Vote No On Prop B Election Scam

propb1Proposition B is a Rex Sinquefield measure to reduce voter turnout for School Board Elections and Charter Amendments. The proposal only moves election of Mayor, Comptroller, Board of Aldermen President, and Aldermen to State/Federal Elections, leaving School Board, Community College Trustee, and Ballot Issues for April Election or Special Elections.

More information on Prop A

Petition Election Date Change Final_Page_1Petition Election Date Change Final_Page_2Petition Election Date Change Final_Page_3
— Marie Ceselski, 7th Ward Democratic Committeewoman

Advertisements

The Other Rex Sinquefield Petition- Changing Election Dates

I am a huge fan of changing local election dates for St. Louis City to state and federal election dates. It would, I believe, increase turnout for local elections and significantly reduce the budget for the Board of Elections. I have been advocating election date changes for about fifteen years.

Most recently, I  blogged about this reform idea in January 2015. In the 2015 7th Ward alderman election, candidate Chelsea Merta had pledged to work on this from both the Board of Aldermen and State Legislature angles. More on the latter in a moment.

So you might think that I’d be thrilled when a petition came along to change St. Louis City elections from March & April to August & November. But I’m not. The devil is in the details.

I was first approached to sign the petition outside City Hall. The signature gatherer told me it was to increase voter turnout by moving local elections to the Fall when state elections are held. I got excited.

But, like many other voters, I am going to be very hesitant about signing petitions after the Rex Sinquefield and Senator Jamilah Nasheed Body Cam Scam Petition.

Wanting to believe that someone had taken my idea and run with it with the best of intentions, I glanced over the petition, picked up the pen to sign, but then saw two names as sponsoring petitioners at the bottom of the first page: Stephanie Lewis and Martin Casas.

Stephanie Lewis was spokesperson for Rex Sinqefield’s No on E Tax campaign.

Martin Casas handles social media for Rex Sinquefield’s Better Together.

So, I did not sign.

I spent a number of days trying to get a screen shot of the petition’s three pages, so I could study it to find the horrible parts. Then I contacted Garrett Webb asking for a copy. Mr. Webb is a political consultant and also one of the sponsoring petitioners. He obliged and emailed the petition to me. The three pages are posted at the end.

Then I set up a meeting with Mr. Webb to discuss the problems I found, and there are huge ones. 7th Ward Committeeman Marty Murray, Jr. and me met with Mr. Webb last week to go over concerns. It was a friendly talk. I think some of the consequences were genuinely new issues for him.

One of the problems with initiative petitions is that the ballot issues are vetted by Board of Aldermen but no changes can be made. If this had originated in the Board, consequences would likely have come to light, changes made.

Here are the Issues: The petition if enacted would result in extra super low turnout for School Board, Community College District Trustee, and ballot issues because there would be no citywide or ward contests to draw voters out. The petition only moves municipal officers and aldermen from March and April to August and November without addressing other elections. Rex Sinquefield could and would run the table with charter amendments- including getting rid of the earnings tax- under 2% turnout scenarios. He could elect his own anti-public education School Board Slate.

None of the seven signature gatherers that I spoke with over the past weeks said anything about this petition reducing the cost of elections. That’s because it’s not intended to reduce the number of elections. It’s intended to reduce turnout in elections important to Rex Sinquefield.

Moving the elections is still a great idea, I think. But needs to happen in a specific way to make sure a billionaire who votes in the Ozarks does not bankrupt us. Instead of putting this on the March 2017 ballot, we should…

First, the Board of Aldermen and next Mayor should lobby the Missouri General Assembly to change our School Board and Community College District Trustee elections to state elections. Without the Legislature’s assent on this matter, moving election dates for other elected officials is putting the cart before the horse.

Second, if successful with the Legislature, the Board of Aldermen should then send voters a charter amendment requiring local ballot issues- referendum or initiative- go to voters during state elections. There needs to be some option for real emergency referendums, perhaps some extra super majority of aldermen consenting or unanimous vote by Estimate and Apportionment, but the language needs to be tight. Many of us are familiar with how emergency clauses work on legislation today, which is everything fits the definition of an emergency. Because of it, the right of the people to petition to undo legislation by public vote is just nice words in the City Charter.

