Three Missouri lawmakers are leading a bipartisan effort to criminalize celebratory gunfire. Their bills would create what is called “Blair’s Law,” in honor of 11 year-old Blair Shanahan Lane, who was killed by an errant bullet fired during a 4th of July celebration in 2011.
Michelle Shanahan DeMoss talks to the House Committee on General Laws. (Photo: Mike Lear, Missouri House Communications)
Blair Shanahan Lane (courtesy; Michele Shanahan DeMoss)
Representative Schroer said as he was growing up his family sometimes went to the basement during times of celebration because guns were being fired into the air in the region.
Representative Sharp said between 6pm December 31 and 6am on January 1 in South Kansas City Missouri, at least 12 residences were hit by indiscriminate gunfire.
Captain Kari Thompson is the Assistant Division Commander for the Homeland Security Division of the Kansas City, Missouri Police Department. She said the legislation would make a common sense change in the law.
Representatives Mark Sharp (at left, holding newspaper), Rory Rowland (wearing mask), and Nick Schroer (right) have all sponsored a version of Blair’s Law. (Photo: Mike Lear, Missouri House Communications)
Blair was hit in the neck by a bullet fired by a Kansas City man, who pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter. He served 18 months in prison. Had one of these measures been in place he could’ve faced additional prison time for the charge it would create.
Victims of domestic abuse would be able to get lifetime orders of protection from abusers under a bill offered in the Missouri House.
Missouri law allows for orders of protection that last for one year. That means victims who want continued protection must go back to court annually to seek extensions. This forces them to repeatedly face their abuser and relive what they went through. Representative Lane Roberts (R-Joplin), former chief of the Joplin Police and director of the Department of Public Safety, says that’s wrong.
Lisa Saylor told House members this represents the paperwork she has accumulated since 2011, in dealing with the court system while working to protect herself from an abuser.
Janice Thompson Gehrke is a survivor and now works with and for victims. She told the House Committee on Judiciary people often ask her why they shake when they have to go to court, including the repeated appearances to renew an order of protection.
Representative Lane Roberts (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
Lisa Saylor told the committee that since 2011 she has spent more than $45,000 in court costs, in part from having to repeatedly renew orders of protection. If she doesn’t retain an attorney she runs the risk that her abuser could personally cross-examine her in a courtroom.
House members are renewing an effort to make sure all county and municipal jails provide free feminine hygiene products to the women they hold.
Federal and state institutions, as well as some local jails, already provide those products to female offenders at no cost. House Bill 318, sponsored by Representative Bruce DeGroot (R-Ellisville), would codify that requirement for state institutions, and county and city jails.
Representative Bruce DeGroot (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
Elizabeth Weiss, director of Missouri Appleseed, told the House Committee on Corrections and Public Institutions that the lack of proper products is a health concern. Women were making their own products, often using material like toilet paper rolls.
DeGroot noted that these health problems also increase the state’s costs for caring for incarcerated women, so passing this bill could save money for the state and local governments.
He believes the cost to the state to provide these products would be less than $200,000 a year.
The Special Committee on Government Oversight has heard that of roughly $150-million in overpayments, only a small portion – roughly a quarter or less – came from the state’s unemployment trust. State statute requires the Department to get that paid back.
Representatives Scott Cupps and Jered Taylor (photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
The larger portion comes from federal covid relief, the repayment of which the federal government has said states can choose to waive. Missouri Governor Mike Parson (R) has told his Department he wants it to be paid back.
The committee held a hearing on six bills – three filed by Republicans and three by Democrats – and a resolution filed by a Democrat, to deal with the issue.
The big question before lawmakers is whether to require that Missourians pay back overpayments out of the state fund. Committee members from both parties say they would like to waive all repayment, but some are questioning whether that can be done. They are unanimous about finding a way to waive the federal repayments, but some think the state portion might have to be recouped.
Shell Knob Republican Scott Cupps said a priority for the Department is to maintain the integrity of the state’s unemployment trust. His bill is one of those that would waive repayment of federal funds, but require Missourians to pay back state overpayments.
Cupps, who sits on the House Budget Committee, is one of those concerned that to waive the repayment of state benefits, the state would have to replenish the fund. This could come from other core budget functions, such as schools or transportation.
St. Louis Democrat Peter Merideth, also a Budget Committee member and sponsor of the resolution, noted that Governor Parson has proposed putting $500-million in federal CARES Act relief funds into the state’s unemployment trust. He suggests that would be a way to waive repayment of state overpayments while maintaining the fund.
Representatives LaKeySha Bosley, Ian Mackey, and Doug Clemens (photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
Five of the six bills filed are largely the same. Committee Chairman Jered Taylor (R-Republic), the sponsor of one of them, said his intention is to pare them down into one bill and to have the committee vote next week on that and the resolution.
