PDA

View Full Version : Elections Missouri Ballot Measures


CHIEF4EVER
11-04-2008, 04:22 AM
2008 Ballot Measures
The following ballot measures have been certified for the November 4, 2008 general election.


Official Ballot Title
Constitutional Amendment 1

[Full text]

[Proposed by the 94th General Assembly (First Regular Session) HJR 7]

Official Ballot Title:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to add a statement that English shall be the language of all governmental meetings at which any public business is discussed, decided, or public policy is formulated whether conducted in person or by communication equipment including conference calls, video conferences, or Internet chat or message board?

It is estimated this proposal will have no costs or savings to state or local governmental entities.


Fair Ballot Language:

A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to add a statement that English shall be the language of all governmental meetings at which any public business is discussed, decided, or public policy is formulated. This includes meetings conducted in person or by other means of communication including conference calls, video conference, Internet chat, or Internet message board.

A “no” vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution to add a statement that English shall be the language of all governmental meetings at which any public business is discussed, decided, or public policy is formulated.

This proposition will have no impact on taxes.



Official Ballot Title
Constitutional Amendment 4

[Full text]

[Proposed by the 94th General Assembly (Second Regular Session) SJR 45]

Official Ballot Title:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to change provisions relating to the financing of stormwater control projects by:

limiting availability of grants and loans to public water and sewer districts only;
removing the cap on available funding and existing restrictions on disbursements;
requiring loan repayments to be used only for stormwater control projects?
It is estimated the cost to state governmental entities is $0 to $236,000 annually. It is estimated state governmental entities will save approximately $7,500 for each bond issuance. It is estimated local governmental entities participating in this program may experience savings, however the amount is unknown.

Fair Ballot Language:

A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to change the provisions relating to the financing of stormwater control projects. Currently, the Missouri Constitution allows the legislature to issue bonds or other types of debt so that grants and loans may be provided to municipalities and water and sewer districts in certain counties and cities for stormwater control.

This amendment will limit funding to only public water and sewer districts. It removes the current limitation on the amount of funds that can be made available for these projects and removes the restrictions on the method of disbursing these funds. It further provides that loan repayment funds shall be deposited into a specific fund to be used for stormwater control projects.

A “no” vote will not change the provisions relating to the financing of stormwater control projects.

If passed, this measure will not have an impact on taxes.



Official Ballot Title
Proposition A

[Full text]

[Proposed by Initiative Petition]

Official Ballot Title:

Shall Missouri law be amended to:

repeal the current individual maximum loss limit for gambling;
prohibit any future loss limits;
require identification to enter the gambling area only if necessary to establish that an individual is at least 21 years old;
restrict the number of casinos to those already built or being built;
increase the casino gambling tax from 20% to 21%;
create a new specific education fund from gambling tax proceeds generated as a result of this measure called the “Schools First Elementary and Secondary Education Improvement Fund”; and
require annual audits of this new fund?
State governmental entities will receive an estimated $105.1 to $130.0 million annually for elementary and secondary education, and $5.0 to $7.0 million annually for higher education, early childhood development, veterans, and other programs. Local governmental entities receiving gambling boat tax and fee revenues will receive an estimated $18.1 to $19.0 million annually.

Fair Ballot Language:

A “yes” vote will amend Missouri law to:

repeal the current individual maximum loss limit for gambling;
prohibit any future loss limits;
require identification to enter the gambling area only if necessary to establish that an individual is at least 21 years old;
restrict the number of casinos to those already built or being built;
increase the casino gambling tax from 20% to 21%;
create a new specific education fund from gambling tax proceeds generated as a result of this measure called the “Schools First Elementary and Secondary Education Improvement Fund”; and
require annual audits of this new fund.

A “no” vote will maintain the current individual maximum loss limit of five hundred dollars for each gambling excursion. The casino gambling tax will not be increased nor will the “Schools First Elementary and Secondary Education Improvement Fund” be created. Also, the number of new casinos that may be built in Missouri will not be restricted.

