The post Election in Night Missouri – Full Episode (Live 11/5/24) appeared first on The Missouri Times.

For cannabis advocates in Missouri, the petition making it in front of Missouri voters is the culmination of a process over a decade in the making.

Gridlocked in the Senate

As is the case in many states, the process of getting cannabis legalization on the ballot started with medicinal marijuana. Starting with former Rep. Kate Meiners’ filing of House Bill 277 in 2009, state legislators repeatedly tried to file and push medicinal marijuana bills through the House and Senate.

Progress was made in 2014, when Senate Bill 951, filed by former Sen. Jason Holsman, made it to a hearing in the General Laws Committee. The bill passed through the committee but was never voted upon on the floor.

Despite the encouraging progress, cannabis advocates later realized that medicinal marijuana wasn’t going to advance in the Senate, being blocked by several Republican legislators.

In 2018, Holsman attempted to add an amendment setting rules for medicinal marijuana to a bill regarding opioid prescription and lowering the age required to get certain vaccines. He was met with stark opposition.

Sen. Bob Onder, R-St. Charles County, immediately opposed the amendment in ’18, the Springfield News-Leader reported. Onder raised concerns about children ending up in hospitals with marijuana poisoning and accused Holsman of trying to “hijack a pharmaceutical bill.” No marijuana overdoses have ever been reported, according to a 2020 report by the DEA.

Later that year, Missouri voters passed medicinal marijuana after it made it onto the ballot via another initiative petition, with over 60% of voters voting yes.

“A long, arduous process”

Medicinal marijuana passing in 2018 was a big win for cannabis advocates all over the Show Me State. However, the path to full-blown legalization was not as easy as some might think.

“Things were going smoothly up until the pandemic,” John Payne, campaign manager of cannabis group Legal Missouri 2022 and co-author of 2018’s medicinal marijuana amendment said. “This was a long, arduous process.”

In order to get legal marijuana on the ballot, Legal Missouri 2022 and its volunteers needed signatures, which became significantly harder to get when the entire country went on lock-down. COVID-19-related setbacks aside, Payne thinks the delay in getting signatures had some positive impacts.

“I think there was a silver lining to all this,” Payne said. “I think we have made an improved version of this amendment.”

Those improvements include multiple protections for medicinal marijuana use, including protecting employees from termination if they use medical marijuana off-the-clock, as well as protecting parents who use medicinal marijuana. The system for medical cards was also improved, as they would last three years instead of one, but still cost $25, if the amendment passes in November.

The passing of marijuana legalization, which will be on the ballot as Amendment Three, would also provide the expungement of non-violent marijuana-related criminal records.

Still, even with an improved amendment and a history of support for cannabis reform, Legal Missouri 2022 needed signatures.

In Missouri, those seeking to get an amendment on the ballot through an initiative petition need a number of signatures in at least six of Missouri’s eight congressional districts that must equal at least 8% of the total votes cast in each district in the most recent election for Governor.

Amendment Three missed the mark in Congressional Districts four and eight, and got through on razor-thin margins in Congressional Districts six and seven.

Going into the final days of gathering signatures, Payne knew he and his volunteers needed to focus on Congressional Districts six and seven.

Payne remembers fondly the mass mobilization of volunteers to Springfield, Mo. the biggest population center in Congressional District seven in the waning days of signature collection.

“I remember driving through and seeing petitioners everywhere,” Payne said. “We have a bunch of people really committed to this.”

Legal Missouri 2022 turned in its initiative petition on the very last day, May 8, with enough signatures to get on the ballot. Payne seems bullish about Amendment Three’s chances come November.

“Other, non-liberal states have passed this (cannabis legalization),” Payne said. “This is an issue that voters support.”

“They’re not afraid anymore”

Amendment Three made it onto the ballot on the backs of volunteers. The mobilization of a large number of volunteers to garner signatures for the cause ultimately ended in a successful effort.

“It’s what the people want!” Paula Prentice, a volunteer with Legal Missouri 2022 and a board member for NORML KC, a non-profit cannabis reform group, said. “People were happy, happy to sign, happy to get medical options.”

Prentice’s grandson has autism, and her husband suffers from a spinal condition. She believes that the option to consume marijuana to relieve pain is a choice every Missourian deserves to be able to make.

“I’m doing this for everybody,” Prentice said of her cannabis advocacy. “Medical (marijuana) has opened up so many people’s eyes to what cannabis can do for you.”

Prentice is most excited about the improvements to the medicinal marijuana program entailed in Amendment Three. Her experience out knocking doors has led her to believe that medical marijuana has helped remove the stigma around cannabis and those who consume it.

“They’re not afraid anymore,” Prentice said. “They’re not saying ‘Oh — it’s just somebody wanting to get stoned’ … the fog is lifting there.”

