Politics
Kansas City mayor warns against Amendment 4 on police funding

[ad_1]
Missouri Amendment 4 affects local funding and state oversight for Kansas City police. Supporters say “adequate funding is needed” to keep the community safe, but Quinton Lucas, who has served as the city’s mayor since 2019, opposes the proposed amendment because it “takes power” from local officials. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.GREGORY HOLMAN, KSMU NEWS: Kansas City, Missouri Mayor Quinton Lucas, welcome to Ozarks Public Radio.QUINTON LUCAS, KANSAS CITY MAYOR: It is great to be with you.KSMU: Let’s get right to it. We’re here to talk about voting on Amendment 4 to the Missouri Constitution. This is a proposed amendment that would affect the Kansas City police department and its minimum funding. Every eligible voter in Missouri is going to have the chance to vote on this Amendment on August 6.Now before we ask any questions, Mayor Lucas, let me just start by reading the ballot language for our listeners. I’m quoting from sample ballots.“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to authorize laws, passed before December 31st, 2026, that increase minimum funding for a police force established by a state board of police commissioners to ensure such police force has additional resources to serve its communities?“This would authorize a law passed in 2022 increasing required funding by the City of Kansas City for police department requests from 20% of general revenue to 25%, an increase of $38,743,646, though the City previously provided that level of funding voluntarily. No other state or local governmental entities estimate costs or savings.”So that’s the question all Missouri voters are being asked on their ballots for August 6.Mayor Lucas, tell us about your views on Amendment 4. Why should people in the Ozarks and all around Missouri care about this issue?LUCAS: Well, you know, it is on the ballot in the Ozarks and all around Missouri. So it is important to make sure a voice is heard from everyone. And I think that the biggest threat to somebody in the Ozarks or somewhere, anywhere else outside of Kansas City, is that the state could do the same thing to you. This is a ballot question that asks in no unclear way, basically, to control the Kansas City Missouri budget. It asks for the statewide voters to say that Kansas City needs to spend more on this one area of its budget, not spending more on certain areas that we fund all the time, like healthcare, paying for firefighters, paying to fix our roads, and paying to address core basic issues. And it takes that power out of the city council and out of the mayor’s office, and having an ability to do so. So I think the real reason somebody should care is if you’re worried about Jefferson City, bureaucrats, bureaucrats anywhere telling you what to do, then this is the very type of question that does just that. And that’s why I’ll be voting no.KSMU: I want to ask you about the perspective on Amendment 4 from folks who disagree with you. One of the main backers of Amendment 4 is State Senator Tony Leutkemeyer. Now as many of our listeners know, the Senator is a Republican, you’re a Democrat, but the Senator is a Republican from the 34th District close to Kansas City.And Senator Leutkemeyer wrote an opinion piece about Amendment 4 in the Kansas City Star on July 2. He wants Missourians to vote for the amendment. He accused your administration of trying to defund the Kansas City police department by tens of millions of dollars back in 2021 and writes that Amendment 4 would “stabilize the KCPD budget.” What’s your response to this type of argument?LUCAS: Yeah, I mean, Tony is just sadly wrong. First of all, when I became mayor, the KCPD budget, our police budget in Kansas City, was $261 million. Now it is $317 million. That is a substantial percentage increase over where it was before. I also, just last year, raised police salaries by 30%. And so this isn’t an issue of funding of the police. I have, Kansas City has, consistently supported police funding. We just want to be able to be like every other city in Missouri, and be able to make these determinations based on our own budgeting, based on our own negotiations, and frankly, based on being able to have some accountability. In what world do you say you get a blank check, and we can’t ask any questions about how you spend your money? That’s exactly what this ballot question is about. You know currently in Kansas City, we have a 911 call-taker crisis where there are people — happened to my own family — who call 911 and have to wait on hold for five minutes. Some people as long as 10 minutes. And that has happened to thousands of Kansas Citians. Under our current system, the city council, the mayor, others, can’t push the police to do anything different about it. Whereas what I want to do is say, heck, I want to give you money targeted to that very issue, so that you can hire more call-takers, so you can have more efficient operations there. This question precludes us from doing so. That’s how it’s a bad idea. And that’s just one example. And so I would respectfully disagree with the senator. We spent a whole lot of money to support our police. We’ve increased it every year I’ve been in office, and I’ve been in office for nine years now [Editor’s note: That includes Lucas’s time as a city council