Jackson County Executive Frank White vetoes recall election ordinance
In a statement from the County Executive's Office, White claims that Ordinance 5993 is a 'clear' violation of state and federal election laws and believes it disregards election authorities' guidance and serves as an unnecessary waste of nearly $2 million in taxpayer money.
See the latest headlines in Kansas City and across Kansas, Missouri
'This ordinance is not just unlawful, but it's also fiscally reckless and a dangerous misuse of the democratic process,' said Jackson County Executive Frank White, Jr. 'It forces our local election boards to break the law, waste taxpayer dollars and invites chaos into how recalls are conducted in Jackson County. The people deserve better.'
On , Jackson County legislators unanimously decided to have residents vote on whether to recall White's position.
A special election was scheduled after legislators received more than 42,900 signatures for the recall.
According to county officials, the recall largely comes from residents who have suffered from price hikes in property tax assessments throughout Jackson County. In some areas, taxes tripled, forcing residents out of their homes.
However, in a , he claimed that the primary reason for the backlash is that he was on the 'Vote No' side of the April 2024 election, where the Chiefs and the Royals looked to continue receiving sales tax money from shoppers in the county to support their projects.
'This effort is being led and funded by dark money groups and self-interested insiders who were denied a blank check for a bad stadium deal,' part of White's statement read.
Now, White has officially vetoed the ordinance, claiming it is unethical and that it discredits the democratic voting process.
He claims that the election date is unlawful, the petitions are deficient, it wastes taxpayer dollars, and it sets a dangerous precedent.
Download WDAF+ for Roku, Fire TV, Apple TV
'It's never too late to do the right thing. The Legislature can move the recall to the November 2025 ballot, which would comply with the law, protect the will of the people and save taxpayers millions,' said White. 'Jackson County residents deserve leaders who stand up for the law and protect taxpayer dollars, not political stunts that cost more and deliver less.'
According to , despite White's veto, Democratic Legislative Chairman DaRon McGee seems to have a veto-proof majority on the issue. As a result, he only needs five other legislators to support the ordinance.
Additionally, in preparation for Thursday's announcement, the Jackson County legislature had already set a , in case they needed to override White's veto.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
26 minutes ago
- Fox News
DOJ's Russia investigation is a distraction from Epstein files, former Biden official claims
'MediaBuzz' panelists Meghan Hayes and Sarah Bedford discuss former President Barack Obama's response to National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard's report claiming he manufactured evidence of Russia's 2016 election interference.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Effort continues to fix South Dakota elections that don't need fixing
In the past few years, a certain segment of South Dakota society has become adamant about making specific improvements in the way we live. Is this a citizen quest for more education funding? No. Is it a movement to put often overlooked Native American issues at the front of the state agenda? No. Is it a grassroots effort to revamp the way South Dakotans pay taxes? No. This effort is aimed at cleaning up the state's elections. 'Hold on,' you might say. 'I didn't know there was a problem with our elections.' Well, there isn't. But that isn't keeping the issue from being front and center at the Legislature and in county commission meetings across the state. In the last legislative session there were more than 50 election-related bills introduced. About half of those had to deal with 'election integrity' in the areas of voter qualification, technology and security. That's a great deal of attention being paid to a part of government that, in the past, has been noted for working just fine. Some of these bills may be duplicates. It has become a practice in the Legislature to introduce similar bills in the Senate and in the House. That way, if cooler heads prevail in the Senate, there's still a similar bill in the House, where bad ideas go to flourish. Spurring on the quest for election integrity is an entity called South Dakota Canvassing Group. The group's mission statement is on its website: 'We are a volunteer organization working to restore free, fair, transparent and secure elections in South Dakota, now and for future generations.' Their work to 'restore' elections in South Dakota implies that voting here has gone off the rails. If the Canvassing Group wants to ferret out corruption and illegalities in elections, they're best off moving to another state. South Dakota, with a history of fair elections, doesn't need their help. According to a story by The Dakota Scout, many of the election integrity chasers in this state got their inspiration at a three-day event in Sioux Falls. It turns out that their North Star, their inspiration, their muse, is none other than Mike Lindell. He's not just the My Pillow guy; he's the My President's Election was Stolen guy. Lindell was, and continues to be, one of the staunchest supporters of the idea that Donald Trump was somehow cheated out of victory in the 2020 election. At his 2021 'Cyber Symposium' in Sioux Falls, Lindell spent so much time offering false claims about Dominion Voting Systems throwing the election to Joe Biden that he was recently sued for defaming one of the company's executives. The jury awarded the executive $2.3 million in damages. Some bills backed by the Canvassing Group were approved by the Legislature and signed by the governor: assigning a federal-only ballot to people who don't live