Prentice pointed to the volunteers and Payne as a real bright spot of the campaign. Volunteers focused on talking to prospective petition supporters at their level, an approach she thinks became a real strength of Legal Missouri 2022 and its efforts.

“We just have a wonderful team,” she said. “I would do it again, no question.”

As voters wait for the general election in November, Payne and his volunteer team feel good about Amendment Three’s chances, but aren’t planning to get complacent after the long journey to get to this point.

“Medical marijuana passed with 66% of the vote,” Payne said. “That doesn’t mean we don’t have work to do.”

“I’m sure we’ll be out there soon enough,” Prentice said.

To read the full text of Amendment Three on the Secretary of State’s website, click here.

Featured Image Courtesy of Legal Missouri 2022.

Matthew McFarland

I’m a journalist hailing from the Detroit area. I love to tell investigative stories with a focus on everyday people.

You can contact me by email at matthew@missouritimes.com

The post “It’s what the people want!” Marijuana advocates feel bullish on ballot chances appeared first on The Missouri Times.

Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick had sued Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft over the proposed language earlier this year, calling it “erroneous and biased.” Amendment 1, which passed the legislature in May as HJR 35, would give Missouri’s state treasurer the ability to invest in certain municipal securities or in “other reasonable and prudent financial instruments and securities as otherwise provided by law” if approved by voters. 

The ballot language provided by the Secretary of State’s Office asks voters if they wish to: 

• • allow the General Assembly to override the current constitutional restrictions of state investments by the state treasurer; and
  • allow state investments in municipal securities possessing one of the top five highest long term ratings or the highest short term rating?

Additionally, the fair ballot language informs voters that a “yes” vote would: 

“[A]mend the Missouri Constitution to grant the General Assembly statutory authority to invest state funds and also expand the state treasurer’s investment options.  Currently the Constitution grants the General Assembly no statutory investment authority and limits the treasurer’s investment options.  This amendment will allow the General Assembly by statute to determine investment avenues for the state treasurer to invest state funds, as well as allow the state treasurer to invest in municipal securities.”

Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green certified the secretary of state’s ballot language and said it “fairly and sufficiently summarizes Amendment 1.” He did amend the fair ballot language for the no portion to say: 

“A ‘no’ vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution and limit the treasurer to investing state funds only in those investment options currently approved by the Constitution.”

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

“We are pleased that the court ruled in our favor and that the Fair Ballot Language is certified to be used at all polling places,” Ashcroft said in a statement. “This was ridiculous from the beginning. It was a complete waste of taxpayer funds in an attempt to force a specific voter outcome on the amendment. I am pleased that the court affirmed that our summary of what the amendment would do was fair and sufficient.” 

Mary Compton, a spokesperson for Fitzpatrick, said the office planned to appeal the decision.

“While the Treasurer is pleased the order made necessary changes to the fair ballot language that at least made it intelligible, we still believe the summary statement is unfair and will create a prejudice against the proposed amendment and the fair ballot language contains a plainly incorrect statement,” Compton said in an email. “As was always likely regardless of the initial outcome, this issue will be decided upon appeal.”

Fitzpatrick’s lawsuit had alleged the ballot language was “misleading and undeniably false” as the Missouri constitution already grants the treasurer “exclusive authority to invest state funds.” It also said the language would mislead voters to wrongly conclude the General Assembly would be the sole authority for determining investment opportunities for the state treasurer to utilize. 

The lawsuit said the use of the word “override” was “intentionally argumentative and likely to create a prejudice against the proposed measure.” 

This story has been updated to include a statement from the Treasurer’s Office. 

Kaitlyn Schallhorn

Kaitlyn Schallhorn was the editor in chief of The Missouri Times from 2020-2022. She joined the newspaper in early 2019 after working as a reporter for Fox News in New York City.

Throughout her career, Kaitlyn has covered political campaigns across the U.S., including the 2016 presidential election, and humanitarian aid efforts in Africa and the Middle East.

She is a native of Missouri who studied journalism at Winthrop University in South Carolina. She is also an alumna of the National Journalism Center in Washington, D.C.

Contact Kaitlyn at kaitlyn@themissouritimes.com.

The post Ashcroft prevails in treasurer’s legal challenge over ballot language appeared first on The Missouri Times.

With possible changes on the horizon amid a larger conversation about elections, here’s a look at Missouri’s initiative petition process and the proposed reforms.

How does the process work?

Initiative petitions must follow the single-subject rule and cannot change or enact more than one article to the state constitution. Petitions must not be used for unconstitutional purposes and are required to indicate a funding source. 

Petitioners must submit proposals to the Secretary of State’s Office along with information on its funding. The proposal is then sent to the Attorney General’s Office for review while the Auditor’s Office prepares a fiscal note. 

The Secretary of State’s Office has 15 days to accept or reject the proposal, with a summary statement due from the office within 23 days of its approval. The official ballot title is then approved and posted to the secretary of state’s website. 

