Politics

Missouri lawmaker accused of ‘unlawful’ conduct in push for contract, drawing FBI scrutiny

Published

2 years ago

September 22, 2023

[ad_1]

The top Republican in the Missouri House is facing allegations he threatened to terminate the employment of a nonpartisan legislative staffer who resisted his monthslong push to hire a private company to manage constituent information.House Speaker Dean Plocher vehemently denies the accusations, which were uncovered through public records obtained by The Independent under Missouri’s Sunshine Law.But Dana Miller, chief clerk of the House since 2018 and a chamber staff member since 2001, wrote in an email to a GOP lawmaker last week about “threats made by Speaker Plocher concerning my future employment.”She wrote that Plocher made statements to her “connecting this contract with campaign activity” — suggesting the speaker’s motivation was his 2024 campaign for lieutenant governor — and expressed that she had “growing concerns of unethical and perhaps unlawful conduct.”Miller wasn’t the only legislative staffer expressing concerns. In another message obtained through the Sunshine Law, a House employee complained that the pressure for the contract was “insanely inappropriate” and would lead to more bad behavior if Plocher got his way.In a statement to The Independent, Plocher insists that every action he took while pushing for the House to consider contracting with a private company was “open and transparent in the interest of good government and delivering efficient services to Missourians.”He added: “No one has asked, received, nor will receive, any special treatment in regard to software contracts or any contracts while I am speaker.”In the short term, the issue is dead, as a legislative committee voted last week to stick with the free, in-house constituent management program already in use.But the saga’s fallout is far from over, and has drawn attention from federal law enforcement, with an FBI agent attending the legislative hearing last week where the idea was discussed.The FBI investigates public corruption, surveilling federal, state and local governments. A spokeswoman for the agency declined comment.‘He really wants it’Nine months ago, the House revamped the software legislative offices can use to contact constituents and assist them when they reach out to their representatives. The redesign came after a working group of legislative staff spent months developing new features in an effort to make it more user friendly.A Washington, D.C.,-based company called Fireside promised to provide a web-based program to replace the system at a cost of nearly $400,000 a year.The company, a subsidiary of the California-based FiscalNote, has contracted with more than 100 members of Congress — including half of Missouri’s delegation — along with state legislatures and local governments around the country.Plocher began advocating for making the change in May, soon after the legislative session adjourned for the year.Also working on Fireside’s behalf was Bardgett and Associates, an influential Jefferson City lobbying firm whose clients include some of the highest profile companies and civic organizations in the state — Anheuser-Busch, the St. Louis Cardinals, Republic Services and Evergy, among others.Rep. Dale Wright, a Farmington Republican who became chair of the House Administration and Accounts Committee this year, said in an interview last week that the speaker approached him about making the switch to Fireside because “he felt like we needed a more robust constituent management program.”And Plocher, Wright said, was very eager.“He really wants it,” Wright said. “He felt strongly that this would be good for the House and good for the members.”In his statement to The Independent, Plocher said “one of the House’s main priorities is to identify potential efficiencies and cost-savings in government to protect taxpayer resources.”Wright said he approached Miller with the idea, and she was hesitant. She informed him the current system was only a few months old, Wright said, and despite being recently revamped was being used by only a fraction of the 163 legislative offices in the House.But she agreed to attend a demonstration by Fireside in June, and soon after wrote a memo to Wright laying out possible concerns.The Fireside program could lead to lawmakers exporting data to use for campaign activity, Miller wrote in her memo, and switching from the current program housed on an internal server to a web-based program could leave constituent information vulnerable to hacking.But among her biggest concerns at the time was the cost for something the House was already providing for free.“The base quote for the proposed Fireside application would exceed $775,000 for the minimum two-year contract,” Miller wrote. “Outside of the Xerox printing services contract, this service would be the second-most costly outsourced expense.”Wright said he shared Miller’s concerns with Plocher.“I explained to the speaker that she doesn’t work for me,” Wright said. “I can’t force her to do anything. And he said, ‘Well, she does work for me.’”When he relayed the conversation to Miller, Wright said she may have taken Plocher’s response as a threat. But he insists he didn’t see it that way, and has never felt any inappropriate pressure from the speaker or the lobbyists involved in the Fireside contract.“I never felt any threat,” he said. “I don’t think she was threatened.”He said he also informed Plocher that despite his wishes, the contract could not move forward without a proper bidding process. And that moving forward quickly would be impossible without a supplemental budget appropriation.“We’d have to do three bids,” Wright said. “We have to do that.”‘The House isn’t for sale’

Tim Bommel

Missouri House Communications The Missouri House chamber during debate on March 12, 2023.

