1. United States
2. Mo.
3. Letter

I urge you to reject SB1060 (Coleman). This bill is a textbook example of special legislation dressed up in neutral language. While it is written to apply only to a narrow set of criteria that currently matches one county, it creates a dangerous precedent that threatens the stability of public water supply districts across Missouri. The fundamental problem with this bill is that it undermines the territorial protection that allows small rural water districts to exist. These districts were formed to serve communities that investor-owned utilities and municipalities ignored. They took on debt, built infrastructure, and provided clean water to areas that would otherwise have none. Their ability to exist depends on the certainty that their service territory will remain intact. This bill allows wealthy landowners to effectively purchase their way out of a public district. If a corporation can write a check to pay off a district's federal debt and then detach, what stops every profitable parcel in every district from doing the same? What happens to the remaining ratepayers when every commercial property leaves and they are left holding the bag for infrastructure debt? The public hearing makes clear this bill is responding to one specific dispute involving James Hardy Building Products and Public Water District 12. That dispute is already in court. The judicial system exists precisely to resolve these conflicts. There is no justification for the legislature to intervene on behalf of one private company against a public entity. The claim that no one is harmed by this detachment is not accurate. Public water districts rely on their entire service territory to spread costs and maintain financial viability. When high-value commercial properties detach, the remaining residential customers often face higher rates for the same service. The second part of this bill requiring districts to accept any gift or donation to pay off federal debt is equally problematic. It removes local control and forces districts to accept payments that may not be in their long-term interest. The district in question had legitimate reasons for refusing the payment losing the federal protections that come with that debt. This bill would strip away that local decision making. We should all want economic development and good paying jobs in Missouri. But we should not achieve it by weakening public districts and setting precedents that will harm rural communities for decades. The proper place to resolve this dispute is in the courts, not through special legislation that applies to one county and one set of facts. I urge you to vote no on Senate Bill 1060.