Petition circulators, who must be registered with the state, collect signatures from registered voters with separate pages dedicated to signatures from only one county. Signatures must be delivered to the Secretary of State’s Office six months ahead of the election. 

Petition pages are then distributed to local election authorities to verify the signatures. Statutory changes require 5 percent of any six congressional districts to sign onto the petition, while constitutional changes require 8 percent of voters in six districts. 

A petition becomes a ballot measure once it is accepted for the ballot. Referendums passed by the legislature or approved by two-thirds of voters in each congressional district are also considered ballot measures once they reach that stage. 

The General Assembly must pass a referendum the same way it would a bill to get it to the ballot. Unlike legislation, the governor does not have the authority to veto a referendum passed by the legislature. 

Legislative proposals must be submitted to the Secretary of State’s Office within 90 days of the end of the session in which they were passed.

What changes have been proposed?

Several elections-related bills were sponsored during the 101st General Assembly in 2021, including a handful of proposed changes to the initiative petition process. One bill would have charged a $500 filing fee for initiative petitions, refundable if the petition is approved for circulation. Another measure sought to prohibit courts from modifying summary language approved by the General Assembly.

A proposed resolution would have required an amendment to the state constitution to receive a two-thirds majority vote for it to be approved and signatures from 10 percent of each congressional district to make it to the ballot. 

The proposals saw pushback from several groups, including former lawmakers and the ACLU of Missouri. 

“These bills would limit the power of the people to put initiatives on the ballot,” Mo Del Villar, legislative associate for the ACLU of Missouri, said. “Missourians have exercised this right for over 100 years, and through the process, we have moved the state forward through the expansion of Medicaid, Clean Missouri, the legalization of medical marijuana. We need all the tools available to push back.”

Several Republican lawmakers urged Gov. Mike Parson to call an extraordinary session to enact the proposals before the legislative session came to a close, but the chief executive has not done so. 

Despite stagnating this year, lawmakers convened committees during the interim to discuss the proposals. Ashcroft, a Republican, has spoken in favor of election reforms numerous times. 

“Our office believes that the constitution of the state should not be changed unless the people of Missouri broadly agree with that change,” Ashcroft previously said. 

The post Missouri’s initiative petition process: How does it work? appeared first on The Missouri Times.

An initiative petition filed in August seeks to prevent the state from authorizing or implementing vouchers or tax credits for tuition at non-public elementary or secondary education schools. The initiative petition would bar the implementation of programs previously passed by the legislature. 

It also would require the state school board to “implement and supervise a uniform method of evaluation and accreditation” that would apply to all public schools. 

Earlier this year, the legislature passed Rep. Phil Chrisofanelli’s education savings account bill. Education assistance organizations are required to distribute grants in a prioritized order for students with an approved individualized education plan (IEP) or who live in a household eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. 

The program is capped at $25 million in tax credits, was signed into law, and went into effect in August. 

Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick announced Monday he had hired Kim Baughman, previously with the Department of Economic Development, to oversee the new MOScholars program. 

The initiative petition was filed by Sherri Talbott, who previously served on the Missouri National Education Association (MNEA) board, on behalf of Taxpayers for Accountability. An August statement of committee organization filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission lists Talbott as the Taxpayers for Accountability’s treasurer. 

Hundreds of public comments on the initiative petition, provided to The Missouri Times, were critical of the changes it proposed and argued it could hinder both public and charter schools. The comments came from education advocacy groups as well as Missouri parents.

One Liberty resident said the ESA program would enable her grandchild to receive tutoring that is “desperately” needed.

“The uniform requirement of this initiative petition would significantly limit the ability of the State Board of Education (SBOE) to incorporate community input on the design and accountability standards for all public schools across the state,” said Robbyn Wahby, executive director of the Missouri Charter Public School Commission. “It would also limit local control of schools overseen by locally elected school boards or the nonprofit governing bodies of charter public schools sponsored by legislative-created bodies like the Commission.”

Talbott filed a lawsuit in mid-October challenging the Secretary of State’s Office ballot language for her initiative petition. That language says: 

Do you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to:

• • remove opportunities for disabled, special needs, and those students who are economically disadvantaged by eliminating public funding to non-public elementary and secondary schools through vouchers, tax credits, tuition subsidies and other funding for student attendance and staff employment;

• • limit the influence, power and authority of parents, community members and local school boards by requiring the state board of education to implement and supervise a uniform method of evaluation and accreditation for all public elementary and secondary schools who receive public funding including charter schools?

Neither Talbott nor an attorney who filed the lawsuit on her behalf responded to requests for comment. 

Legislators, parents defend ESA program

For Becki Uccello, a Springfield mother, the ESA bill will be a “godsend” for her daughter, Izzi, who has spina bifida and uses a wheelchair. She said the initiative petition would annul “all the progress in education Missouri has made this year,” noting her daughter has an approved IEP. 

