Missouri senators debate sweeping 'obsolete boards' substitute; amendment adopted and bill laid over

Sen. Jefferson, the sponsor of a 105-page senate substitute aimed at cleaning up outdated boards and commissions, told colleagues the measure "is attempting not to change the status quo of what's happening in the state, but to bring our statutes in line with what is happening currently in the state." She said the substitute would repeal or transfer duties of panels that have not met or had appointments for years and would require state departments to send an annual report on inactive administrative entities to every member of the General Assembly by Oct. 1, 2026, and each Oct. 1 thereafter.

The measure drew lengthy, line-by-line discussion on the floor Wednesday as senators reviewed renamings (for example, changing statutory references from "division" to "office" and updating agency names to "higher education and workforce development") and the disposition of scores of advisory panels. Sponsor Johnson (Sen. Jefferson) repeatedly said the goal was to "reflect reality" — not to remove ongoing functions — and pointed to examples where departments already handle duties once assigned to dormant boards.

Lawmakers debated both technical and policy questions. Senator from the 7th pressed the sponsor on how the list had been compiled and whether any work would be lost; Jefferson responded that her office surveyed agency records, legislative research, and public testimony and that departments had helped identify sections where no appointments or meetings had occurred in years. Jefferson also said she had asked staff to prepare an amendment to remove one section that had not appeared on a committee "cheat sheet," and the body adopted that change. "The amendment is adopted," the presiding officer announced after a voice vote.

Floor exchanges ranged from routine clarifications to more charged policy debate. A senator from the fifth, proposing a separate GIS-related amendment, argued for shared data standards across agencies and said, "When we don't measure, we rely on antidotes. When we don't coordinate, we rely on assumptions," urging a council to harmonize statewide mapping and infrastructure data. That amendment was discussed but is separate from the main substitute.

Education oversight became a focal point after a senator from the first offered an amendment to move the Missouri Charter School Commission into the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). The senator argued the change would increase transparency and accountability for charter finances and safety; she cited recent local cases and news reports in which charter operators faced financial strain or safety violations. Colleagues from St. Louis and other districts described multiple charter closures, probation letters, and an instance reported in news accounts where an 8-year-old wandered from a downtown charter campus before the commission prohibited the school from reopening. Senators debated whether the change exceeded the substitute's single-subject scope; several points of order were raised and referred to the presiding officers during the floor sparring.

Legal scope and procedural limits were a recurring theme. Some proposed amendments were sent back on point-of-order grounds as senators and leadership sought to keep the substitute within its title about obsolete administrative entities. Others — including an amendment to strike a small, disputed section tied to health facility quality reporting — were negotiated on the floor and handled by amendments.

Financial impacts were flagged but not resolved on the floor. Senators reviewed the bill's fiscal note (LR 4254), which listed about $294,000 in potential expenses; one departmental estimate noted that savings could offset up to $250,000 of that amount. Jefferson said fiscal notes sometimes contain inconsistencies and suggested senators follow up with fiscal staff for details.

The Senate adopted the sponsor's amendment (Senate amendment No. 1) by voice vote but did not complete final action on the full substitute. At the day's close Sen. Jefferson asked to lay the bill over; the Senate placed the substitute on the informal calendar for further consideration.

What happens next: The substitute remains on the informal calendar for additional review and possible amendment. Sponsors and interested senators signaled a willingness to continue negotiating changes, including amendments addressing cybersecurity, data standards, and possible charter commission restructuring, but several proposed changes were held aside pending committee- or public-level vetting.