We the People of Johnson Co MO, Saturday, October 22, 2022 š¤š§ Information & Links to Clarify Some Voting Questions on Nov. 2 Ballot.
Time to put on our thinking caps and figure out the items we have the opportunity to vote on! There are several amendments on the ballot, and the links/articles will help explain the issues they address.
This link will allow you to view/print a sample ballot. Click on the āSample Ballotā square in the upper right-hand corner.
Iāve printed out my sample ballot, and as I go through each amendment, Iām marking what I want to vote when I get to the voting booth. Iām going to take my sample ballot with me when I vote, so I donāt forget what I decided after researching the amendment. You all may have a better memory than I do and may not need to take your marked ballot, but there are 4 proposed amendments, a Constitutional Convention Question and another Jo Co Emergency Services Question, so itās a bit to keep track of.
Here we go!
Constitutional Amendment No. 1 - (Link)
Ballot summary
Currently, the Constitution limits the treasurerās investment options and grants the General Assembly no statutory authority to determine the treasurerās investment options.
A 'yes' vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to allow the state treasurer to invest in municipal securities, as well as allow the General Assembly to authorize by statute additional investment avenues for the state treasurer to invest state funds.
A 'no' vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution and limit the treasurer to investing state funds only in those securities currently listed in the Constitution.[4]
State Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick (R) is in favor of a āyesā vote because, "It would allow the treasurer's office to invest in municipal securities. It would also give the General Assembly the power to add to the current investment options by passing a statute." He said what prompted his office to pursue the amendment was "the huge influx of cash" from tax revenue and COVID-19 stimulus money from the federal government and the low interest rate environment. Being able to assess and choose from a larger venue of investment options may provide greater interest/dividend income.
Missouri Amendment 3 - Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2022) - Ballotpedia (Link)
Ballot summary
The official ballot summary is as follows:[2]
āA āyesā vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to remove state prohibitions on the purchase, possession, consumption, use, delivery, manufacture, and sale of marijuana for personal use for adults over the age of twenty-one.
The amendment would also allow individuals with certain marijuana-related offenses to petition for release from prison or parole and probation and have their records expunged. If passed, this measure will impose a 6 percent tax on the retail price of recreational marijuana.[6]
A ānoā vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution and the sale and use of marijuana for recreational purposes will remain prohibited under current law. Medical marijuana would remain available as it is currently.
Of note is that one would be very hard pressed to find a person in jail or on probation for the single offense of possessing or using marijuana. Should such an offender be found, the reality of his/her recorded offense would be that multiple offenses had been plea bargained down to a single and least punishable offense. In this day and age no one goes to jail for the single offense of marijuana use.
The largest contributor to this ballot initiative is the lobbying group New Approach Advocacy Fund whose mission is: To support the reform of marijuana laws and progressive causes (*āprogressiveā can also accurately be described as āliberalā, āsocialistā or ācommunistā) including but not limited to, support of state ballot initiatives and candidates.[2]
New Approach PAC is a 527 nonprofit organization founded in 2014 and based in Washington, D.C. The organization supports *progressive initiatives , especially initiatives that seek to legalize medical and recreational marijuana.[1]
New Approach PAC contributed at least $10.4 million to campaigns supporting marijuana legalization and medical marijuana initiatives from 2014 to 2020.
New Approach PAC supported Florida Amendment 4, approved by voters in 2018, which was designed to automatically restore the right to vote for people with prior felony convictions.
The 2 final bullets on the Sample Ballot under Amendment No. 3 leave unanswered questions.
Issue equally distributed licenses to each congressional district (via lottery selection) - my question centers around how those entering the ālotteryā do so? Does it require financial donation? Are the amounts donated, weighted for winning according to the amount donated? How will those donations be used? By the states selling the ālottery ticketsā? Legislators campaign funds? What else?
Impose a six percent tax on the retail price of marijuana to benefit various programs - my question here is similar: How will this tax funding be used? Do the marijuana purchasers get to choose how their funds are to be distributed? Do citizens vote on how it will be used - or more likely will it be designated in a non-elected and non-transparent way?
I wonder if this tax will end up being promised to a ābeneficial areaā only to be siphoned to a different arena, similar to the casino money promised to schools.
In the first year of operation, taxes from lotteries generally do go toward education, according to a study Pierce co-authored that looked at the period 1966 to 1990. āYou saw an initial bump in education spending by about $50 per capita,ā he says. But after a number of years, the practice of using the money for other expenses became commonplace. After eight or nine years, says Pierce, āstates with lotteries were spending less on education than states that didnāt have the lottery tax.ā
Missouri Amendment No. 4 - Legislature Requires a City to Increase Funding Without State Reimbursement, for a Police Force Established by State Board Amendment - 2022 (Link)
Ballot summary
The official ballot summary is as follows:[2]
āA āyesā vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to allow the general assembly, by law, to increase the minimum funding for a police force *established by the state board of police commissioners, to ensure such police force has additional resources to serve its communities. Currently the only police force *established by the state board of police commissioners is found in Kansas City, Missouri.
A ānoā vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution regarding the funding for a police force established by the state board of police commissioners.
