House answers Jackson Countians’ call to elect their assessor

      Jackson County residents are angry and frustrated by skyrocketing property tax bills, and the Missouri House has responded, voting toward a restoration of accountability to the office of the county’s assessor.

Representative Dan Stacy (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      Jackson County, since a voter-approved measure was passed more than a decade ago, is the only charter county in the state whose assessor is appointed rather than elected.  The County’s assessments have been the subject of criticism and anger for months, as property values have increased by about 40-percent since the last assessments were done in 2021.  The situation has earned criticism from the state auditor and is the subject of a lawsuit filed by the attorney general.

      The House last week approved putting to voters a measure to reverse their earlier decision.  HJRs 68 & 79 propose an amendment to Missouri’s Constitution to restore the requirement that Jackson County’s assessor be elected. 

Representative Ingrid Burnett (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      It is proposed by Blue Springs Republican Dan Stacy.

      “In 2023 Jackson County had over 50,000 appeals of real estate assessment value.  Actually, 54,539 appeals.  That’s almost one out of every five parcels filed an appeal in Jackson County,” Stacy told his colleagues. 

      “Many people in Jackson County, Missouri, believe that their tax assessor is not accountable to the people of Missouri.  HJR 68 & 79 simply removes the carve-out and special treatment of Jackson County, and provides the Jackson County citizens the opportunity to elect their county assessor just like other charter counties, and all other second, third, and fourth-class counties in Missouri.”

      Representative Robert Sauls (D-Independence), who like Stacy, represents a portion of Jackson County, said idealistically he would prefer not to have the entire state voting on an issue specific to Jackson County, but he supported these Resolutions.

      “We have got a situation where property tax has become extremely high and people are asking for help,” said Sauls.

      Another Jackson County representative, Ingrid Burnett (D-Kansas City), was among the few who voted against the measures.

      “Our Jackson County Assessor, current assessor, was handed a mess.  It was a mess, the way that the county personal property taxes were being assessed,” said Burnett.  “For this body to decide that the rest of the state should decide how Jackson County manages their personal property taxes is just bad policy.”

      In response, Stacy reminded his colleagues, “Just keep in mind that 97-percent of Jackson County residents, when polled, said they want an elected assessor.  I ask my fellow legislators to support House Joint Resolutions 68 and 79 to give the citizens of Jackson County the same privilege that every other charter county and all smaller counties have in Missouri:  an elected tax assessor.”

      The House voted 116-10 to advance the measure.  It now goes to the Senate.  If approved there, it would go to voters on a statewide ballot. 

House plan to create mental health courts advancing

     A House committee has advanced a plan to create treatment courts in Missouri that would focus on mental health issues, and offer offenders treatment options as an alternative to incarceration.  Its bipartisan supporters say it would be a meaningful expansion of the state’s successful treatment courts. 

Representative John Black (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      The mental health courts that would be created by House Bill 2064 would be similar to the already existing veteran courts, DWI courts, drug courts, and family treatment courts.  In each of those, a defendant must go through a regimen of relevant treatment programs.  Those who succeed, or graduate, can avoid prison time or having a crime appear on their record.  

      “The goal is that they receive treatment to help them overcome, have the tools that they are now aware of, that they’ve experienced, which they have available to them to maintain a lifestyle without the problems that haunted them,” said Representative John Black (R-Marshfield), the bill’s sponsor. 

      He said this would be a continuation of the existing treatment courts, which are widely viewed as an achievement by Missouri’s legal system and a cost-effective way to avoid incarceration.  They allow offenders a chance to remain connected to and active in their communities while working and remaining with families.  They are also associated with reductions in crime and the need for foster care, and with ensuring timely payment of child support. 

      Black noted that perhaps most importantly, “The percentages of those folks who are able to avoid recidivism … with those folks who have actually completed the treatment courts, are very impressive.”

      The proposal is one recommendation to come from the Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention Task Force, created under legislation passed in 2019 and chaired by Black.  That task force sought to get a handle on what is happening throughout the state of Missouri and across all agencies, to deal with substance abuse issues. 