“I know my voice is just one of thousands out there that want the best for our students, even as special interests try every trick in the book to block progress and trap students in failing schools,” Uccello said in an email. “If we don’t stand up and put the needs of every kid first, who will?” 

Uccello filed a motion to intervene in the case Tuesday afternoon on behalf of the proposed Keep the Promise group. 

“I am not surprised the same people that tried to keep our kids out of classrooms and promote [critical race theory] are now trying to put our state’s curriculum in the hands of the State Board of Education and attempting to kill a program designed to help children in need,” Sen. Cindy O’Laughlin, chair of the Senate Education Committee, said. 

Jean Evans with the Missouri Federation for Children argued Talbott’s initiative petition would strip control from local school boards. 

“If passed, this initiative would remove children, particularly low-to-middle income students and children with disabilities, from the schools of their dreams and return them to the failing school districts where they live,” Evans, a former state legislator, said. 

A survey of more than 1,000 likely 2022 general election voters conducted in mid-September by a school choice advocacy group found 50 percent would oppose a ballot initiative that would prohibit the implementation of the ESA program. The survey, shared with The Missouri Times, found 29 percent would support the measure while 20 percent were undecided. 

Additionally, 52 percent of respondents said they would oppose a ballot measure preventing vouchers or tax credits from providing tuition assistance for private or parochial schools. With that question, 32 percent of voters said they would support the measure while 16 percent remained undecided. 

The survey had a margin of error of +/-2.9 percent, the survey found 29 percent of likely voters would support the ballot initiative while an additional 20 percent were undecided. 

Education has underscored legislative activity and campaigns, in Missouri and across the U.S., this year — from navigating mandates amid the pandemic to defining and identifying critical race theory teachings in schools. Just this week, education was at the forefront of the closely-watched Virginia gubernatorial contest. 

“Last night in Virginia, the education establishment and their political allies were thoroughly routed by America’s new powerful special interest — the parents of children in public schools,” Christofanelli told The Missouri Times. “Today, those same people who were so roundly defeated are seeking to double down with a cynical ballot proposition designed to deprive low-income and special needs children of access to education alternatives. I have faith that Missouri voters will stand together with frustrated parents in protecting the critical advancements our state enacted this year through HB 349.”

The Missouri School Boards’ Association recently left the national organization after it referred to “domestic terrorists” in a letter regarding contentious school board meetings. The letter quickly drew condemnation by those who thought it likened parents concerned about mask mandates or the teaching of critical race theory as “domestic terrorists.” 

Kaitlyn Schallhorn

Kaitlyn Schallhorn was the editor in chief of The Missouri Times from 2020-2022. She joined the newspaper in early 2019 after working as a reporter for Fox News in New York City.

Throughout her career, Kaitlyn has covered political campaigns across the U.S., including the 2016 presidential election, and humanitarian aid efforts in Africa and the Middle East.

She is a native of Missouri who studied journalism at Winthrop University in South Carolina. She is also an alumna of the National Journalism Center in Washington, D.C.

Contact Kaitlyn at kaitlyn@themissouritimes.com.

The post Legislators, parents defend ESA program amid initiative petition battle appeared first on The Missouri Times.

Jefferson City will see a new .25 percent sales tax go toward salaries for the city’s police and fire departments beginning in April. The tax is expected to bring in about $2.8 million to be distributed between the two entities. 

The tax was approved by nearly 70 percent of the vote, according to unofficial results from the Cole County clerk. 

“Thank you Jefferson City for your support of our public safety!” Jefferson City Mayor Carrie Tergin said on social media following the results. 

James Noah, president of the Jefferson City Firefighters Local 671, said the increase would boost recruitment numbers and safety for the capital city and thanked voters for coming out to back the measure.

“The overwhelming support we routinely receive from the community on a day-to-day basis is amazing,” Noah told The Missouri Times. “The support for the passage of this tax will have a huge impact in ensuring a safer Jefferson City for years to come.”

Both departments reported a 24 percent retention rate last year, according to JC Citizens for Public Safety, a joint effort between the fire and police department that encouraged citizens to approve the measure. Jefferson City was the only community of its size in Missouri without a designated public safety tax, the group said. 

The average salary for a Jefferson City Police Department (JCPD) officer ranges from $40,000-$61,000 while Jefferson City firefighters average between $31,000-$46,000. Both averages are below salaries for departments of a similar size in the area, according to the group. 

Funds are also set to go toward equipment for police officers, including body cameras and network servers. JCPD is one of the only law enforcement agencies of its size in Missouri not to have body cameras for its officers, according to the group. 

The measure was backed by several community partners, including the Jefferson Area Chamber of Commerce. President and CEO Gary Plummer said public safety was a vital component of the local economy.