If passed, this measure will increase the casino gambling tax.



Official Ballot Title
Proposition B

[Full text]

[Proposed by Initiative Petition]

Official Ballot Title:

Shall Missouri law be amended to enable the elderly and Missourians with disabilities to continue living independently in their homes by creating the Missouri Quality Homecare Council to ensure the availability of quality home care services under the Medicaid program by recruiting, training, and stabilizing the home care workforce?

The exact cost of this proposal to state governmental entities is unknown, but is estimated to exceed $510,560 annually. Additional costs for training are possible. Matching federal funds, if available, could reduce state costs. It is estimated there would be no costs or savings to local governmental entities.

Fair Ballot Language:

A “yes” vote will amend Missouri law to enable the elderly and Missourians with disabilities to continue living independently in their homes by creating the Missouri Quality Homecare Council. If formed, this Council will ensure the availability of quality home care services under the Medicaid program by recruiting, training, and stabilizing the home care workforce.

A “no” vote means the Missouri Quality Homecare Council will not be created.

This measure will have no impact on taxes.



Official Ballot Title
Proposition C

[Full text]

[Proposed by Initiative Petition]

Official Ballot Title:

Shall Missouri law be amended to require investor-owned electric utilities to generate or purchase electricity from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, biomass and hydropower with the renewable energy sources equaling at least 2% of retail sales by 2011 increasing incrementally to at least 15% by 2021, including at least 2% from solar energy; and restricting to no more than 1% any rate increase to consumers for this renewable energy?

The estimated direct cost to state governmental entities is $395,183. It is estimated there are no direct costs or savings to local governmental entities. However, indirect costs may be incurred by state and local governmental entities if the proposal results in increased electricity retail rates.

Fair Ballot Language:

A “yes” vote will amend Missouri law to require investor-owned electric utilities to generate or purchase electricity from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, biomass (including ethanol) and hydropower. The required renewable energy sources must equal the following percentages of retail sales:

• 2% by 2011
• 5% by 2014
• 10% by 2018
• 15% by 2021.

Of the total renewable energy sources required to be sold, at least 2% shall be solar sources. Also, any rate increase to consumers resulting from this measure must be no more than 1%.

A “no” vote will not require Missouri’s investor-owned electric utilities to generate or purchase electricity from renewable energy sources.

This measure will not have an impact on taxes.

http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2008ballot/

Just FYI.

ExtremeChief
11-04-2008, 08:08 AM
What is the idea behind constitutional amendment 1? Is it really that much of an issue what the official language is during meetings?


What am I missing?

dirk digler
11-04-2008, 08:20 AM
Thanks Chief4ever for posting these. This will make my voting time shorter.

I think this is how I will vote

Amendment 1 = yes (stupid amendment anyway)
Amendment 4 = yes
Prop A = No
Prop B = Yes
Prop C = Yes

PastorMikH
11-04-2008, 08:23 AM
What is the idea behind constitutional amendment 1? Is it really that much of an issue what the official language is during meetings?


What am I missing?


Haven't lived in Missouri for quite a while now, but I would imagine that they want to make it clear that english and not spanish is the proper lanquage to conduct government business with.

ExtremeChief
11-04-2008, 12:03 PM
Thanks Chief4ever for posting these. This will make my voting time shorter.

I think this is how I will vote

Amendment 1 = yes (stupid amendment anyway)
Amendment 4 = yes
Prop A = No
Prop B = Yes
Prop C = Yes

If I can ask, why no on A? My father is voting no because he is afraid people will lose their retirements, mortgages, etc by the increase in gambling loss limits.

talastan
11-04-2008, 12:36 PM
If I can ask, why no on A? My father is voting no because he is afraid people will lose their retirements, mortgages, etc by the increase in gambling loss limits.

I was actually for this but when I went to the polls and saw the restriction on number of casinos. SWMO has been toying with the possiblity of building a casino in our area. This would limit that. So I voted NO

dirk digler
11-04-2008, 12:40 PM
If I can ask, why no on A? My father is voting no because he is afraid people will lose their retirements, mortgages, etc by the increase in gambling loss limits.