member and mayor]. And I think we’ll continue to — we just want to be able to have good conversations, good accountability. And unlike the senator, who was running for reelection when this last came up — and I think that was a big part of why this was introduced — I’m somebody who’s term-limited, and I’m just saying this for the best interest of Kansas Citians long-term.KSMU: I think it’s fair to say that a lot of folks living in rural Missouri are likely to take a view that Kansas City — and St. Louis, for that matter — have pretty severe crime problems and that even more state oversight and police spending is needed. What’s your reaction to that sort of Back the Blue viewpoint?LUCAS: You know, I think my view is that if you can absolutely Back the Blue, you can absolutely be supportive of them, but also believe in local oversight. Just think about this: Do you want the mayor of Kansas City—? I’m Quinton Lucas, I’m a left-of-center guy and all of that, but do you want me running your local police department? If I run for governor one day, and I’m able to get elected, do you want me a bunch of my friends, a bunch of bureaucrats in Jefferson City, telling you and your community what to do? What’s the priority? How much people need to get paid? Should you put more money into this category or another? That’s where my concern is. I think about my children, I think about the people in this community who deserve that voice. So it isn’t just saying that, you know, Kansas City will be safer, because frankly, under current state control of policing, it’s not. We break homicide records under the control of a board, four of whom are appointed by the governor of Missouri, only one comes from the people of Kansas City, and that’s the mayor. And I think, frankly, long-term, we will be in a better position if you have a closer connection between law enforcement and the people of Kansas City. So, I think it’s kind of a sheep in wolf’s clothing that, you know, you’re dealing with this thing, wolf in sheep’s clothing, rather, where you’re dealing with this thing, that seems kind of nice, right? We’re just gonna pay for the police more. But instead, what it actually is doing is saying you have no control. The state has control over how you’re going to spend your money. And if you want to make a change to it — too bad.KSMU: Now, you alluded to some of the history and context here, and I want to ask about that. Back in 2022, Missouri voters passed Amendment 4, but in April of this year, Missouri Supreme Court rejected those results — I’m quoting from coverage by KCUR over in Kansas City that the state supreme court “ruled that the original ballot measure was so inaccurate that it ‘actually misled voters.’” What’s your view on that?LUCAS: You know, my view is that that was a very wise decision. And I was sad that we had to get there. I am somebody who doesn’t like to file lawsuits against the state. I don’t like to have to get into these battles. But it’s about fundamental fairness for our voters. They tried to rush a question onto the ballot, they tried to rush a question on making it seem like it was just free. And I think a lot of people said understandably, ‘wait, we can get more good stuff for no cost. That’s really cool.’ At least this time around, and I think it was rushed on the ballot again, after the Supreme Court decision. The — at least this time around — people get to see there will be a fiscal impact on Kansas City, we will lose our ability to spend $40 million a year on almost anything else. And I think that is something that, to me, is fundamentally challenging with having this type of provision. And don’t get me wrong — maybe we will elect to spend $100 million more on police services. But Kansas Citians go to the ballot, they vote for people. That’s how we should have things done in a representative democracy. What we shouldn’t have is state bureaucrats telling us what to do.KSMU: Now if you spend $100 million more, we may call you back for another interview. [Mayor Lucas laughs.] But this is the last question for this one. Can you compare and contrast, briefly — if Amendment 4 passes, what can folks expect with Kansas City policing? Or if voters reject it this time, what’s going to happen?LUCAS: Well, here’s the thing, if Amendment 4 passes, what you are going to see is a status quo, and to some people, things staying the same, status quo, sounds good. To the people of Kansas City, it doesn’t. And the last four years, we have broken our city’s homicide record, twice — twice. We have a higher number of murders than we have ever had in the history of this city. In the past four years, we have had a homicide-department, a 911 call-taker crisis, where people are waiting on hold. Status quo, not accountability, is not good for the people of Kansas City. And I would submit to you, is not good for the people of Missouri. As you might have seen after the shooting at the Chiefs Super Bowl parade, a great event, lots of Missouri dignitaries, including the governor of Missouri were there. The state legislature canceled session that day. We had a mass shooting, where 24 people were injured one woman lost her life. That’s not a status quo I want in Kansas City, and it’s not a status quo I want the state of Missouri. That’s why I think a vote no is the right one to break that type of status quo around us now.