“We believe public safety is second only to education when it comes to economic growth,” Plummer told The Missouri Times this week. “Looking at some of the crime statistics and trends in Jefferson City and across the state, we thought it was time for the citizens of Jefferson City to come together and try to better support our public safety capability.”

Labeled Proposition 2, the measure was the only thing on the ballot in Cole County. Only Jefferson City voters were able to vote on the tax, and the county clerk reported 14 percent of registered voters weighed in at the polls Tuesday.

The post Jefferson City approves public safety sales tax  appeared first on The Missouri Times.

The question is whether a section in the Missouri Constitution restricting the use of public funds to support or oppose political candidates or ballot measures — with violators facing possible Class 4 election offense charges, fines up to $2,500, and jail time — violates municipal officials’ right to free speech based on content. The lawsuit was brought by officials from Maryland Heights and other communities in 2019. 

In April, Cole County Judge Cotton Walker sided with the local officials’ argument that the statute, which specifically targets “officers, employees, and agents” of a subdivision, violated the elected officials’ right to free speech, a focal point of Tuesday’s debate. He also said the language was overly vague in terms of what language defied the statutes.

The state appealed the case to the Missouri Supreme Court due to its focus on statutory language. 

Michael Talent with the Attorney General’s Office asked the high court to reverse the Cole County Circuit Court’s verdict. Talent said the state had full authority to prohibit the use of public funds to weigh in on ballot measures, arguing governmental speech is not covered under the First Amendment. 

“Government cannot speak except through its officials, and what those officials speak, they are speaking for that government. That’s what I think is worth noting, and officials don’t disagree with that,” Talent said. “They say, ‘This law goes further and applies to private speech, and that’s unconstitutional.’ Your honor, that’s not the case.”

Paul Martin, who represented the plaintiffs Tuesday, argued the law covered the use of public funds for political advocacy rather than general speech. He said communities often distributed educational materials to inform voters about issues on the ballot rather than persuade them how to vote. 

He also said officials may discuss election matters at publicly-funded local events geared toward other subjects, an action the local officials and Martin said should be allowed. 

“The state needs to establish a compelling interest, and the essence of the state’s case isn’t speech as regulated by the statute, it is the funding by the public of that speech,” Martin said. “The speech part is integral to the funding part, and without a speech that advocates, the funding is irrelevant.”

Both sides noted officials were allowed to discuss ballot measures on their own time or through personal social media channels. 

The 2019 legal challenge sought to clarify what speech is covered under the statute and assert that officials’ First and 14th amendment rights had been violated. Walker’s decision dismissed the declaration motion as moot.  

The Missouri Legislature passed a bill this session restricting school districts from using public funds for political action, a response to a separate lawsuit against the St. Joseph Public School District for its support of 2017’s right to work referendum. 

While justices questioned the impact of the new statute on Maryland Heights’ case, Martin said it didn’t affect the language in question. 

The Supreme Court has not set a deadline for a decision on the case.

The post Missouri Supreme Court considering officials’ ability to weigh in on ballot measures  appeared first on The Missouri Times.

Cole County Judge Jon Beetem said the Department of Social Services (DSS) cannot deny individuals who qualify under the expansion from enrolling in the MO HealthNet program. Additionally, those people cannot be subject to any additional restrictions or burdens than those already placed on Medicaid recipients. 

The expansion opens up Missouri’s Medicaid program to about 275,000 individuals in the state. It covers those making less than $18,000 per year and initially had an effective date of July 1. 

“The latest Republican attempt to block and delay Medicaid expansion has failed,” Senate Minority Leader John Rizzo said on social media. “Let’s be clear: Health care for working families is a good thing.” 

The state had asked for a two-month delay to ensure it had the adequate technology to handle the influx of recipients, but no such stay was included in Beetem’s two-page order. The Attorney General’s Office declined to comment. 

Late last month, the Supreme Court of Missouri unanimously remanded a lower court’s decision, saying the constitutional amendment expanding Medicaid did not appropriate money or hamper the legislature’s discretion in appropriating funds. 

“I’m gonna follow the law. I’ve always done that, and I’m going to continue to do that,” Gov. Mike Parson told reporters Tuesday morning. “We don’t have the funding to support it right now so we’ve got to figure out how we’re going to do that — whether we’re going to dilute the pool of money that we have now for the people that are on the program or how we’re going to move forward.”

Lawmakers in both chambers and on both sides of the aisle have speculated there’s enough money already appropriated for the Medicaid program until at least January when lawmakers will already be back in the Capitol and can pass a supplemental budget.

Rep. Rasheen Aldridge sent a letter to the governor asking for a special session to ensure enough money is appropriated to fully fund Medicaid to include the expanded population, however.

“[T]he people of this state cannot afford to wait a second longer for the realization of expansion after having their decision deferred by a government that occasionally seemed hellbent on undermining their choice,” Aldridge said. “We still have work to do on that front, given the majority’s limited funding for Medicaid in our state with the passage of the FY 2022 budget.”