How Missouri law dealing with orders of protection defines stalking only covers the following of a person or unwanted communication. Roberts’ proposal, House Bill 292, would broaden it to cover things like the use of cell phones, GPS, cameras, or third parties to observe, threaten, or communicate about or to someone.
The House Committee on Crime Prevention heard from Janice Thompson Gehrke. She about her experience being harassed by her ex-husband, who is now in prison for shooting his ex-fiancé and her boyfriend. This included sending his roommate to her workplace multiple times on the pretense of conducting business, having friends monitor her on social media, and using her information to have her phone spammed with contest and prize offers.
She spoke of another victim who is being harassed through threats on social media, but the law does not allow her to seek an order of protection because, as she put it, “it’s not technically him.”
Roberts has also filed a bill (House Bill 744) that would allow victims to seek a lifetime order of protection against an individual. Orders of protection are only valid for a year at a time. That has been referred to a committee.
He said throughout his career he was frustrated many times that he couldn’t do anything to help a victim of stalking and abuse, but one case frequently comes to mind in which a mother and elementary school-aged child were being abused.
House members from both parties are not happy that Missourians are being asked to pay back unemployment assistance they received in error through no fault of their own.
Department of Labor Director Anna Hui told the Special Committee on Government Oversight overpayments are “kind of built into” the unemployment system. The Department is expected to make an eligibility determination and get a payment out to an applicant within 14 days, generally based solely on information provided by the applicant. As additional information comes in, often from the applicant’s current or past employers, it could prove he or she was not eligible.
Missouri Department of Labor Director Anna Hui (photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
She said for 2020 that amounted to about $150-million in benefits that the Department paid out and now wants back.
Hui told the committee Governor Mike Parson (R) has made clear that he wants the Department to seek collection of those overpayments, viewing them as taxpayer dollars that went to ineligible individuals.
Several legislators said they have heard from constituents who have been asked to pay back thousands of dollars in state or federal relief, sometimes months after they received it. One constituent was asked to repay about $23,000.
St. Ann representative Doug Clemens (D) said for Missouri to ask people already struggling financially due to covid to pay back thousands of dollars is wrong.
Representatives, including Raychel Proudie (D-Ferguson), said the reasons given to individuals for their ineligibility were not always clear. She read a letter the Department sent to one of her constituents telling them they had to repay for a “miscellaneous reason.” Proudie called that “unacceptable.”
Members of the House Committee on Government Oversight, including (front row, from left) Reps. Tony Lovasco, Scott Cupps, Doug Clemens, (next row, from left) Richard Brown, Mark Ellebracht, and Raychel Proudie (photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
Federal directives have given states the option not to require repayment of assistance from the federal government, which makes up the majority of the $150-million the Department overpaid. Hui explained that Missouri is choosing to seek repayment of federal relief.
Proudie thinks the state shouldn’t be expending its resources to pull money from Missouri’s economy just to send it back to the federal government, and Representative Scott Cupps (R-Shell Knob) agrees.
The Department is required by state statute to collect overpayments out of the state fund.
Dan Thacker represents a union including about 500 school bus drivers and monitors. He said many of them make salaries that would put them near the poverty level, yet roughly 400 are being asked to pay back thousands of dollars.
St. Joseph Republican Bill Falkner said any legislative action will have to balance the waiving of repayment by Missourians with protecting businesses, as some of these overpayments are charged to them.
Committee members also spoke directly to Missourians during the hearing. Cupps said the repayment situation is adding to already heightened stress for struggling Missourians. He wants them to know he and other legislators are paying attention, and are looking for a solution.
Hui told the committee that Missouri is on pace to need a loan to support the state’s unemployment trust, likely by around June. She did not offer a projection of how great that loan might be. She said this could cause employers to have to pay more, as that loan is repaid.
Witnesses and lawmakers alike suggested that repayment decisions have seemed arbitrary and inconsistent, with some people being ordered to pay back only federal funds, some to pay back only state funds, and some told to pay everything or nothing.
Representative Michael O’Donnell (R-St. Louis) received Monday a promotion to Lieutenant Commander in the U.S. Navy, on the Missouri House Chamber floor. In front of his House colleagues, O’Donnell accepted the promotion in a ceremony that combined Navy traditions with House traditions.
It was conducted by Representative Mike Haffner (R-Pleasant Hill), a Navy veteran. House Speaker Rob Vescovo (R-Arnold) and Majority Floor Leader Dean Plocher (R-St. Louis) assisted in the ceremony.
Missouri House members are being asked to protect law enforcement officers and other first responders and their families by protecting the personal information of those individuals.
