Missouri voters could be asked this fall to expand the Missouri Conservation Commission from four members to six.
State senators debated the issue for more than three hours over three days last week, before voting 22-10 Thursday to send the idea to the House.
If both chambers agree, the question would be placed on the Nov. 8 general election ballot unless Gov. Jay Nixon schedules it for an earlier date, such as the Aug. 2 primary.
Sponsor Brian Munzlinger, R-Williamstown, said the commission hasn't represented all parts of the state equally during its 80-year history.
The current commission has members from Jefferson City (Chairwoman Marilynn Bradford), Columbia (Vice Chair David W. Murphy), St. Louis (Secretary James T. Blair IV, grandson of Gov. James T. Blair Jr., of Jefferson City) and Sikeston (Don C. Bedell).
Murphy is a Lewis County native - the same county Munzlinger calls home - and some senators argued last week his strong Northeast Missouri roots.
But, Munzlinger argued: "It's been well over 30 years - and, I think, 36 years - since true Northeast Missouri has had anybody (on the commission). ... As diverse as Missouri is in its wildlife and throughout its eco-system, it's very diverse.
"And I feel that it's a good reason to have a diversity of the people who come on this commission from around the state, so that they're familiar with things related to their area."
Munzlinger had proposed an eight-member commission, with each member coming from a designated geographic region in the state.
But some after-hours negotiations involving several senators resulted in the proposal to expand the commission by two members - and have the governor appoint them from any part of the state, as he does now.
Sen. Jason Holsman, D-Kansas City, helped write the compromise.
"While having geographical representatives can have a positive impact of allowing the constituents to be closer to their commissioners - thereby increasing and improving communication," Holsman told Munzlinger last week, "it can also have the negative impact of those commissioners becoming very parochial.
"And, I'm not opposed to more voices being a part. I think if you're going to spend $170 million a year, I think having more eyes, more ears, more conversation is not a bad thing."
The state Senate still would have to approve the governor's appointees.
A four-member commission was part of the original 1936 constitutional amendment creating Missouri's Conservation department.
Voters approved that amendment by a 71.4 percent margin.
In 1976, voters statewide OK'd the one-eighth of a cent sales tax for Conservation, by a 50.8 percent margin.
"A lot of things have changed since the inception of the department and the commission," Munzlinger reminded colleagues. "Back then, they didn't own any land. They didn't have a tax.
"Now they handle about $180 million a year in taxes. They own or control over 1 million acres of land here in the state of Missouri right now (and) actually purchased (another) 1,600 acres, I believe it was, at their last meeting."
Missouri has a total of 44.7 million acres, according to the website, www.statemaster.com.
Sen. Scott Sifton, D-Affton, acknowledged some areas of the state could feel slighted by their lack of commissioners, but asked: "What is broken with the commission now that adding members is going to fix?"
Sifton said his St. Louis County constituents don't complain about the commission or its operations.
"I see a fiercely independent commission that has functioned very well for 80 years - generally regarded as a national beacon," he argued.
Several senators agreed Missouri's Conservation department and commission are considered tops in the nation.
But Sen. Ed Emery, R-Lamar, questioned the importance of a ranking that generally comes from similar departments around the country.
"My district is rural, primarily, and I guarantee you the vote would come out different, because you're talking about landowners ... farmers (and) rural school districts - all of whom are affected by this (commission)," Emery said.
He agreed "there are folks across the country who are very proud of what we're doing - most of them, it's because we've got more money than most of the others, because not every state has their own sales tax - so they (Conservation) do not suffer through some of the budget shortfalls in the same way that other states do."
He said he hears "probably ... more complaints about the Conservation department than I get positive comments," usually "about the amount of land the commission owns."
Emery explained: "The fact that the land is out of circulation and, so, it raises the price, potentially, for other land for agriculture uses in the area - and the fact the land isn't always used as effectively as the Conservation Commission would like."
But Sen. Dan Brown, R-Rolla, guessed he'd had "probably, one (complaint) in the last seven years."
And Sen. Mike Cunningham, R-Rogersville, said during Wednesday's debate: "We are admired by others, whatever we do. ... In my area it's very well thought of.
"We're 39th in job growth in the United States - and some people say 43.
"I'd much rather we spent our time on economic development, on job growth, on doing something that would be more productive instead of messing with something where we're ranked number one."
Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Glendale, on Wednesday and Thursday urged colleagues to reject the "terrible idea."
"There is no reason on God's green earth why we would move from four (commissioners) to a larger number," he said. "It's a solution in search of a problem."
Mid-Missouri's four senators - Mike Kehoe, R-Jefferson City; Jeanie Riddle, R-Mokane; Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia; and Brown, R-Rolla - all voted for the proposal.