If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.[7]
Board of police commissioners
The Kansas City Police Department was founded in 1874, and in its founding, it was governed by a board of governor-appointed commissioners. This changed in 1932, when the Kansas City Council brought the Kansas City Police Department under city governance. In 1939, the Kansas City Police Department returned to being governed by the state board of commissioners.[8]
Kansas City is the only police department in the state of Missouri that is governed by a *state board of commissioners.
*As such it would be the only police department considered in this specific amendment.
Background -
Kansas City police funding (Link)
ACTION - KC City Council and Quentin Lucas: In May 2021, the Kansas City Council passed two ordinances that would give the city leaders more control on the funding of the Kansas City Police Department. The first ordinance reduced the KCPD budget by $42.3 million, cutting it to 20% of the city's general fund. Missouri Law requires the city to spend 20% of its general fund revenue on policing. The second ordinance would negotiate how that $42.3 million would be spent.[9] The fact the Quentin Lucas is against this makes me see it in a favorable light!
COUNTER ACTION - KC Board of Police Commissioners: On May 28, the Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners filed a lawsuit against Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas and the City Council, filed in the Jackson County Circuit Court. The lawsuit stated that the *police board of commissioners has sole management over the police budget, and that the city has to spend at least 20% of its general revenue on policing. The lawsuit demanded the return of the $42.3 million.[10] On October 5, 2021, a Jackson County judge ruled that the Kansas City Council violated state law in its plans to relocate the $42.3 million.
FURTHER COUNTER ACTION - Missouri State Legislature: On May 13, 2022, the Missouri State Legislature passed Missouri Senate Bill 678 (SB678) to increase the funding of the Kansas City Police Department from 20% of the Kansas City general revenues to 25% of the general revenues.[11] On August 17, 2022, Lucas announced he is filing a lawsuit in the Jackson County Circuit Court against the state of Missouri over SB678.[12]
This one takes some thought. Click on the link at the top of the heading for Amendment 4 to read the full argument of pros and cons.
Constitutional Amendment No. 5 - Department of the National Guard Amendment (Link)
Ballot summary
The official ballot summary is as follows:[1]
āA āyesā vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to create the Missouri Department of the National Guard as a new state agency, headed by an adjutant general appointed by and serving at the pleasure of the governor by and with the advice and consent of the senate.
A ānoā vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution regarding the National Guard.
If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.[3]
Arguments
Sen. Bill White (R-32): āThe mission of the Guard will not change. This is an administrative change. It will correct budgetary issue ... currently has to compete for money with other programs run by the Department of Public Safety. Itās not able to make its requests directly to the chief executive (Governor of Missouri)."
State Rep. Adam Schnelting (R-104): "When a disaster strikes, whether it's an earthquake or another Joplin scenario, God forbid, instead of the adjutant general and our military forces having to go through a bureaucratic process, the adjutant general would answer directly to the governor."
The bill was overwhelmingly supported by Republicans and a few Democrats in the House and Senate. Rep. Adam Schnelting (R-104) introduced the constitutional amendment as House Joint Resolution 116 (HJR 116) on January 11, 2022.
On April 6, 2022, the Missouri House of Representatives voted 126-2 to pass HJR 116.
On May 5, 2022, the Senate voted 31-0 to pass the amendment.[1]
With approval in the House and Senate, the constitutional amendment was referred to the ballot for the election on November 8, 2022.
Amendment 5 would create the Missouri Department of the National Guard as an administrative department within the state's executive branch. As of 2022, the Missouri National Guard is part of the Missouri Department of Public Safety.[1]
As an executive department, the adjutant general, who commands the national guard, would be a member of the governor's cabinet.[1]
Amendment 5 would define the department's purpose as providing for the state militia, upholding the U.S. Constitution, upholding the Missouri Constitution, protecting the constitutional rights and civil liberties of Missourians, and providing other defenses as required.[1]
I have one nagging concern about this bill. This bill would provide a direct line of communication between the adjutant general of the Missouri National Guard to the Governor such that decisions could be made without the involvement of significant bureaucracy. That sounds great unlessā¦the governor elected in the future is woke and redefines āconstitutional rightsā and ācivil liberties of Missouriansā to align with woke ideologiesā¦similar to the Presidential detainment of January 6 political prisoners for the past 2 years.
I need to think and pray on this one. Let me know your thoughts in the Comments.
Constitutional Convention Question - (Link)
First off, this is about the Missouri Constitutional Convention, NOT our Convention of States Resolution. Donāt mix up the two.
The link above goes to Brettās Blog, which does a terrific job of explaining what our ballot question of Constitutional Convention is and is not, and how it differs from the Article V Convention of States. It is concise and I recommend reading it through, which takes about 3 minutes.
Johnson County Emergency Services Board
I couldnāt find a lot of background information on this! If you have articles, thoughts, comments, about this tax increase, please put them in the Comments so others of us can learn from you!
Judges - (Link)
Take a look at your sample ballot for each judge and find out what court and district they represent. Then click on the link above, find that specific court and district, click on it, and read about the judge. You also can use your preferred search engine and type in the judgeās name, Missouri, court and district to see if you can find more info.
Happy researching my friends!!! Please put info you find in the Comments section so we can learn from each other! This has taken me several hours, so you may want to set aside 4 or more, 30+ minute time blocks to be sure you have the understanding you need to fully understand the person and issue.