      One of its recommendations was to see that existing treatment courts receive more funding, as well as the creation of mental health treatment courts. 

      Black said among the existing treatment courts there is already a lot of overlap with mental health.  

      “In fact, it’s called, ‘co-occurring disorder,’ and if put the mental health courts in the statute, specifically, then they’re also available for funding.  There are some people who are in jail and have a mental health problem and they’re there for that problem, when in fact it is a co-occurring disorder involving substance abuse.  This just allows a more comprehensive treatment.”

      Black said such courts would likely rely heavily on counseling that is specific to a given defendant’s circumstances, “and it is a tough program.  It’s not something that’s easy.  They have to invest a lot of effort in completing the program, so if there was a co-occurring problem – substance abuse would be the most likely – then the persons in that program would be referred not only to mental health professionals but also those folks that could help them with their substance abuse problem.”

      The bill has been unanimously endorsed by the House Judiciary Committee, where it was praised by members of both parties.  Ranking Democrat Representative Robert Sauls (Independence) said this is a subject that needs more attention.

      “I can unequivocally say that we do not do enough to address mental health in this country or this state.  I’ve seen it time and time again.  I’ve seen it as a prosecutor, as a public defender, I’ve seen situations where people, quite frankly, possibly, wouldn’t have committed crimes if situations were addressed prior to,” Sauls said.

      For any who question the effectiveness of the treatment courts Missouri already has, or the desire to expand on them, Black said one need only be present at a graduation.   He called them, “inspiring, humbling, you see people who are there fully acknowledging that the program has turned their life around for themselves and their families.  They show great gratitude to the elements of the treatment courts, including the prosecutor’s office, they usually organize the effort … it’s one of the things Missouri is doing well.”

House panel asked to stem ‘medical kidnappings’ by the state

      A House committee has been presented with stories of a parent’s nightmare:  children being taken by the state based on false suspicions of parental abuse.  Legislators are being asked to address the issue, but finding a balance is difficult when the safety of children is at stake.

Representatives Jamie Gragg and Holly Jones (Photo: Mike Lear, Missouri House Communications)

      The stories shared some similarities.  Parents take a child to a doctor for care for a broken bone.  A medical professional suspects the parent of abuse and contacts the state.  The state takes the child and its siblings from the parents. 

      Months or more go by.  Eventually, a medical diagnosis reveals an explanation for the broken bones that doesn’t involve abuse.  After many frustrating circumstances, much heartache, and the passage of a lot of time, parents and children are reunited, but there are no apologies and much, much damage has been done.

      “The bigger picture, again, is:  we don’t have any rights at all, as soon as anybody says, ‘This is abuse,’” Rebecca Wanosik told the House Committee on Children and Families. 

      Wanosik was one of those who shared her ordeal with the Committee, as was Tessa Gorzik.

      Gorzik said, “It’s not a one-time thing and you’re done, whether you are convicted of it or not, or accused of it or not.  It’s ‘you’re guilty’ from day one and you have to fight your whole entire life to get those allegations overturned when there should have never been allegations from the get-go if they had done their job appropriately from the get-go.”

     This is what Representatives Holly Jones (R-Eureka) and Jamie Gragg (R-Ozark) are trying to address with House Bills 2690 and 2691.  They are proposing that when a child is placed into 24-hour protective custody due to suspicion of child abuse, custody cannot be extended if a parent or other authorized guardian presents proof that contradicts the allegation of abuse. 

      Jones said it would allow a parent to present a second opinion.

      “There are children that have never been diagnosed [with diseases that can cause injuries that resemble abuse], so there’s no proof to be had, as of yet.  That’s the spirit of the bill, is to be able to offer parents an option when some of these medical conditions could be happening and they’re being accused of child abuse when no such abuse is occurring.”

      Wanosik said such provisions would have saved her a great deal of pain. 

      She said five of her children were taken from her in 2015 when the youngest, then nine weeks old, was found during a doctor visit to have three rib fractures and an arm fracture.  She said her family was denied second opinions and denied access to her child’s medical records. 

      While her children were in state custody, the infant developed more fractures.  Rather than see this as a possible sign that the parents weren’t responsible, the state said the parents could have caused these new fractures during visits, despite those visits being supervised.

      Eventually, a medical diagnosis revealed another explanation for the injuries, but the allegations did not go away.

      “They ruled by a preponderance of evidence that my baby was clearly a victim of child abuse and neglect but they couldn’t pin a perpetrator, and then they gave me my children back,” said Wanosik.  “It’s very common, actually, because you’re not held to the same standard [of] the criminal court and there was never enough evidence for us to be criminally charged,” so they just kept running us through the family court system.”

      Now, Wanosik is the Treasurer for a group called Fractured Families, a group that advocates for situations like hers.  

      “I wholeheartedly believe that [HBs] 2690 and 2691 are going to open up the gateway to at least provide protection for families in the fact that we [could, if it passed,] access the child, the [medical] records.”

      The Committee’s members responded favorably to the proposals but expressed concern that the language needs to be refined. 

      Ferguson Representative Raychel Proudie (D) said it’s unclear to whom any kind of proof of a medical condition would need to be presented.

      “You’re at my house, I’m about to go to jail, you’re about to take my kids, I have the proof, who do I show?  Do I show the police?  The nurse?  It’s the weekend.  It’s a Saturday.  Court’s closed.  My kid has been in your possession now for over 24 hours and I don’t know to whom I am showing this proof.  How do we remedy that?”

      The Missouri Network Against Child Abuse (formerly Missouri KidsFirst), an entity respected by many lawmakers when considering child abuse legislation, spoke in opposition to the bills.  Its Executive Director, Jessica Seitz, said the bills focus on one piece of an abuse allegation.

      “In the overall investigation of an allegation of abuse, the medical opinion is not the arbiter, the decider of the outcome.  It is one part of the investigation.”  

      Further, Seitz said the “proof” the bill centers on is not defined, calling the language, “vague and problematic, and being unspecified puts us at risk of a child being left in an unsafe situation.”

      Seitz challenged the premise of the bill, that there is a need for a state law to allow parents to get a second opinion when they are being investigated for child abuse.

      “A second opinion is always welcome in the court process, but just introducing a second opinion as a part of the overall investigation … should not short circuit the process and mandate the outcome, introducing one factor in the overall investigation.  We risk putting our kids in danger.”

      However, Seitz emphasized respect for the efforts of Jones and Gragg, saying she wants to work with them to improve the system.

      Jones said she remains adamant that something must change, because the damage done to children and their families when the state takes children away is long-lasting and runs deep.

      “That’s one of the reasons why we’re trying to move forward with this bill so quickly, is that our foster care system is not only so overrun and it’s such a huge part of the children and families organization throughout the state, this is really going to cut back on the mental health issues and the trauma to families,” Jones said.

      Committee member Ed Lewis (R-Moberly) acknowledged Seitz’s concerns but told her, “We are going to move forward with this bill, if I have anything to say about it, but you need to be a part of the picture.  Your organization needs to be a part of the picture because if you’re not, it’s not going to be the balanced, thread-the-needle approach that has to happen so that we both protect those children who are actually being abused and … I would say [just] as important, [is] protecting those families and those parents and those children who aren’t being abused but get caught up in the system.”

      Gragg echoed Lewis’ sentiment, telling the committee he knew addressing this issue would be challenging.

      “There’s a very fine line that we’re trying to close the gap on, from protecting the kids that need protecting … and also not taking advantage, or overstepping, with those [cases of children with parents] that are falsely accused of something.  We’re trying to narrow that gap, and the problem with that narrow line, that fine line, is it ain’t straight.  That is for sure.”   

House bill would increase cap on popular food pantry tax credit

      House members are being asked to increase the cap on a successful benevolent tax credit that supports organizations that help the state’s homeless population. The sponsor says donors who apply after that cap is reached are being penalized.

Representative Phil Amato (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      Representative Phil Amato (R-Arnold) is the volunteer President of the Board for a food pantry in Arnold, and he said organizations like that one have benefitted greatly from the food pantry tax credit.

      “It has worked so well it has exceeded its cap,” Amato told the Special Committee on Public Policy. 

      This tax credit has been in existence since 2013.  It allows Missouri taxpayers who make donations to food pantries, soup kitchens, or homeless shelters to deduct an amount equal to half that donation from their state taxes.

      The program is capped at $1.75 million.  Amato said in the last few years Missourians have been donating enough to reach that cap.  What happens to donors after that, he said, is alarming.

      “The donor gets a letter from the Department of Revenue that says we’re disallowing some of your tax credit and you need to make a remittance for the amount of money that we’re disallowing, and you owe us penalty and interest, on a donation,” Amato said.  “When I tell that to people around the House, they’re shocked.”

      His House Bill 1730 would increase the cap to $3 million annually.  It would also extend its expiration date from the end of 2026 to the end of 2030.

      Committee member Mark Sharp (D-Kansas City) was one of those who expressed support for the expansion.

      “We have a food pantry in my district called Community Assistance Council, and they provide food, clothes, really kind of a one-stop shop … it’s just really important that we try to support these organizations.  They really are impactful to our communities,” Sharp said.

The committee voted in favor of the increase, 6-0.

House approves multi-pronged human trafficking legislation

      The state House has approved a comprehensive plan for combatting human trafficking in Missouri.  The bill brings together the efforts of several lawmakers, and its sponsor says it is just his opening volley.

Representative Jeff Myers (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      Representative Jeff Myers (R-Warrenton) told colleagues that the state has got to think of human trafficking in terms broader than those by how it is defined.  He said it goes beyond, “using fraud, force, or coercion to exploit a person for labor, services, or commercial sex.”

      A partial list of its other forms includes, “Escort services; illicit massage, health, and beauty; outdoor solicitation; residential sex trafficking; domestic work; bars; strip clubs; cantinas; pornography; traveling sales crews; restaurants and food services; peddling and begging; agricultural, personal sexual servitude; and health and beauty services, and that’s just the top half, but most of those involve one aspect of sex trafficking and/or labor and sex trafficking.”

      Myers, a retired Highway Patrolman, said he launched the effort that became House Bills 1706 & 1539 at the end of the 2023 legislative session. 

      “Last session when I walked out of here I reached out to contacts that I’d made when I was on the Patrol, law enforcement, and also others I’d met during last session and I asked them once simple question:  what are some of the thing that you think will help stop this … what will start to make a dent?  And the result is this piece of legislation that I’m presenting now.”

      His legislation would require regular training in sex trafficking for EMTs, paramedics, nurses, prosecuting attorneys, juvenile officers, social workers, and law enforcement officers.  The bill would establish, “a steering and vetting committee to make sure that this training is tailored and effective, and adapts over time.”

      Myers said the training this bill would require is vitally important, as it reflects a recent and important shift in attitudes throughout the country about how first responders should interact with sex workers.

      “After having some training on that, there’s a paradigm shift that occurs.  Me, as a law enforcement officer, when I contact somebody who’s a potential victim of this, instead of treating her like a criminal, it’s a victim.  I’m now offering, extending, ‘Hey, I can be of assistance.  I can be an outlet.  If there’s anything that you need or if you’re looking to get out of this lifestyle, I can help you,’ and that’s a bit of a paradigm shift that what law enforcement used to do with prostitution.”

      First responders and medical personnel are often the first people trafficking victims have a chance to talk to after becoming victims, who aren’t exploiting them and who might offer them a chance for escape, but by the time of that interaction victims are often already too traumatized or brainwashed to ask for help.  Myers said this training, in part, focuses on recognizing a victim and how to offer help without further endangering them.

      “Eighty-five percent of the people that are recovered … the folks that were recovered, rescued out of that … came in contact with one or more of those professions on a regular basis.  Juvenile officers; nurses, especially; and social workers get disclosures from people being trafficked.  The part that’s in there for the training, what that does is allow for a digital format to be pushed out and distributed that gives folks awareness training, but not only that, the skills to handle that,” Myers said.