“We have already put expansion off for too long, even before the drama of the last year. Medicaid expansion would have helped our state during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially benefitting people of color and Missourians who live in high poverty communities by providing greater access to much needed medical care.”

Beetem had previously deemed the 2019 Amendment 2 unconstitutional due to its lack of a funding source. The lawsuit brought against DSS, Acting Director Jennifer Tidball, and the MO HealthNet Division, among others, was filed in May on behalf of three single mothers who would be covered under the expansion. 

The order for Missouri to allow eligible Missourians to apply for Medicaid came on Missouri’s bicentennial.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Cameron Gerber contributed to this report.

This story has been updated. 

Kaitlyn Schallhorn

Kaitlyn Schallhorn was the editor in chief of The Missouri Times from 2020-2022. She joined the newspaper in early 2019 after working as a reporter for Fox News in New York City.

Throughout her career, Kaitlyn has covered political campaigns across the U.S., including the 2016 presidential election, and humanitarian aid efforts in Africa and the Middle East.

She is a native of Missouri who studied journalism at Winthrop University in South Carolina. She is also an alumna of the National Journalism Center in Washington, D.C.

Contact Kaitlyn at kaitlyn@themissouritimes.com.

The post Missouri must open Medicaid eligibility to expansion population appeared first on The Missouri Times.

When he inherited the leadership of the largest community college in the state in 2015, it was languishing. Pittman was the fifth chancellor in eight years. But since coming to St. Louis from Indiana, Pittman has deftly implemented his mission of stability and efficiency to St. Louis Community College (STLCC). 

The multi-million-dollar budget deficit has been erased, and today the budget stands balanced from a series of cost reduction efforts, including rightsizing staffing levels and eliminating administrative duplications. Since 2015, the college has reduced its expenses by $15 million, Pittman said. 

In an effort to streamline the community college process, Pittman introduced the school to the Guided Pathways model, an approach that connects students throughout the collegiate process to improve retention. 

“It’s removing barriers on the front end for students. It’s doing things like making the registration process simpler, helping students complete the FAFSA, getting them enrolled in the right classes that they need, assigning an education coach for the student as they go all the way through their educational journey,” Pittman said. “It’s not the old model of community colleges where you provide students with minimal advising throughout their time at the college.”   

Pittman was born and raised in Bloomfield, Indiana, a rural area close to a large Naval weapons manufacturing center that requires the types of workers the community college system trains. 

“I really like the system we have here in Missouri. While I was in Indiana, I started out as a teacher and faculty member. Eventually, I was chancellor of the Terre Haute region for 13 years,” Pittman said. 

In Missouri, the community college system is segmented into 12 districts. STLCC includes all of St. Louis city and county as well as small parts of adjoining counties. It has the largest taxing base of any community college in the state. Because of that and some effective budgeting, the system has been able to maintain a $122 credit hour for all courses — one of the lowest in the state. 

Pittman is famous for a quote too blunt to have been often heard in academia: “Unless you  hate money, why would you not go here?”

However, all of the innovations have not been focused on correcting the budget. STLCC has begun a series of partnerships to innovate its course offerings. 

It has upgraded its presence in state government, enabling the system to get several state grants and some from MoExcels. Gov. Mike Parson recently provided the college a $4 million grant for a new childcare center, removing a huge roadblock for students at the Forest Park Campus. But one of its most successful partnerships has been its relationship with LaunchCode, a company that provides IT training and is headquartered in St. Louis.

The partnership utilizes LaunchCode’s innovative curriculum and has allowed the college to train workers who are needed the day they graduate. The curriculum is taught over a 14-week period as a full-time cohort-based class. It starts off with 20 students and realizes an amazingly high graduation rate. It also provides students with transportation support and offers other measures of financial assistance if needed. 

There are approximately 2,000 coding position vacancies right now in St. Louis, and the partnership with LaunchCode will assist in filling these positions. 

 “Any community has to be ready when an economic development opportunity arises. Now more than ever, that means having the right workforce training facilities and programs,” said Rob Dixon, director of the Missouri Department of Economic Development. “Dr. Pittman understands that workforce training is the best economic development strategy there is.”

STLCC has also embraced a cohort system to help students not just in the classroom. 

“This is the model of wrapping support around students and having a defined pathway and cohorts — the value of students being together,” Pittman stated. “I can’t begin to describe the value of that.”   

STLCC is expanding health care services and food programs for students and developing family resource centers in an effort to put all those services into one place. STLCC has begun hiring social workers; as the college has never employed social workers in the past, it has started with hiring one for each campus to help students with life challenges.

