Missouri government owns 19 aircraft - and that's too many, State Auditor Tom Schweich said in an 18-page report released Monday.
Three different agencies - the Highway Patrol and Conservation and Transportation departments - operate the aircraft and spent about $6.6 million on flight operations during the two years that ended Dec. 31, 2013.
Deputy Auditor Harry Otto told the News Tribune the audit determined that state government has "more planes than are needed or can be justified, and some usage that is questionable - with respect to MoDOT and Conservation - because they are different from almost all other boards and commissions; they fly their people in and out to meetings."
The report noted the three agencies combined "maintain and operate six passenger planes, with three of those having pressurized cabins," noting that pressurized planes have some benefits because they "are usually faster, have a more comfortable, smoother and quieter ride, and can quickly maneuver around bad weather situations."
The pressurized planes - including a controversial, $5.6 million King Air that the patrol bought at the beginning of 2013 - primarily are used to transport the governor and the two commissions' members, auditors said.
And, Otto said, auditors determined the Highway Patrol fails "to capture the true costs of operating this operation (so) that, when they do pass on the costs that are captured, they're understating those costs to the user."
That means "anyone who is using a Highway Patrol plane is being underbilled," he said.
The auditor's report said some of those underbilled costs include depreciation of the planes and the hangar rentals, as well as some of the retirement benefits for the mechanics hired to maintain the planes.
All the passenger planes are based in Jefferson City.
The three agencies also maintain and operate eight utility planes and five utility helicopters, auditors reported, with some of that equipment kept in other parts of the state.
"Utility aircraft are used for flights specific to each agency's mission; such as airport inspections for the MoDOT, deer telemetry or fire patrol for the MDC, and traffic control for the MSHP," the report said.
Still, the audit cited a duplication of efforts among the three agencies.
"There's a question of duplication of expenses because you have, maybe, two sets of mechanics and two sets of pilots," Otto explained, "extra expenses that, even if you had too many planes, if you had just one entity doing it, that would cut costs."
The report didn't make specific recommendations on how many aircraft or employees is the right number, but instead recommended that the Office of Administration study the situation and develop policies that all agencies would follow.
OA officials responded in the report: "The Office of Administration will consider a policy based on discussion with the departments."
The patrol said it already "reviews and approves all flight requests before a flight occurs. No flights take place without a review of the purpose and prior approval."
However, the patrol said in another part of the audit: "The (Auditor's) statement MSHP flights were not always documented in sufficient detail to determine the purpose for a flight is not accurate. While the MSHP had a small number of flight reports that could have included a more detailed description of the flight purpose, they did contain sufficient detail for responsible personnel to determine such and provide a verbal explanation to the examining auditor."
Auditors noted most other state agencies and employees drive rather than fly.
The Conservation department told the auditor's office it "will continue to use the trip optimizer for both in-state and out-of-state travel and retain documentation of its use or note why driving was not an option for the trip." The agency's "chief pilot will continue to review the flight reports and will retain documentation of his review."