Over the course of the summer, records show staff were increasingly expressing concern about what was happening behind the scenes.In early July, a handful of lawmakers began submitting nearly identical letters to Wright’s office advocating for the Fireside contract. A draft of the letter, obtained through the Sunshine Law, shows it was originally sent to the lawmakers by an employee of Bardgett and Associates.“Two more letters. We’ve received five now… all pretty much the same form letter,” Danyale Bryant, legislative director for House administrations and accounts, wrote in an email to Wright.Wright wrote back to Bryant to say that there was no need to respond, as “I’ve always felt generic form letters, in most cases, don’t necessarily deserve a response, plus we don’t have enough solid information/direction to share.”On July 11, Miller reached out directly to Plocher in an email to him and his staff — explaining her resistance to the Fireside contract, voicing concern about the pressure to sign off on it and asking for his help putting an end to it.“Bottom line, this program is cost prohibitive, redundant and it is an unnecessary expense,” Miller wrote, adding that Fireside lobbyists have been “aggressively promoting this program, to the point that it is giving me cause for concern. I would appreciate your assistance in ensuring that this unsolicited pressure ceases.”There is no record of Plocher ever responding in writing. But Wright appears to have spoken with him soon after Miller’s message.In a July 18 email with his staff, Wright said Plocher “told me he would be reaching out to Dana when he returns from his meeting/vacation in Hawaii.”Wright’s own staff began expressing concern about the situation.“There’s literally zero valid reason for us to sign off on this and the fact that they just keep trying to push you into it is insanely inappropriate,” Bryant, who has worked for the House since 2015, wrote in a July 25 message to Miller.She later added: “The House isn’t for sale, and if we don’t stop it here there will be (hundreds) more lined up at the door to get in as well.”In late July, Miller cited the ongoing lobbying effort in deciding to share her memo laying out concerns with the Fireside program to the other members of the administration and accounts committee.Soon after, she shared the memo with all 163 members of the Missouri House.“My staff and I have been receiving inquiries from members who have been contacted by lobbyists promoting efforts to outsource our current constituent management program to a third-party vendor,” Miller said in an Aug. 8 email explaining why she was sending the memo.Holly Foster, a legislative assistant working for Republican Rep. Dave Griffith of Jefferson City, echoed some of Miller’s concerns, writing in a July 31 email that she worried about turning over constituent information to a private entity.“We deal with many personal issues daily and that information should not be accessed by anyone outside of this building,” she wrote.Several lawmakers responded, agreeing with Miller that there was no need for a change.“My father always told me to, ‘Dance with those that brung you,’” wrote state Rep. Travis Smith, a Republican from Dora. “Meaning stick with what you’ve got when you started. Would not make sense to change at this time.”‘Something doesn’t feel right about this’Despite the pushback from legislative staff, Plocher pressed ahead, presenting the idea to his GOP colleagues at the party’s annual summer caucus in August and asking Wright to hold a public hearing to consider switching to Fireside when lawmakers convened for a veto session in September.The day of the Sept. 12 hearing, Miller sent an email to Wright and his staff.“As you are aware, we have been engaged in ongoing conversations regarding efforts to outsource House constituent management services,” she wrote. “Despite providing concrete facts to you, Speaker Plocher and the members, these efforts have continued.”Miller wrote that she discussed her concerns with Wright on numerous occasions — both about the contract and the lobbying effort.“Since May,” she wrote, “we have also had over a dozen phone conversations regarding this matter, so at this point you are absolutely aware of my continued concerns about this company, the lobbyists that represent it, as well as the involvement of Speaker Plocher and the growing concerns of unethical and perhaps unlawful conduct.”In an email to The Independent, John Bardgett, president of Bardgett and Associates, decried the “shocking and false accusations” that “attack my, and my colleague’s, character and my firm’s reputation.”“Threatening individuals is not a very effective advocacy tool and not one that is employed or tolerated at our firm,” Bardgett said.Wright went forward with the hearing last week, and the idea of switching to Fireside faced pointed criticism from those who showed up to testify.“Something doesn’t feel right about this,” said Jason Moore, an information technology worker from St. Louis County who traveled to Jefferson City to testify. “We should table this. Now is not the time.”Bev Ehlen, a longtime conservative advocate, testified that she had real concerns about a private company having access to constituent data.“It’s not a wise thing to be spending $800,000 on something that may subject our data to eyes outside of Missouri,” she said.On a voice vote, the committee unanimously decided to stick with the in-house system for at least the next two years.In a statement to The Independent, Miller stood by her actions in opposing the contract and voicing concerns about the lobbying effort.“As an officer of the House of Representatives,” she said, “I take an oath to uphold the constitution, and this includes protecting the House as an institution. I take those responsibilities seriously.”This story was originally published by the Missouri Independent, part of the States Newsroom.

[ad_2]

Source link

Politics

Poll: Support for Missouri abortion rights amendment growing

Published

9 months ago

August 29, 2024

Natural Bridge

[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

Published

9 months ago

August 29, 2024

Natural Bridge

[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

Published

9 months ago

August 29, 2024

Natural Bridge

[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