2 years, 4 months ago

They've already changed the health insurance and cut out deferred compensation matching. They've had no cost of living increases for years. They changed "80 and out" retirement to age 90. What precisely do you think they have left to cut? And as for overtime, have you ANY idea how overworked these offices are? I get totally sick of people who don't work state jobs saying state workers are lazy. It takes so long to get things done because we don't have enough employees to handle the workload!

JMO 2 years, 4 months ago

I challenge you show me one single company where some employees don't work as hard as others. I'm not saying every single state employee works to the best of their ability. I'm saying that, as a whole, that is not where the problem lies.

JCLifer 2 years, 4 months ago

Maybe it is because there is poor management and design of the work. Why blame the workers if management is not clear on what they want or how they want it? Take away the tools to get things done, punish the workers by taking away benefits and see how well morale improves. Take workers away and force the remaining work that has been done for years by two or three employees on to one remaining employee. What do you expect? How is all of this the fault of the workers? They are just trying to do their jobs and understand what the hell the ever-changing management wants.

JCLifer 2 years, 4 months ago

Private contractors = greasing the palms of campaign contributors. Same as the old Revenue fee offices...

jeffcitygirl 2 years, 4 months ago

exactly JCLifer..that's all it is.

gofish 2 years, 4 months ago

Cutting 850 jobs in the public sector will not be replaced by an equal number of private sector jobs with equal pay. The Gov is cutting his own nose off, but with as long as it has grown, maybe a trim isn't a bad thing. However, don't mistake this as support for Kinder. I haven't forgotten the fact that he rallied to build a new Cardinals stadium with state tax dollars while cutting Medicaid for seniors and disabled Missourians. It really disgusts me that the guy running the show now is nothing more than the lesser of the evils.

whatif 2 years, 4 months ago

Wow, they could not have picked a better picture of him.....as though he were ready to choke somebody -- oh wait that be state workers.....

JCsleeper 2 years, 4 months ago

Looks like he's either got gas or just found out the Legislature wants to ground him.

gofish 2 years, 4 months ago

I'm even more impressed with where Kinder's eyes appear to be focusing. ;-)

JCsleeper 2 years, 4 months ago

Pete looks like he got a whiff of something that didn't smell too good.

wcywing 2 years, 4 months ago

we will see what happens in 2012, btw does the GOP have any good candidates for Gov? is Kinder going to run?

wcywing 2 years, 4 months ago

now this might be a crazy idea, but why not reduce the reps per diem, salaries, etc. don't forget some of the high paying state officials, cut their pay or the job. if i'm not mistaken, MO is the least or close to the bottom in pay for state workers. i know the Gov has to make tough decisions, but still cutting high paid officials should be a easy choice to make, especially when he cut 860 state jobs. any choice he makes will be under scrutiny, i don't want his job.

wcywing 2 years, 3 months ago

that would work, however i don't think the legislature will vote on that, plus it makes too much sense. maybe the Gov, can do something, highly unlikely though.

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune