Jonathan Shorman

News-Leader

Environmental activists, opposed to the proposed expansion of City Utilities' coal ash landfill, plan to raise their objections with City Council tonight. This comes as the Sierra Club releases a new report suggesting the electric industry contributed to the campaign fund of a Springfield lawmaker for smoothing the way for the landfill.

The report tracks campaign donations to Rep. Lincoln Hough, R-Springfield, in 2013. It shows Hough received $1,900 from industry groups and lobbyists.

The Sierra Club suggests the donations, seven in all, show the industry rewarding Hough for moving pro-industry legislative language. At the same time, the size of the donations amount to only a drop in the bucket for the lawmaker, who has amassed a war chest of more than $141,000.

Hough says the Sierra Club is "trying to make something out of nothing."

The Sierra Club has long opposed efforts by CU to expand an existing coal ash landfill at the John Twitty Energy Center southwest of Springfield. The group says coal ash is harmful to human health.

About 40 have indicated on Facebook they intend to show up to tonight's council meeting, where speakers plan to urge council to exercise more oversight over CU and stop the landfill expansion.

In the past, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources has rejected several landfill sites proposed by CU, citing the porous karst topography that could potentially allow ash into the groundwater. The rejections came during preliminary site investigations.

However, during the 2013 General Assembly, lawmakers passed and Gov. Jay Nixon signed a bill exempting CU, and only CU, from the preliminary site investigation requirement, allowing the utility to proceed straight to a detailed site investigation. Legislative language creating the exemption was inserted into multiple bills and in at least one instance at the behest of Hough.

The Sierra Club's report purports to document the contributions that "flowed" to Hough after the legislation passed. A copy of the report was given to the News-Leader ahead of an expected public release today.

"Most often, it would be overly simplistic to suggest that one particular vote by a legislator was triggered by one particular contribution from an interest group. At the same time, a pattern of significant contributions from an industry that shares a public policy goal should raise concerns on how government policy is made," the report says.

Donations from CU lobbyist Scott Marrs, the Association of Missouri Electric Cooperative, Ameren lobbyist Michael Winter and the Missouri Association of Municipal Utilities, among others, are shown. The size of the donations range from $150 to $500 — relatively small amounts for Hough.

Hough, who reported more than $141,726 cash on hand in April, regularly takes in much larger contributions than those cited by the Sierra Club. His large contributors often include businesses and business owners.

For example, Mark Gardner of Gardner Capital donated $10,000 in March of this year. H.E. Whitener of Fair Grove gave $10,000 in February.

John Hickey, director of the Missouri chapter of the Sierra Club, when asked about the significance of the electric industry donations given that they are a relatively small percentage of Hough's overall campaign fund, said the lawmaker has also received donations from other campaign committees, which renders the original source of the money difficult to track.

The report says Hough received $500 each from the campaign committees of Sen. Jay Wasson, R-Nixa, and Rep. Todd Richardson, R-Poplar Bluff, in December. The report then notes that Wasson and Richardson both received thousands in electric industry donations.

Missouri allows unlimited transfer of cash between campaign committees. The report gives no evidence that the funds Hough received from Wasson and Richardson were originally electric industry money.

Hickey also said $1,900 — the amount the Sierra Club says the electric industry donated to Hough in 2013 — is a large amount for most people.

"For most Missourians, two grand is a lot of money," Hickey said. "That's a used car. People shoot each other for that kind of money."

Hough said he is trying to help consumers, who would likely have to pay more if CU has to haul the coal ash off-site. CU has said not being able to store the ash near the power plant will mean trucking it elsewhere at a higher cost.

Hough added that a full, monthslong detailed site investigation is still required.

"All (the legislation) does is allow them to study the site. It kind of baffles me that the Sierra Club is as upset about something that is as simple as that," Hough said.

Despite CU's ability to now bypass preliminary site inspections of potential coal ash landfills, the state still retains the power to reject sites following the detailed site investigation phase.

Roddy Rogers, CU manager of water resources projects, said the detailed site investigation process is just beginning and could last years. He said the first phase of the investigation, involving what he called "field recon" — gathering information about the subsurface — will take place over the next year.