permanently in the state, changing the definition of resident eligibility, designating county voter registration files as public records, changing the process for challenging someone's residency status, increasing the penalty for voting illegally, placing citizenship status on driver's licenses, and sending a constitutional amendment to voters clarifying that a person must be a U.S. citizen to vote in the state. However, just as Lindell continues to spout his falsehoods about the 2020 election, look for the Canvassing Group to keep up the pressure on legislators for more election integrity laws that aren't needed. On its website, the top issue on the group's want list is an effort to make Election Day a holiday. In the last session, this came to the Legislature in a bill sponsored by Dell Rapids Republican Tom Pischke. Pischke explained to the Senate State Affairs Committee that a holiday was needed because in some communities there are not enough poll workers nor enough polling places. He said he hoped to work on solutions to those problems without legislation, asking the committee to table the bill. Creating a Tuesday Election Day holiday might free up more people to work on the elections, but it could just as easily cut down on voter participation. Instead of looking ahead to how they'll mark their ballots, citizens could just as easily be looking ahead to using a vacation day on Monday to create a long weekend. South Dakota has a long history of running fair, accurate elections. For all their finger-pointing and hand-wringing, the Canvassing Group and the legislators who indulge them can't change that. Election integrity legislation amounts to nothing more than solutions in search of problems, trying to fix a system that doesn't need fixing. Dana Hess spent more than 25 years in South Dakota journalism, editing newspapers in Redfield, Milbank and Pierre. He's retired and lives in Brookings, working occasionally as a freelance writer. This article was originally published on South Dakota Searchlight. This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Effort continues to fix South Dakota elections that don't need fixing
CNN
5 hours ago
- CNN
California Democrats debate what a Harris governor run could mean for them
Rep. Dave Min was chatting with reporters at the US Capitol when the California Democrat was asked about whether he wants Kamala Harris to run for governor. Suddenly, Min no longer had time to talk. 'I have no comment,' he said. Asked what he thought a Harris run would mean for his own reelection prospects, Min repeated, 'I have no comment on that, sorry,' and bolted onto the House floor, away from reporters. Rep. George Whitesides, another Democratic freshman from California who beat an incumbent Republican by 8,000 votes, took a long pause before answering whether he wanted to see the former vice president run. 'I welcome her to the race. I'm just really focused on my own race, but if that's what she feels calls to do, that's her prerogative,' Whitesides told CNN. As Harris deliberates on whether she should run for governor or hold out for another potential presidential bid, California Democrats are quietly asking themselves the same question. Her critics say that while she would be a favorite to win the governor's race in a deep-blue state, possible ambivalence about her candidacy could hurt Democratic chances in swing districts as the party tries to retake the US House. Some top donors and interest group leaders insist that Harris will have to answer for former President Joe Biden, whose decision to run for reelection before making way for her remains a sore subject for Democrats, and whether Harris could have done more to prevent President Donald Trump's return to the White House. Harris has plenty of allies who want to see her run. Several leading elected officials in the state told CNN that they do not believe the candidates already running have either the stature or experience to stand up to Trump's pressure campaign against California on everything from immigration raids to funding cuts. 'As someone who served as district attorney, attorney general and senator from California, she would have the experience, leadership and understanding of the state legislature to tackle two of the biggest problems in the state: the lack of affordable housing and a sense of a lack of public safety,' said Rep. Ro Khanna, who represents the Silicon Valley area and has had an uneasy relationship with Harris at times. Rep. Mike Levin, who held his San Diego County district by 17,000 votes last year, said he believed a Harris run could help in 2026. 'She knows the state well, she knows the electorate well and I think she'd be a very formidable candidate,' he said. The Harris critics — few of whom will put their names to their complaints — are doing their own math: She would probably win if she runs, they say, but if she doesn't generate enthusiasm or if she fires up Republicans, she could prove a drag on vulnerable Democrats like Min and Whitesides as well as State Assembly and State Senate districts where Democrats don't have votes to spare. 'There's no groundswell for her candidacy. In fact, I think it would only fire up Republicans and hurt our ability to win the four to five seats that we need to win to win the House and hold on to three seats that we just flipped in 2024,' said one California House Democrat who asked not to be named in order to speak candidly about a candidate widely expected to be the party's front-runner if she enters the race. 'She comes in with baggage.' Part of the issue for many Californians, said Rep. Jimmy Gomez, who represents a reliably Democratic district in Los Angeles, is that no matter what kind of campaign Harris might run, people believe that being governor wasn't her first choice. 'Once you're the vice president of the United States, there's only one place to go. It's president,' Gomez told CNN. 'For me, if I was vice president and all of a sudden I lose, it would be a fallback to me. I hate to put it so bluntly.' Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has had a tough relationship with her fellow San Francisco-rooted politician. Asked by CNN whether she wanted to see Harris run for governor as she left the Capitol last week, Pelosi said only, 'I want her to do whatever she wants to do.' Harris is once again earning her reputation for long, drawn-out deliberation. Several people who have spoken to Harris told CNN she has asked them whether they think she should run. Some of those people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to disclose private conversations, say they have turned the question back to her. She has also reached out to former California governors to ask what she could get done on the job, though not all have agreed to speak with her about it. Harris canceled a long-planned August vacation, a move that one person familiar with her deliberations does not mean she's decided what to do. Besides talking about a potential governor's race, that person said, Harris has in the last few weeks asked her closest aides for research and memos that outline other options. Among those options: Starting a 501(c)(4) organization focused on the information ecosystem and how to empower younger voters while rethinking institutions key to democracy, creating a political action committee to raise money for other candidates, and doing a listening tour of Southern states with a 2028 presidential bid in mind. Her thinking, the person said, is that she would have time for all of these if she doesn't run for governor. While nursing some worries that Harris has let the governor's race take shape too much in her absence, confidants have also kept tabs on the other candidates, who include former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, former US Rep. Katie Porter and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Harris allies privately scoff at the insistence of several candidates that they'd remain in the race if she enters it or that they would retain much support if they did. And few voters are focused on a governor's race when the primary isn't until next June. The top two finishers in that contest, regardless of party, will advance to the November 2026 ballot. Supporters and rivals are not waiting for the fall book tour for Harris' soon-to-be-published memoir or a decision on the race to choreograph around her. Several pro-Harris Democrats have been passing around numbers from private polls conducted for others in the state showing her popularity among Democrats is much higher than any declared candidate. Supporters of others have been seeding chatter that people don't want her back on the ballot, often with data that shows a drop-off of support for Democrats across California races when she was the presidential nominee last year. Burning over Trump's time in office, Harris is eager to stay involved, several who have spoken with the former vice president told CNN. She wants to at least keep open the option for another White House campaign in the future. That's different, though, from delving back to the hand-to-hand politics that advisers feel this kind of run for governor would require, if only for Harris to stave off looking like she was taking the race for granted, and for grappling with big challenges in Sacramento that are getting bigger. Harris' decision is not just intertwined with closing the door on a 2028 presidential run, but weighed against the quieter, wealthier existence that key members of her family have suggested to others they'd prefer. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove, a California Democrat, said that especially among fellow Black women she speaks with, 'they're still healing and they want to make sure that she is fully healed.' 'She should certainly run if that's the thing that she wants to do. She is certainly California's girl. We have been rooting for her for so long,' Kamlager-Dove said, adding that though she thinks having yet another big personality as governor is important, 'those decisions are incredibly personal.' One factor in how vulnerable California Democrats feel about a Harris run wasn't in the conversation just a few months ago: the prospect that their districts may be redrawn in the middle of the decade. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called a special session to consider a rare mid-decade redistricting at the behest of Trump and the Justice Department. Trump says he wants to eliminate as many as five Democratic seats in Texas ahead of the midterms. That's led leaders of Democratic-run states — including California Gov. Gavin Newsom — to threaten their own redrawing of lines to push out Republicans. In California, Democrats who won by small margins could face harder races as they lose friendly territory to other districts. California Democrats who argued Harris' weaknesses to CNN could not, when pressed, say any of the other candidates would be more of more help for down-ticket candidates. And Harris supporters point out that if the argument holds, any statewide dynamics are likely to be subsumed to nationalized energy in a midterm year when Democrats will be mobilizing to take the majority in the House as a check on Trump. Rep. Mark Takano, who represents the Southern California city of Riverside, told CNN that not only does he hope Harris considers running, but that enthusiasm for her and for Democrats overall has resurged in the last few months in response to Trump. 'After the Los Angeles protests, the 'No Kings' march, any drift to the right among certain parts — Latinos, African Americans, Asians — I think that's been staunched, to say the least, and it's moved the other direction,' Takano said. But Rep. Young Kim, a Republican who represents an Orange County seat that is once again near the top of Democrats' wish list to flip, laughed when asked about Harris running. 'Seriously, good luck to her,' Kim said with a laugh. She clarified she was being sarcastic.