      The provision in this legislation that is the most personal for Representative Jeff Coleman (R-Grain Valley) is one he has sponsored for the past two years. 

Representative Jeff Coleman (Photo: Missouri House Communications)

      It would allow courts to enter into evidence recordings of statements made by a victim of trafficking or sex crimes up to the age of 18, an increase from the age of 14 in current law.  Allowing these recorded statements spares victims from another occasion having to relive their experience, this one in a courtroom in front of their abuser.   

      In the year since Coleman first offered that bill, it took on new meaning for him.

      “It became extremely personal to me because I had an unfortunate position where my daughter got molested by my son-in-law.  Not his wife, but my youngest daughter; his sister-in-law.”

      The intent of Coleman’s bill was always to spare victims, who already have to revisit the trauma of what they’ve been through multiple times as a case goes through the courts.  Now he has a much deeper understanding of what they face.

      “The first thing my 15-year-old daughter had to do was go to the hospital and get a rape test.  She was there for eight hours getting probed and … all kinds of things that I won’t even tell you, eight hours.  The next thing, she had to do a forensic interview, and that took another three hours … so she’s reliving it every time that she has to go do something,” Coleman said.  “Then she had to talk to the prosecutor’s office and that was another hour-and-a-half interview, that she had to explain all over again, what happened.”

      Coleman implored his colleagues, who approved this provision last year 149-2, to vote for it again this year on behalf of people like his daughter.     

      “I appreciate the votes that we got last year on this House floor, and I would just ask that you would once again please understand that these victims are victimized over and over and over again until this thing goes away … it’s a long process.”

      The bill would also build on an effort that began in 2022, with legislation carried by Moberly representative Ed Lewis (R).  It created The Statewide Council on Sex Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation of Children. 

      Its goals included making sure that the state understands how big of a problem trafficking in Missouri is, and looking for ways to combat it.

      “Three years ago when I asked [The Department of Social Services] how many people were being trafficked, they couldn’t give me a number; how many have you had that were in foster care that were being trafficked, and they couldn’t give me a number.  So, we made some structural changes there, with creating a position inside the DSS, got the funding for that and got that put into place,” Lewis said.

Representative Ed Lewis (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      HBs 1706 & 1539 seeks to extend that effort by creating the “Statewide Council against Adult Trafficking and Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children,” which will be very similar to the Statewide Council (for/on) Minor Sex Trafficking, except that it will fall under the authority of the Attorney General’s Office.

      “I think that will help because [the Attorney General] will coordinate between all of these organizations, bring it all together to make sure that we have a robust response from the State of Missouri against minor sex trafficking,” said Lewis.

      The legislation would increase from 15 to 17 the age a victim must be in order for an abuser to be charged with enticement of a child. 

      It would also would establish restitution to be paid by those guilty of trafficking and sex crimes as specified by the bill, in the amount of $10,000 in restitution per identified victim and $2,500 for each county in which an offense or offenses occurred.

       That restitution would to go support local rehabilitation services for victims including mental health and substance abuse counseling; education; housing relief; parenting education; vocational training.  It would also back local efforts to prevent trafficking, including education efforts and efforts to expand law enforcement efforts targeting trafficking. 

      “This is a highly lucrative business … and people are the commodity, and when the trafficker’s done, they discard the person, whether it’s to overdose or whatever.  That’s why the restitution piece of this bill provides money for psychological counseling, medical care, job training, housing, so they can get back up on their feet and get back into the community,” Myers said.

      HBs 1706 & 1539 passed out of the House 143-1 after several legislators expressed, passionately, how badly they want to see Missouri combat trafficking. 

      Rogersville Representative Darrin Chappell (R) said in his time as a city administrator in Chillicothe, Bolivar, and Seymour, this issue caused him more stress than any other.

      “It was those children who I knew were suffering, but they lived just outside our jurisdiction.  They would come to our schools, we would know what was going on in their homes, we saw the horror stories being played out in our lives, and because they were outside of our jurisdiction there was nothing we could do,” Chappell said.  “I believe with all my heart we need to protect our citizens from this absolute travesty that we see in our society today, known as human trafficking, and I encourage everybody to support this bill with me today.”

