Divvying of surplus stirs doubts
Posted on Sunday, April 15, 2007
In the waning days of this year’s legislative session, House leaders met in Speaker Benny Petrus’ corner office on the third floor of the state Capitol to determine how to split up the chamber’s $ 20 million share of surplus state revenue.
The four-man team devoted most of the money to local fire departments, senior citizen centers and higher-education institutions, then earmarked about $ 3. 4 million to projects championed by individual members.
The projects that benefited from House leaders’ largess were for the most part sponsored by Petrus and his lieutenants, and some members whose projects didn’t get funding have said that they had little or no input in the decisions on which bills won a share.
“We were not consulted,” said Rep. Johnnie Roebuck, D-Arkadelphia. “I was never called in.”
Rep. David Rainey, D-Dumas, said some House members were unhappy at not having more say in how the money was split up.
“People were frustrated, based on not having any real input,” he said.
The puzzlement and occasional dissatisfaction some rank-and-file House members felt with the process by which leaders divvied up the chamber’s share of roughly $ 919 million in surplus state revenue stems in part from its novelty, lawmakers said. This session, House leaders took it upon themselves to decide how to spend the money, because in December the state Supreme Court issued a ruling widely held to prohibit the Legislature’s previous practice of earmarking state funds for specific local projects.
“I don’t think there’s any question leadership did that,” said Petrus, a Stuttgart Democrat, when asked to respond to members’ comments. “That is what leadership does.”
Petrus was joined by Rep. Scott Sullivan, D-De Queen, House speaker pro tem and right-hand man; Revenue and Taxation Committee Chairman Keven Anderson, RRogers; and Joint Budget Committee Co-chairman Chris Thyer, D- Jonesboro.
“We did most of the work. If the question is ‘Did we go around and poll the other 96 members and ask if this is OK ?’ No, we didn’t,” Thyer said. He noted the bills leaders drafted to allocate the money weren’t questioned on the House floor, and they received overwhelmingly favorable votes.
The Senate divided its share equally, with each senator allowed to earmark roughly $ 571, 000. Rep. John Paul Wells, D-Paris, said he hopes that next session, the House will follow the Senate’s example and split its share among 100 members. Though Wells is close to Petrus, he too said he wasn’t party to the funding decisions.
“They did not let me in on any information about that whatsoever, except for the fact that they thought they needed to be statewide projects,” he said.
The House leaders’ conclave was a marked departure from past legislative practice.
In the 2005 regular session of the General Assembly, each chamber received $ 26. 2 million, and split most of that up among members. In the House, third-term members got to allocate the most: $ 212, 000 each. Lawmakers generally designated the money for projects in their home districts — a local sports league, neighborhood associations, road projects and libraries among them.
But in December, the state Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional a law by which Sen. Bob Johnson, D-Bigelow, sent $ 400, 000 to his hometown for infrastructure, sewer and road improvements. The high court found the bill violated an amendment to the state constitution barring the Legislature from passing “local” legislation.
In light of that ruling, this year the House leadership chose to distribute the bulk of the chamber’s $ 20 million through grants to the fire departments, senior centers, city and county governments, colleges and universities, and other entities. Most of the money was sprinkled across Arkansas through existing formulas state agencies use to distribute aid. House members didn’t get to pick which local fire department or city or county received it.
“That took the politics out of it,” Petrus said.
Petrus and Thyer said the large allocations to fire departments and other organizations in home districts gave every member a piece. Indeed, although the leaders didn’t fund Roebuck’s bid to send roughly $ 12 million to Henderson State University in Arkadelphia, the school will get $ 100, 000 through a separate legislative vehicle Petrus sponsored, to spend on maintenance and its library. Roebuck is a professor of education there.
While some members said they’re satisfied that legislative leaders split the money fairly, others complained about a lack of transparency in the decisionmaking.
“Your guess is as good as mine” why certain projects were funded and not others, said Rep. Horace Hardwick, a third-term Bentonville Republican whose appropriation for community health clinics in rural areas received no money. “For those that are uninsured and are underinsured those community health centers do a tremendous service. The fact that none of it got funded is a big disappointment to me.”
Hardwick didn’t cast a vote on the bills. He said he thinks state surplus money shouldn’t be used for local projects at all, but should be deposited with general revenue to fund state agency budgets.
Rainey said he voted for the bills that distributed the money because “I thought that it was the best plan presented, and to say no, from my perspective, would have just been against something, when there was not necessarily any better option.”
He proposed that in future sessions, the House split the surplus revenue among the four congressional districts and let the legislators serving them recommend where it should go, rather than have the House leadership decide.
The House leaders also sent money to members’ chosen projects and organizations. Most of the members whose projects were funded are part of Petrus ’ leadership team or were appointed by him as committee chairmen or vice chairmen.
For example, while every public higher education institution in the state received some surplus money, some received extra House funds — those chosen by House leaders.
“It has to do with Sullivan and Anderson and myself,” Thyer said. “The speaker said ‘You’re the ones that did a lot of the heavy lifting,’ so we got to pick where a little bit went.”
The funds allocated by the House include: $ 853, 000 to the University of Arkansas at Monticello for a forestry research program. House Bill 1883, which appropriated the money, was sponsored by Rep. Allen Maxwell, D-Monticello, vice chairman of the Revenue and Taxation Committee.
$ 500, 000 to Northwest Arkansas Community College, under HB 1615 sponsored by Anderson, the tax panel chairman.
$ 200, 000 to Camp Couchdale, a Future Farmers of America camp in Hot Springs. HB 1727 was sponsored by Rep. Mike Burris, D-Hot Springs.
$ 100, 000 to the Stuttgart campus of Phillips Community College, under HB 1851 sponsored by Petrus. $ 50, 000 to education programs for troubled youth run by the Arkansas National Guard. HB 1587 was sponsored by Rep. Jeff Wood, D-Sherwood, chairman of the House State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee.
That program was singled out for funding “because Jeff did a whole bunch of work during the session, in that state agencies committee,” Thyer said.
Some members complained House leaders’ choices left other worthy projects without funding.
Rep. Steve Harrelson, House Democrat majority leader, sponsored a bill that would appropriate $ 100, 000 to the Department of Health and Human services to feed the hungry.
“I wanted to try to give a small amount to them, but it wasn’t funded,” said Harrelson, a Texarkana Democrat.
Harrelson said he didn’t know why the bill hadn’t been chosen for funding. “It’s outside of my control,” he said.
Thyer said he and other House leaders chose projects that seemed to have a broad geographic impact, if not a statewide reach. Camp Couchdale, for example, serves children from across the state, he said. Petrus gave $ 641, 000 to the Arkansas Rice Depot, which feeds the hungry in all 75 Arkansas counties, for maintenance and improvements at its headquarters and a new refrigerated truck. For his efforts on its behalf, the organization recently gave him its Lincoln Humanitarian of the Year Award, named for U. S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln.
However, Thyer said that in choosing which apparently wide-reaching programs were to receive money, “there was no rhyme or reason.”
House leaders said many members called for support to fire departments, senior citizen centers and domestic abuse shelters, so Petrus had those bills drafted, then sent money their way.
“We listened to the rank and file, and that’s the reason the money got divvied up the way it did,” Sullivan said. “Of course, there are a lot more wants than we could get funded.”
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