[ad_2]
Source link
Politics
Poll: Support for Missouri abortion rights amendment growing

[ad_1]
A proposed constitutional amendment legalizing abortion in Missouri received support from more than half of respondents in a new poll from St. Louis University and YouGov.That’s a boost from a poll earlier this year, which could mean what’s known as Amendment 3 is in a solid position to pass in November.SLU/YouGov’s poll of 900 likely Missouri voters from Aug. 8-16 found that 52% of respondents would vote for Amendment 3, which would place constitutional protections for abortion up to fetal viability. Thirty-four percent would vote against the measure, while 14% aren’t sure.By comparison, the SLU/YouGov poll from February found that 44% of voters would back the abortion legalization amendment.St. Louis University political science professor Steven Rogers said 32% of Republicans and 53% of independents would vote for the amendment. That’s in addition to nearly 80% of Democratic respondents who would approve the measure. In the previous poll, 24% of Republicans supported the amendment.Rogers noted that neither Amendment 3 nor a separate ballot item raising the state’s minimum wage is helping Democratic candidates. GOP contenders for U.S. Senate, governor, lieutenant governor, treasurer and secretary of state all hold comfortable leads.“We are seeing this kind of crossover voting, a little bit, where there are voters who are basically saying, ‘I am going to the polls and I’m going to support a Republican candidate, but I’m also going to go to the polls and then I’m also going to try to expand abortion access and then raise the minimum wage,’” Rogers said.Republican gubernatorial nominee Mike Kehoe has a 51%-41% lead over Democrat Crystal Quade. And U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley is leading Democrat Lucas Kunce by 53% to 42%. Some GOP candidates for attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer have even larger leads over their Democratic rivals.
Brian Munoz
/
St. Louis Public RadioHundreds of demonstrators pack into a parking lot at Planned Parenthood of St. Louis and Southwest Missouri on June 24, 2022, during a demonstration following the Supreme Court’s reversal of a case that guaranteed the constitutional right to an abortion.
One of the biggest challenges for foes of Amendment 3 could be financial.Typically, Missouri ballot initiatives with well-funded and well-organized campaigns have a better chance of passing — especially if the opposition is underfunded and disorganized. Since the end of July, the campaign committee formed to pass Amendment 3 received more than $3 million in donations of $5,000 or more.That money could be used for television advertisements to improve the proposal’s standing further, Rogers said, as well as point out that Missouri’s current abortion ban doesn’t allow the procedure in the case of rape or incest.“Meanwhile, the anti side won’t have those resources to kind of try to make that counter argument as strongly, and they don’t have public opinion as strongly on their side,” Rogers said.There is precedent of a well-funded initiative almost failing due to opposition from socially conservative voters.In 2006, a measure providing constitutional protections for embryonic stem cell research nearly failed — even though a campaign committee aimed at passing it had a commanding financial advantage.Former state Sen. Bob Onder was part of the opposition campaign to that measure. He said earlier this month it is possible to create a similar dynamic in 2024 against Amendment 3, if social conservatives who oppose abortion rights can band together.“This is not about reproductive rights or care for miscarriages or IVF or anything else,” said Onder, the GOP nominee for Missouri’s 3rd Congressional District seat. “Missourians will learn that out-of-state special interests and dark money from out of state is lying to them and they will reject this amendment.”Quade said earlier this month that Missourians of all political ideologies are ready to roll back the state’s abortion ban.“Regardless of political party, we hear from folks who are tired of politicians being in their doctor’s offices,” Quade said. “They want politicians to mind their own business. So this is going to excite folks all across the political spectrum.”
[ad_2]
Source link
Politics
Democrat Mark Osmack makes his case for Missouri treasurer

[ad_1]
