1.Blunt calls for science in regulating biotech

2.Research cash fails to spawn new business

Missouri is hardly alone in not benefitting from biotech:

"This notion that you lure biotech to your community to save its economy is laughable," said Joseph Cortright, a Portland, Ore. economist who co-wrote a report on the subject. "This is a bad-idea virus that has swept through governors, mayors and economic development officials." http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=3772

EXCERPT: The idea is to avoid unpleasant surprises and controversies that could derail the plans of companies to set up shop or move to Missouri, said Roger Beachy, president of the science center and chair of the advisory council.

A recent example is Ventria Bioscience, a cutting-edge California company interested in moving its headquarters and production of genetically modified, pharmaceutical-producing rice to Missouri. Some farmers [like all the rice farmers!] and Anheuser-Busch Cos. opposed its plan to grow the crop in the Bootheel, fearing it could contaminate rice destined for beer.

The 11th-hour controversy delayed Ventria's plans by a year - and a lack of state funding for a production facility scrapped later intentions to build headquarters in Maryville. State officials continue to search for options for Ventria, but its move here no longer is assured.
---

1.Blunt calls for science in regulating biotech
By Rachel Melcer
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 01/27/2006 http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/business/stories.nsf/0/A705CDA7204081C6862571040019647C?OpenDocument

Missouri needs a science-based approach to regulating the often-controversial plant-science industry, Gov. Matt Blunt said Friday at the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center in Creve Coeur.

So, Blunt is supporting a pair of legislative proposals drafted by his Advisory Council for Plant Biotechnology.

One would set a uniform standard of regulation for the state, matching rules set up by the federal government. The other would establish a five-member board to keep the governor up to speed on plant biotech breakthroughs and debates; to conduct scientific reviews of issues that crop up in Missouri; and to identify ways the state can support and grow the industry.

"This creates the certainty needed for business," Blunt said in an interview.

The idea is to avoid unpleasant surprises and controversies that could derail the plans of companies to set up shop or move to Missouri, said Roger Beachy, president of the science center and chair of the advisory council.

A recent example is Ventria Bioscience, a cutting-edge California company interested in moving its headquarters and production of genetically modified, pharmaceutical-producing rice to Missouri. Some farmers and Anheuser-Busch Cos. opposed its plan to grow the crop in the Bootheel, fearing it could contaminate rice destined for beer.

The 11th-hour controversy delayed Ventria's plans by a year - and a lack of state funding for a production facility scrapped later intentions to build headquarters in Maryville. State officials continue to search for options for Ventria, but its move here no longer is assured.

"We would have benefited if we had a panel like this (proposed board) ... early on in that discussion," Blunt said.

In suggesting a uniform state regulatory code for the products of plant science, Missouri could avoid a patchwork of county-by-county ordinances that would make it difficult for businesses to operate here, Beachy said.

For example, in California some counties have passed or considered ballot measures outlawing the planting of genetically modified crops.

Blunt is seeking sponsors for the bills, but hopes to see them introduced in the Legislature next week, said Rob Rose, spokesman for the plant science center.

The legislative framework would compliment Blunt's Lewis & Clark Discovery Initiative, unveiled earlier this week in a plan to spend proceeds from the possible sale of the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority. The proposed initiative would spend more than $186 million on infrastructure to house life-science industry and research statewide.
---

2.Research cash fails to spawn new business
Blunt’s biotech panel lays blame on UM.
Associated Press, January 28 2006 http://www.columbiatribune.com/2006/Jan/20060128News021.asp

ST. LOUIS (AP) - A lot of money goes into biotechnology research in Missouri, but not much comes out.

That’s what Gov. Matt Blunt heard yesterday during a daylong meeting with his advisory council on plant biotechnology. Blunt appointed the council last spring to help Missouri foster more high-tech companies in the state, and he said yesterday that the group already helped lay the groundwork for a $300 million spending proposal he announced Thursday.

But money alone isn’t the answer, Blunt was told as he sat with the council of academics, businessmen and state officials during a meeting at the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center.

Missouri does a worse job than most states at turning research dollars into new businesses or patented products, said Mike Mills, deputy director of the Missouri Department of Economic Development.

The problem isn’t a lack of talented scientists but of a process to turn basic research into new companies or marketable products, council members said.

"We have an abysmal record of translating that research into jobs," said Roger Beachy, chairman of the council and president of the plant science center.

The council looked at a number of ways to change that fact, from state tax breaks to forming a special arm of the University of Missouri that would move research into the private sector.

The governor’s proposal to spend $300 million on research facilities was part of a broader plan called the Lewis and Clark Discovery Initiative. The money could go toward laboratories or business incubators, which the council told him Missouri needed during its first meeting in September.

Blunt said Missouri is a world leader in plant sciences that needs to exploit its competitive advantage to draw new companies here while encouraging homegrown upstarts. Along with the Danforth research center, Missouri is home to Monsanto, the world’s biggest genetically engineered seed company.

Blunt said his initiative would make sure that Missouri regulations don’t interfere with bringing new biotechnology companies to the state.

The proposal would make sure that any laws governing genetically engineered seed would be statewide and not different from federal laws, he said.

That was music to the ears of council member Jerry Caulder. As former chairman of the biotech seed company Mycogen Corp., Caulder said business owners avoid states where the regulatory environment is uncertain.

"I can deal with the most asinine law in the world. I just can’t deal with uncertainty," Caulder said.

"We’re your state if you can deal with asinine laws," Blunt joked.

Caulder and others had harsh words for the UM system, which they said is inefficient at moving research out of the lab and into the private sector.

He contrasted that with Stanford University, where the student founders of Google easily found support from university officials who incubated their young company.

"You have to deal with so many people" at UM "that you ask yourself: ‘Why am I wasting my time?’ " Caulder said.

Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, a University of Missouri-Columbia professor, said the problem also lies in the lack of entrepreneurs statewide.

"I don’t think we have those people waiting on the other side of the university gate," Kalaitzandonakes said.

Mills, with the department of economic development, said the state was considering a plan to offer $8 million to $10 million in tax breaks to start-up companies.

Blunt said after the meeting he expects broad support for biotechnology funding in his Lewis and Clark initiative because it will bring good jobs to the state.