House Bill 59 has been called the “First Responders Protection Act.” It would bar counties from disclosing the address or personal information of law enforcement officers and first responders, upon their request. This would be directed at county clerks, collectors, treasurers, auditors, and recorders of deeds.
Representative Adam Schnelting (photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications, 03-10-2020)
It would also make illegal the “doxing” of those individuals; that is, the posting of such information on the internet with the intent of causing harm to them.
The bill’s sponsor, St. Charles Republican Adam Schnelting, said such information has been used to target law enforcement officers and their loved ones.
Dale Roberts with the Columbia Police Officers Association said Columbia officers have been targeted by those they’ve arrested.
“They track our officers down. They called our officers after being arrested and said, ‘I know your daughter, Amanda, goes to Grand Elementary School. I know you live at 309 Pine Street,’ and threaten the officers and their families,” Roberts told the House Committee on Public Safety.
“We go to work every day and we understand the responsibilities, the duties, and the dangers of our job,” said Missouri Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police president Rick Inglima. “A bill like this would be paramount in helping our officers protect themselves, to keep their information undisclosed – either online or by going through the county records, to keep our officers and their families safe.”
Backers said the legislation could save local law enforcement agencies money that is expended to protect officers who have been targeted due to access to their personal information.
The Recorders Association of Missouri testified against the bill. Speaking for the Association, Jessica Petrie stressed that it supports the intent of the legislation but implementing it wouldn’t be practical.
Petrie said with the range of capabilities and technologies across Missouri’s 114 counties and the city of St. Louis it is hard to predict what it would take – especially in terms of cost – for all of them to get software or other items necessary to comply with the requirements of HB 59.
The Missouri NAACP also opposes the legislation, saying it would create crimes and penalties redundant to current Missouri law. Sharon Jones with the Association joined the Recorders Association in suggesting that many of the bill’s goals could be met by extending to law enforcement officers the Safe At Home Program, which allows survivors of domestic violence and other crimes hide their address.
The bill’s supporters note that Safe At Home’s protections are not retroactive, so records already available through county offices would stay that way.
An ongoing discussion about security in the Missouri State Capitol continues next week when House committees will hold hearings on two bills.
One would move control of the Capitol Police from the Department of Public Safety to a new Capitol Police Board, made up of members appointed by the House Speaker, the Senate President Pro Tem, the Governor, the Chief Justice of the Missouri Supreme Court, and the chair of the State Capitol Commission. Another would allow the House Speaker and the Senate President to appoint marshals to provide security and other duties.
Representative Ron Hicks (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications, 05-14-2020)
House Bill 785, which would create the Capitol Police Board, is sponsored by St. Charles Republican Ron Hicks. He says legislators and other public officials in the Capitol have no control over the security.
Former Joplin Police Chief and Director of the Department of Public Safety Lane Roberts (R-Joplin) sponsors House Bill 784, which would create marshals for the House and Senate. He shares Hicks’ concern that the legislature has no control over Capitol security, and says the agencies responsible for that security are “fragmented.”
Lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle have been concerned about Capitol security for many years. Lee’s Summit Democrat Keri Ingle is beginning her third year in the House after working in many public buildings in her career dealing with child welfare and adoption. She said compared to other public facilities, Capitol security is lacking.
The hearing will come just shy of three weeks after people protesting against the confirmation of the Electoral College Vote that saw Joe Biden become President stormed the U.S. Capitol. Rumors and threats in recent weeks that some state capitols, including Missouri’s, would be targeted on the day of Biden’s inauguration, led to heightened security. No such additional attacks occurred.
Representative Lane Roberts (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications, 02-26-2020)
Hicks said the increased security during the inauguration of Governor Mike Parson (R) and again this week during President Biden’s inauguration highlights one of his main concerns.
Ingle said she has supported Hicks’ legislation in past years, but she and others in her caucus believe a new Capitol Police Board should include two additional members chosen by the minority leaders in each chamber.
A House Committee has voted to make adopting or fostering children in Missouri easier, with its support for two bills that are early-session priorities for chamber leadership.
The House Committee on Children and Families unanimously passed House Bill 429, which would authorize an income tax deduction for foster care expenses; and House Bill 430 which would expand the state’s existing $10,000 tax credit for the adoption of children with special needs to any adoption.
Representative Hannah Kelly (photo: Ben Peters, Missouri House Communications)
The proposed tax deduction for foster care would begin January 1 and continue for six years unless extended by the legislature. Parents who foster children for at least six months would be eligible for a deduction of up to $2,500, or $5,000 for a couple filing jointly.
Those who foster for fewer than six months could apply for a prorated deduction. Kelly said extending help to those foster parents is no less important.
Kelly said anything that makes it easier for a child in foster care to be adopted isn’t just good for that child, it makes financial sense for the state.