Mark Osmack has been out of the electoral fray for awhile, but he never completely abandoned his passion for Missouri politics.Osmack, a Valley Park native and U.S. Army veteran, previously ran for Missouri’s 2nd Congressional District seat and for state Senate. Now he’s the Democratic nominee for state treasurer after receiving a phone call from Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ Carnahan asking him to run.“There’s a lot of decision making and processing and evaluation that goes into it, which is something I am very passionate and interested in,” Osmack said this week on an episode of Politically Speaking.Osmack is squaring off against state Treasurer Vivek Malek, who was able to easily win a crowded GOP primary against several veteran lawmakers including House Budget Chairman Cody Smith and state Sen. Andrew Koenig.While Malek was able to attract big donations to his political action committee and pour his own money into the campaign, Osmack isn’t worried that he won’t be able to compete in November. Since Malek was appointed to his post, Osmack contends he hasn’t proven that he’s a formidable opponent in a general election.“His actions and his decision making so far in his roughly two year tenure in that office have been questionable,” Osmack said.Among other things, Osmack was critical of Malek for placing unclaimed property notices on video gaming machines which are usually found in gas stations or convenience stores. The legality of the machines has been questioned for some time.As Malek explained on his own episode of Politically Speaking, he wanted to make sure the unclaimed property program was as widely advertised as possible. But he acknowledged it was a mistake to put the decals close to the machines and ultimately decided to remove them.Osmack said: “This doesn’t even pass the common sense sniff test of, ‘Hey, should I put state stickers claiming you might have a billion dollars on a gambling machine that is not registered with the state of Missouri?’ If we’re gonna give kudos for him acknowledging the wrong thing, it never should have been done in the first place.”Osmack’s platform includes supporting programs providing school meals using Missouri agriculture products and making child care more accessible for the working class.He said the fact that Missouri has such a large surplus shows that it’s possible to create programs to make child care within reach for parents.“It is quite audacious for [Republicans] to brag about $8 billion, with a B, dollars in state surplus, while we offer next to no social services to include pre-K, daycare, or child care,” Osmack said.Here’s are some other topics Osmack discussed on the show:How he would handle managing the state’s pension systems and approving low-income housing tax credits. The state treasurer’s office is on boards overseeing both of those programs.Malek’s decision to cut off investments from Chinese companies. Osmack said that Missouri needs to be cautious about abandoning China as a business partner, especially since they’re a major consumer of the state’s agriculture products. “There’s a way to make this work where we are not supporting communist nations to the detriment of the United States or our allies, while also maintaining strong economic ties that benefit Missouri farmers,” he said.What it was like to witness the skirmish at the Missouri State Fair between U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley and Democratic challenger Lucas Kunce.Whether Kunce can get the support of influential groups like the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which often channels money and staff to states with competitive Senate elections.
[ad_2]
Source link
Politics
As Illinois receives praise for its cannabis equity efforts, stakeholders work on system’s flaws

[ad_1]
Medical marijuana patients can now purchase cannabis grown by small businesses as part of their allotment, Illinois’ top cannabis regulator said, but smaller, newly licensed cannabis growers are still seeking greater access to the state’s medical marijuana customers.Illinois legalized medicinal marijuana beginning in 2014, then legalized it for recreational use in 2020. While the 2020 law legalized cannabis use for any adult age 21 or older, it did not expand licensing for medical dispensaries.Patients can purchase marijuana as part of the medical cannabis program at dual-purpose dispensaries, which are licensed to serve both medical and recreational customers. But dual-purpose dispensaries are greatly outnumbered by dispensaries only licensed to sell recreationally, and there are no medical-only dispensaries in the state.As another part of the adult-use legalization law, lawmakers created a “craft grow” license category that was designed to give more opportunities to Illinoisans hoping to legally grow and sell marijuana. The smaller-scale grow operations were part of the 2020 law’s efforts to diversify the cannabis industry in Illinois.Prior to that, all cultivation centers in Illinois were large-scale operations dominated by large multi-state operators. The existing cultivators, mostly in operation since 2014, were allowed to grow recreational cannabis beginning in 2019.Until recently, dual-purpose dispensaries have been unsure as to whether craft-grown products, made by social equity licensees — those who have lived in a disproportionately impacted area or have been historically impacted by the war on drugs — can be sold medicinally as part of a patient’s medical allotment.Erin Johnson, the state’s cannabis regulation oversight officer, told Capitol News Illinois last month that her office has “been telling dispensaries, as they have been asking us” they can now sell craft-grown products to medical patients.“There was just a track and trace issue on our end, but never anything statutorily,” she said.
Dilpreet Raju
/
Capitol News IllinoisThe graphic shows how cannabis grown in Illinois gets from cultivation centers to customers.