“The dialog about social workers and student success coaches began a while back, and every year it’s just grown. These are the things that help a student with staying and completing.  When you have this coach that helps you along the way, that is what gets the student through and is successful,” said Kedra Tolson executive director of Marketing and Communications with STLCC. “With sustainability and leadership, you’re able to gain traction, and every year it grows and gets better.” 

A key goal of the entire leadership team is to show students how to make education a part of their life and not simply an added burden. 

That plan has focused on removing barriers on the front end for students. It has included making the registration process simpler, helping students complete the FAFSA, getting them enrolled in the right classes, and assigning an education coach for the student as they go all the way through their educational journey. It’s not the old model of community colleges where students have minimal guidance but a holistic design of assisting students with every part of their lives. 

The average community college student usually completes 15-18 credit hours too many for their program because they haven’t been on a Guided Pathway to stay on track. At STLCC, the health care programs are the most regimented, and these students graduate on time with the right credits — eliminating wasted time and costs. 

“We need to make all of our programming this efficient,” Pittman said. 

One area of growth within the college has been the increase in high school students earning dual credit. 

“We saw the relationship grow between school counselors and college administrators and the relationships gained with school systems,” said Tolson. “So when you start to talk about opportunities for kids it becomes, ‘We’re all on board with that; how do we make it happen?’”

“With our early college students, we found they should come in cohorts and not as individual students,” she continued. “It was nice that they came in groups so it would be this group of students that come together and carpool because that was the sense of safety some of the parents needed and wanted.”

When Pittman got to STLCC, he had employees work as a college to put together a strategic plan that has evolved over the years. STLCC recently completed a master facility plan that is comprehensive in nature and allows flexibility with what can be done with each campus.

“Dr. Pittman has proven to be an asset to St. Louis Community College as his innovative leadership has been so beneficial to his students and the community,” Rep. Jim Murphy said. “His dual enrollment program has given many high school students a very valuable head start.”

Those innovations and reforms — combined with the renewed confidence Pittman has instilled in the college — have led to Proposition R. 

The transformation has set the stage to do more with Prop R

All of the transformations of the past six years have led the St. Louis business community to encourage STLCC to increase its role in training the skilled workforce they are seeking. The end result is Prop R that is on the ballot this week. 

“We have the opportunity to be an area of real growth if we can prepare our workforce,” Pittman said. “Companies that consider moving here are asking, ‘Can we recruit the people that we need who are committed to the community?’ And I think the St. Louis Community College already has demonstrated a track record of achievement that’s very compelling.” 

Previously, STLCC’s district publicly-set levy was around 30 cents. A state law change lowered that without a vote of the district. Prop R would simply return that levy to just below what it was previously.

Dr. Mark Wrighton, chancellor emeritus of Washington University in St. Louis, has led the campaign for Prop R. 

“I’ve been involved in higher education for nearly 50 years. I believe the work that is being done by Dr. Pittman and STLCC is vital to our community to provide the workforce we need to grow, and I believe Prop R is the right investment in the future of the St. Louis area,” Wrighton said. 

Beginning in 2020, Wrighton was involved in a community-wide effort to consider how to bring about new jobs and inclusive economic growth. The initiative was originally led by business development organizations. The result of that work was to bring to the forefront the need for workforce development and a talented group of people to take the jobs. 

“We still have a large number of underemployed and unemployed people who can benefit enormously from the kind of education and training that takes place right here at St. Louis Community College. There are shortages, and I believe that in order for us to support the growth of businesses in this region and to attract new businesses, we have to be able to have a talented, diverse, and well-prepared workforce,” Wrighton said. 

“I’ve been involved in the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center that is today the No. 1 largest plant science start-up center in the world,” he continued. “They need educated [and] trained science technicians, and the community college partnered. Vincent Hill is a start-up community. It’s a so-called unicorn coming out of the Danforth Plant Science Center — a unicorn meaning it’s going to be valued at over $1 billion. Their corporate headquarters is out there in Creve Coeur right by the Danforth Plant Science Center. They already have significant employment. It’s biotechnology, and in order to prepare people to work in the biotechnology areas, you need specialized facilities. The community college on each of its four campuses with Proposition R will have the opportunity to enhance their facilities and prepare for this expanded employment opportunity in biotechnology.”

With an 8 cent increase, Prop R is estimated to add $24 million to the college’s budget annually. The current levy is set at just less than 20 cents, and Prop. R would raise it to 28 cents — making it still one of the lowest in the state for community colleges. 

“If Prop R were to pass, this would modernize the campuses with expanded programs in health care, IT, financial services, biotechnology, and manufacturing, and will enable a bonding capacity of $350 million,” Wrighton said. “The support that comes in the short run will enable the college to modernize outdated facilities … and redevelop campuses in the next four or five years. There will be many jobs that are created in the construction sector. A lot of redevelopment will take place as the current campuses need to be updated to provide students with real-world work environments.”