      While this legislation is on its way to the Senate, Myers is already thinking about his next effort.

      “This was an issue that, when I was in my previous career, I found out [about this] later on, and it became a passion, to do something about, so this is the first installment.”

House committee votes to save expiring diaper bank tax credit

      A tax credit that legislators say has proven “vital” to the state’s diaper banks, and to the families that rely on those banks, is set to expire in August.  A possible extension has been advanced by a House committee.

Representative Mark Sharp (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      The diaper bank tax credit was passed in 2018.  It allows Missouri taxpayers to claim up to half of their donations to a diaper bank against what they owe in state taxes, up to $50,000.  101 House members supported it in 2018.

      Representative Mark Sharp (D-Kansas City) said the diaper banks that operate in Missouri have come to rely on the support this tax credit generates, and he urged his fellows to advance this extension “so that our diaper banks across the state can continue to do the great job they’re doing with getting millions of diapers to underserved communities.”

      Representative Ashley Bland Manlove (D-Kansas City) is the ranking Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, who heard the bill.

      “I, myself, have gone to buy boxes of diapers to donate … and these boxes are like 30, 40 bucks and up, and babies [need a lot of diapers],” said Bland Manlove.  “While we have been on the trend of extending the benevolent tax credits and raising their caps, I hope we can do the same with this one, too.”

      Legislators say access to diapers has many repercussions for a family.  This includes being the difference between a baby being healthy or suffering serious and even life-threatening medical issues and between a parent or parents landing and maintaining employment or having to stay home due to lack of childcare. 

      “You don’t want to be that family or that parent that can’t have diapers available, and these diaper banks and these partners of diaper banks in these communities, places like Community Assistance Council in South Kansas City, make it possible for families that don’t have access,” Sharp said.

      His bill, House Bill 2384, would extend that tax credit’s expiration date from August 28 of this year to August 2030. The committee advanced it 9-0.

Plan to flatten rates for inmate phone calls endorsed by House panel

      A House committee has advanced a proposal to set a flat rate on how much inmates are charged to make phone calls home from the state’s jails and prisons, to promote family communication even during times of incarceration.

Representatives Aaron McMullen and Michael Davis (Photos: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      “Right now there’s no set standard,” according to Independence Republican Aaron McMullen.  “It’s just a patchwork of whatever the county or local [government bids] it at.”  

      According to data presented to the House Committee on Corrections and Public Institutions, some facilities are charging more than $1 a minute for a phone call, and on average, a 15-minute phone call costs $5.74.  One study found that more than one-third of families with incarcerated relatives went into debt due to the costs of keeping in touch with those loved ones. 

      McMullen and Kansas City Republican Michael Davis are sponsors of a proposal to cap the cost to inmates at $.12 per minute.  Davis said their plan for facilities in Missouri is based on how the federal government regulates calls from correctional centers that cross state lines.

      “The federal government can regulate interstate calls, but they don’t have the ability to regulate intrastate calls,” Davis explained to the Committee.  “What our bill does is, we apply the regulation that the federal government is applying … to interstate calls at the rate for correctional centers, which is $.12.” 

      The pair said their goal is to keep families in contact even during periods of incarceration.  They said children who have limited contact with incarcerated parents have an increased risk of self-harm and suicide, and incarcerated parents who have contact with children are less prone to substance abuse or reoffending, upon release. 

      “There’s just a lot of good data that suggests that this is the right way to go and reduces recidivism, and increases and protects the families,” McMullen said. 

      They said many families with incarcerated loved ones are poor, and high phone rates over the course of a year can amount to a third or more of a family’s income at a time when one of its providers is already absent.  

      A similar bill last year was approved by the committee 9-0.  Committee members discussed possibly adding a cap on the cost of inmate email communications to this proposal.

      Their proposals are House Bill 1679 (Davis) and House Bill 2169 (McMullen).