No notice has been posted, but Johnson’s verbal guidance comes almost two years after the first craft grow business went online in Illinois.It allows roughly 150,000 medical patients, who dispensary owners say are the most consistent purchasers of marijuana, to buy products made by social equity businesses without paying recreational taxes. However — even as more dispensaries open — the number available to medical patients has not increased since 2018, something the Cannabis Regulation Oversight Office “desperately” wants to see changed. Johnson said Illinois is a limited license state, meaning “there are caps on everything” to help control the relatively new market.Berwyn Thompkins, who operates two cannabis businesses, said the rules limited options for patients and small businesses.“It’s about access,” Thompkins said. “Why wouldn’t we want all the patients — which the (adult-use) program was initially built around — why wouldn’t we want them to have access? They should have access to any dispensary.”Customers with a medical marijuana card pay a 1% tax on all marijuana products, whereas recreational customers pay retail taxes between roughly 20 and 40% on a given cannabis product, when accounting for local taxes.While Illinois has received praise for its equity-focused cannabis law, including through an independent study that showed more people of color own cannabis licenses than in any other state, some industry operators say they’ve experienced many unnecessary hurdles getting their businesses up and running.The state, in fact, announced last month that it had opened its 100th social equity dispensary.But Steve Olson, purchasing manager at a pair of dispensaries (including one dual-purpose dispensary) near Rockford, said small specialty license holders have been left in the lurch since the first craft grower opened in October 2022.“You would think that this would be something they’re (the government) trying to help out these social equity companies with, but they’re putting handcuffs on them in so many different spots,” he said. “One of them being this medical thing.”Olson said he contacted state agencies, including the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, months ago about whether craft products can be sold to medical patients at their retail tax rate, but only heard one response: “They all say it was an oversight.”This potentially hurt social equity companies because they sell wholesale to dispensaries and may have been missing out on a consistent customer base through those medical dispensaries.Olson said the state’s attempts to provide licensees with a path to a successful business over the years, such as with corrective lotteries that granted more social equity licenses, have come up short.“It’s like they almost set up the social equity thing to fail so the big guys could come in and swoop up all these licenses,” Olson said. “I hate to feel like that but, if you look at it, it’s pretty black and white.”Olson said craft companies benefit from any type of retail sale.“If we sell it to medical patients or not, it’s a matter of, ‘Are we collecting the proper taxes?’ That’s all it is,” he said.State revenue from cannabis taxes, licensing costs and other fees goes into the Cannabis Regulation Fund, which is used to fund a host of programs, including cannabis offense expungement, the general revenue fund, and the R3 campaign aiming to uplift disinvested communities.For fiscal year 2024, nearly $256 million was paid out from Cannabis Regulation Fund for related initiatives, which includes almost $89 million transferred to the state’s general revenue fund and more than $20 million distributed to local governments, according to the Illinois Department of Revenue.Medical access still limitedThe state’s 55 medical dispensaries that predate the 2020 legalization law, mostly owned by publicly traded multistate operators that had been operating in Illinois since 2014 under the state’s medical marijuana program, were automatically granted a right to licenses to sell recreationally in January 2020. That gave them a dual-purpose license that no new entrants into the market can receive under current law.Since expanding their clientele in 2020, Illinois dispensaries have sold more than $6 billion worth of cannabis products through recreational transactions alone.Nearly two-thirds of dispensaries licensed to sell to medical patients are in the northeast counties of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake and Will. Dual-purpose dispensaries only represent about 20 percent of the state’s dispensaries.While the state began offering recreational dispensary licenses since the adult-use legalization law passed, it has not granted a new medical dispensary license since 2018. That has allowed the established players to continue to corner the market on the state’s nearly 150,000 medical marijuana patients.But social equity licensees and advocates say there are more ways to level the playing field, including expanding access to medical sales.Johnson, who became the state’s top cannabis regulator in late 2022, expressed hope for movement during the fall veto session on House Bill 2911, which would expand medical access to all Illinois dispensaries.“We would like every single dispensary in Illinois to be able to serve medical patients,” Johnson said. “It’s something that medical patients have been asking for, for years.”Johnson said the bill would benefit patients and small businesses.“It’s something we desperately want to happen as a state system, because we want to make sure that medical patients are able to easily access what they need,” she said. “We also think it’s good for our social equity dispensaries, as they’re opening, to be able to serve medical patients.”Rep. Bob Morgan, D-Deerfield, who was the first statewide project coordinator for Illinois’ medical cannabis program prior to joining the legislature, wrote in an email to Capitol News Illinois that the state needs to be doing more for its patients.“Illinois is failing the state’s 150,000 medical cannabis patients with debilitating conditions. Too many are still denied the patient protections they deserve, including access to their medicine,” Morgan wrote, adding he would continue to work with stakeholders on further legislation.Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service covering state government. It is distributed to hundreds of newspapers, radio and TV stations statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation, along with major contributions from the Illinois Broadcasters Foundation and Southern Illinois Editorial Association.
[ad_2]
Source link
-
Politics2 years ago
Prenzler ‘reconsidered’ campaign donors, accepts vendor funds
-
Board Bills1 year ago
2024-2025 Board Bill 80 — Prohibiting Street Takeovers
-
Business3 years ago
Fields Foods to open new grocery in Pagedale in March
-
Board Bills3 years ago
2022-2023 Board Bill 168 — City’s Capital Fund
-
Business3 years ago
We Live Here Auténtico! | The Hispanic Chamber | Community and Connection Central
-
Entertainment1 year ago
OK, That New Cardinals/Nelly City Connect Collab Is Kind of Great
-
Entertainment3 years ago
St.Louis Man Sounds Just Like Whitley Hewsten, Plans on Performing At The Shayfitz Arena.
-
Politics1 year ago
Illinois residents can submit designs for the state’s new flag