“Supporting Proposition R is an easy choice when I consider Chancellor Pittman’s leadership of the community college. Dr. Pittman has demonstrated a bold vision for innovation. He’s aggressively sought and embraced new models of education and job training that push outside beyond conventional programs,” said LaunchCode Executive Director Jeff Mazur.  “He’s led the college to be a genuine partner and investor in accelerated, accessible non-credit opportunities like the ones our organizations work on together which is aimed squarely at solving a huge regional talent problem. St. Louis is fortunate to have Dr. Pittman helping shape the workforce at a pivotal moment for our community.”

Thus far, the business community hasn’t just encouraged STLCC to grow its degree programs. It has put its money where its mouth is. Several big employers such as Enterprise, Centene, Ameren, Washington University, and St. Louis University have contributed to the campaign. Almost every building trade has signed on. Mercy Hospital made a large donation last week. 

“There is an education gap, and if we don’t close it, we can’t be competitive as a region. It is really is a critical thing. That’s why I got involved in this, and the chancellor has inspired our community to know how important the community college is in closing this gap,” Wrighton said. 

Scott Faughn

Scott Faughn is the publisher of The Missouri Times, owner of the Clayton Times in Clayton; SEMO Times in Poplar Bluff; and host of the only statewide political television show, This Week in Missouri Politics.

The post St. Louis Community College’s run of success has it poised to meet labor shortage with Prop R appeared first on The Missouri Times.

Specifically, the Supreme Court of Missouri unanimously remanded a lower court’s decision and said the constitutional amendment did not appropriate money or hamper the legislature’s discretion in appropriating funds — which would have been unconstitutional. The expansion opens up MO HealthNet to about 275,000 lower-income Missourians. 

The issue of implementation is back in Cole County Circuit Court next week. 

“We’ve got to figure out a solution. I don’t think this is something we can sit on for months and say we’re not going to do anything,” Parson told The Missouri Times in an interview. “It was a unanimous decision on the Supreme Court which pretty well tells you, like it or not, that’s the decision, and we’ve got to figure out how to deal with that.” 

“My biggest concern is we don’t want a judge making all those decisions for the legislative body and for the executive branch,” he continued. “I think it’s important that we take some sort of action, and the legislature will have to be involved in that process.” 

Parson said there would need to be a concrete solution in place if he was to call legislators back to Jefferson City for a special session. But lawmakers in both chambers and on both sides of the aisle are speculating there’s enough money already appropriated for the Medicaid program until at least January when lawmakers will already be back in the Capitol and can pass a supplemental budget. 

“If the department is compelled through judicial action to implement and enroll benefits toward the expansion program, they’re going to have to pay for it out of money appropriated for other populations in the Medicaid program,” House Budget Chairman Cody Smith said Thursday. “That means they will run out of money much sooner than they would normally, and unless they cut Medicaid rates or shoehorn the benefits into the amount appropriated — which means cutting services to someone somewhere — they’re going to have to ask for additional appropriation for additional benefits.”

Smith said in recent years lawmakers have been able to pass supplemental budgets toward the start of the legislative session. 

Senate Minority Leader John Rizzo was averse to the idea of a special session to appropriate additional funding if the department can hold off until a regular session — especially considering the proclivity for special sessions to go off-topic. Rizzo said he’s been given information pointing to funding lasting until January or February. 

“You need to expand. The people want that; the courts have clearly paved the way to do that,” Rizzo said. “You definitely have this bigger pool of people who are eligible.”

Missourians voted to become the 38th state to expand its Medicaid program in August 2020, moving to cover more than 270,000 people who earn less than $18,000 a year. Despite several attempts, the legislature did not approve a dedicated fund before passing its budget.

During his State of the State address earlier this year and in his budget recommendations to the General Assembly, Parson said he believed in “uphold[ing] the will of the voters.” However, he dropped the plans to expand it after the legislature did not proffer funding. 

Smith said the governor was “now in a difficult place between two branches of government” and vowed to work with him on a solution. 

“I find it absurd that the seven people in Missouri who think that we did appropriate money for Medicaid expansion are the seven members of the Missouri Supreme Court,” Smith said. “From the legislature’s perspective, we’ve spoken on this, and obviously we’ve been through a lengthy debate and process.” 

The expansion had been slated to take effect July 1.

Kaitlyn Schallhorn

Kaitlyn Schallhorn was the editor in chief of The Missouri Times from 2020-2022. She joined the newspaper in early 2019 after working as a reporter for Fox News in New York City.

Throughout her career, Kaitlyn has covered political campaigns across the U.S., including the 2016 presidential election, and humanitarian aid efforts in Africa and the Middle East.

She is a native of Missouri who studied journalism at Winthrop University in South Carolina. She is also an alumna of the National Journalism Center in Washington, D.C.

Contact Kaitlyn at kaitlyn@themissouritimes.com.

The post Parson hopes for swift action on Medicaid expansion appeared first on The Missouri Times.