Federal money to eliminate Missouri’s dangerous lead pipes briefly slashed from budget
Only five U.S. states have more lead water service lines than Missouri, antiquated infrastructure that exposes both rural and urban residents to the harmful toxin.
Missouri lawmakers are seeking to curtail the state’s reliance on lead pipes through funds from President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus stimulus package. Of the $2.8 billion the state received, Gov. Mike Parson requested that $411 million be used over the next few years to repair and upgrade drinking water systems and track lead water pipes.
But concern over committing to a multi-year program within one budget cycle briefly caused a significant reduction — sparking worries that organizations needing the money wouldn’t be funded in time to meet the federal government’s tight spending deadline.
The money would be used to create a grant program for water infrastructure projects and help the state keep track of service lines that contain lead. Organizations — ones that can prove financial need, provide matching local funds and propose projects “necessary for compliance and public health protection” — would apply for funding from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, according to the budget proposal.
After initial plans to significantly slash the spending plan were nixed last week by House Budget Chairman Cody Smith, the lead abatement money, along with the rest of Parson’s budget, will head to the House for floor debates this week.
Smith told the House Budget Committee last week that Rep. Don Mayhew, a Republican from Crocker who owns an engineering and surveying company, convinced him to restore the funding.
In an interview Monday, Mayhew said Smith initially felt that it was a bad idea to lock in money for a program that may extend over several years and that the state should instead fund the effort in multiple budgets.
“His logic was sound on the reason why he did that,” he said. “But where that doesn’t work, in the lead abatement stuff, is because of the way we fund those kinds of projects.”
The federal funds have to be appropriated by December 2024 and must be fully spent by the end of 2026. If lawmakers hold off on the full $411 million commitment, the organizations that need the money would have to scramble to hire engineers and submit reports to meet the tight deadline, he said.
“I don’t see any way that the money that’s intended for [lead abatement] gets spent unless we make a commitment for it in this budget,” he said.
Smith said that the $411 million in federal money is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to curtailing the state’s water infrastructure issues. He estimates that there is roughly $5 billion in unfunded needs across the state.
He said his biggest concern with the proposal is that lawmakers in the Senate will try to earmark the funds for specific projects.
If lawmakers begin earmarking the federal money for projects, it “ensures that those that need it the most don’t get it,” he said.
“It’s not just small rural,” he said. “It’s depressed urban areas too can benefit greatly from these funds. Those are the folks that are always left behind. Those are the ones who need it the most.”