Third, if voters pass the local ballot issues election date charter amendment, the Board of Aldermen should send voters an amendment moving the mayor, comptroller, board president, and aldermen elections to state elections. There needs to be a provision for special elections to fill vacancies, of course. And, I’d also like to see a sunset on the local officials election change- twenty or so years. We would evaluate how it worked and either vote to renew it or go back to the old election dates. I’d like to see it with a sunset clause so that the decision to have it back on the ballot is not left to aldermen or initiative petition.

Which brings me to the argument against moving local elections or local ballot issues to state elections- people are weary of long ballots. My answer to that is we can declutter the ballot by making it more difficult for people with big money- like Rex Sinquefield- to purchase ballot space via initiative petition. Petition Election Date Change Final_Page_1Petition Election Date Change Final_Page_2Petition Election Date Change Final_Page_3b

I Will Not Endorse An Illegal Campaign

Updated 2/16/2016 The Missouri Sate Board of Education today decided that the Special Administrative Board should control St. Louis Public Schools for another three years. Yes. The same board violating Missouri Ethics Laws will remain in charge of our schools, not our elected board.
———-

I believe every child has a right to a quality education in public schools paid for with tax dollars.

I believe good teachers should be among the most valued and best paid of occupations.

I am, in general, in favor of raising taxes to accomplish both. I will not, however, support an illegal campaign to raise taxes for St. Louis Public Schools.

By Monday, February 8th, members of the St. Louis City Democratic Central Committee, ward committeemen and committeewomen, received a solicitation from the St. Louis Public Schools Special Administrative Board (SAB) asking for our endorsements of Proposition 1 to raise property taxes for public schools.

SAB1SAB2SAB3The first thing that I noticed from the mailing is that a copy of the actual ballot measure was not enclosed. We were being asked to endorse the proposal based on what the SAB said it would do. That did not sit right with me.

The second thing that I noticed was the use of “Proposition 1” by the SAB for the ballot. That did not sit right with me. The City of St. Louis also has a Proposition 1 for the same April 5th election, a bond issue which will not raise taxes.

Then I noticed there was no “Paid for by” on the SAB letter, endorsement form, or envelope, and that the campaign was using resources paid for with tax dollars to advocate for the ballot issue, both violations of Missouri Ethics Laws.

There was a conversation about this mailing on Twitter between 7th Ward Committeeman Brian Wahby, 15th Ward Committeewoman Missy Pinkerton McDaniel, and others.

I entered the conversation on Tuesday, February 9th, after the St. Louis Public Schools Foundation declared no public funds were being used.
SAB4
That prompted a call to me on my landline phone from Rachel Seward, Deputy Superintendent of Institutional Advancement, St. Louis Public Schools (SLPS). Ms. Seward’s message was that the mailing had erroneously left off the “Paid for by” disclaimer, a new mailing was going out to correct the previous, and the campaign was being funded by a Political Action Committee.

I returned the phone call and told Ms. Seward that sticking “Paid for by” a PAC on the SAB/St. Louis Public Schools (SLPS) stationary would not have made the mailing legal; the use of SLPS resources including staff had tainted the campaign; and the SAB needed to pull the issue off the ballot. She listened and said she would pass along my concerns.

Let me be clear here. This is not an “oops” moment. It’s a “we got caught” moment. Local government entities, particularly school boards, frequently have complaints filed against them with the Missouri Ethics Commission on use of public resources to advocate for ballot issues.

I have not received the promised correction mailing from a PAC. Perhaps the SAB is waiting to see if someone actually files a complaint against them.

It gets worse. According to a January 26th article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the SLPS hired a campaign manager “to develop, coordinate and supervise the tax campaign at a cost of $60,000,” another clear violation of Missouri Ethics Laws.

And this comes from the SAB, not our elected School Board stripped of its powers to run the SLPS District. The SAB is appointed by Governor Jay Nixon, Mayor Francis Slay, and Board President Lewis Reed. According to St. Louis Public Radio, Tuesday, the State School Board is poised to retain the SAB and not return control of our public schools to voters, retain an unaccountable, unelected board that currently is violating Missouri Ethics laws.

As I said, I want to support our public schools with more funding. I postponed blogging about this last week because there was a fundraiser for a nearby public elementary school and I didn’t want to detract from it.

But I will not, cannot, support a ballot issue for public schools that begins by breaking the law. I do not care who tells me this was all a series of mistakes now being corrected. The damage is done. I have no reason to believe that if I endorsed this school tax levy, another violation of state law will not happen. The best thing for everyone would be for the SAB to remove school levy hike from the ballot and start clean another time.

– Marie Ceselski, 7th Ward Democratic Committeewoman