Talastan and I agree on that. It was putting the limit on no more casinos being built.

triple
11-04-2008, 12:40 PM
If I can ask, why no on A? My father is voting no because he is afraid people will lose their retirements, mortgages, etc by the increase in gambling loss limits.

I'm voting against it because of the dishonest campaign that the gambling companies, who take all this money out of state, are running to get it passed. they act like it's a school bond issue - won't mention casinos or gambling or loss limits at all in the ads, because most people are in favor of the loss limit.

It also keeps any further competition out of the state, sweet deal for the gambling industry. Taxpayers don't get anything though, except money locked into schools which is what they promised back in the 90s when casinos came in the first place, but turned out to be a lie

Mecca
11-04-2008, 12:41 PM
When you guys voted do you ever look at the judges and go "who?" and wonder how to vote on that?

dirk digler
11-04-2008, 12:41 PM
I'm voting against it because of the dishonest campaign that the gambling companies, who take all this money out of state, are running to get it passed. they act like it's a school bond issue - won't mention casinos or gambling or loss limits at all in the ads, because most people are in favor of the loss limit.

Interesting info thanks.

Mecca
11-04-2008, 12:41 PM
I'm voting against it because of the dishonest campaign that the gambling companies, who take all this money out of state, are running to get it passed. they act like it's a school bond issue - won't mention casinos or gambling or loss limits at all in the ads, because most people are in favor of the loss limit.

I'm not, if you're dumb enough to lose all your money, your problem.

dirk digler
11-04-2008, 12:42 PM
When you guys voted do you ever look at the judges and go "who?" and wonder how to vote on that?

Yeah pretty much. I only had one that was for someone on the MO supreme court IIRC

dirk digler
11-04-2008, 12:43 PM
Does anyone know what led to having Constitutional Amendment 4 on the ballot?

I haven't quite figured out why that is so important.

ChiefsCountry
11-04-2008, 12:45 PM
Here is how I voted on them:
Amendment 1 = Yes
Amendment 4 = Yes
Prop A = Yes
Prop B = No
Prop C = No

KingPriest2
11-04-2008, 01:31 PM
Here is how I voted on them:
Amendment 1 = Yes
Amendment 4 = Yes
Prop A = Yes
Prop B = No
Prop C = No
Why no on B?

ChiefsCountry
11-04-2008, 01:55 PM
Why no on B?

Its another government program that is not needed.

J Diddy
11-04-2008, 03:12 PM
Why no on B?


I voted no on B just because it limits the casinos to the current ones.

Dave Lane
11-04-2008, 05:29 PM
How can anyone be against Prop C

CHIEF4EVER
11-05-2008, 03:20 AM
Ballot Issues
Unofficial Election Returns
State of Missouri General Election - 2008 General Election
Tuesday, November 04, 2008

Office Candidate Name Votes % Of Votes

Constitutional Amendment 1 Precincts Reporting 3441 of 3507
English Language Yes 2,352,805 85.9%
No 387,691 14.1%
Total Votes 2,740,496


Constitutional Amendment 4 Precincts Reporting 3441 of 3507
Stormwater Yes 1,459,147 57.9%
No 1,062,279 42.1%
Total Votes 2,521,426


Proposition A Precincts Reporting 3441 of 3507
Casinos and Gambling Yes 1,541,659 56.2%
No 1,202,262 43.8%
Total Votes 2,743,921


Proposition B Precincts Reporting 3441 of 3507
Home Care Yes 2,026,858 75.2%
No 668,186 24.8%
Total Votes 2,695,044


Proposition C Precincts Reporting 3441 of 3507
Renewable Energy Yes 1,735,808 66.1%
No 892,195 33.9%
Total Votes 2,628,003



* Election results as of 1:10:50 on 11/05/2008

All of them passed. I am not fond of Prop A passing in particular. I voted yes, yes, no, yes, no FTR.