Residents press St. Francois County commission to recognize FOP, ask about $1 million budget rumor

St. Francois County residents and union representatives used the public‑comment period to press the county commission on whether it will voluntarily recognize the Fraternal Order of Police as the bargaining agent for sheriff’s deputies and to seek clarity about a circulating rumor that $1,000,000 would be removed from the sheriff’s budget.

Lee Asher, a resident who opened the discussion, said county voters have historically supported labor and questioned why the commission “has chosen not to recognize the FOP as their bargaining unit, as their bargaining agent.” He told commissioners deputies had voted to be represented by the FOP and urged the board to “sit down with the FOP and negotiate a contract.”

Commissioners responded that they had not refused recognition as a matter of policy but that state procedures must be followed before the county can formally recognize or negotiate with a bargaining unit. “We have not taken that stance,” one commissioner said, adding the county’s attorney had sent a letter outlining the legal steps the FOP must follow before the commission could meet with them about representation.

Asher also asked whether the commission “took over $1,000,000 out of the sheriff’s department budget this year.” Commissioners said that had not happened and explained the rumor arose from a possible lawsuit by a 9‑1‑1 entity over use‑tax allocations; if that litigation succeeded, it could reduce funds flowing to the sheriff by about $1,000,000 per year, but the suit had not yet produced that outcome.

Union and labor representatives reinforced the request for professional, unbiased negotiations. Jim Schulte, a business representative for Sheet Metal Workers Local 36, asked whether the commission intends to negotiate fairly with the FOP if the matter proceeds; commissioners said they would meet and negotiate within legal constraints and consult counsel as needed.

Commissioners and public speakers also discussed operational limits such as existing health‑insurance contract terms (the county noted coverage arrangements with the Teamsters) and broader budget pressures tied to declining sales‑tax receipts and potential state actions that reduce county revenue.

The public comments ended with commissioners reiterating that legal requirements and pending actions (including any court outcomes) would determine the timing and scope of formal recognition or bargaining. The commission did not take a formal vote or adopt a policy change during the meeting; next steps hinge on whether the FOP follows the procedural steps outlined by the county attorney or whether litigation compels further action.