Latest news with #SherriGallick
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Dysfunction makes path to keeping Chiefs and Royals in Jackson County ‘rough'
A rendering of the Royals proposed downtown ballpark (image submitted). For more than 50 years, the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals have called adjacent stadiums in eastern Kansas City home. The teams' future at Truman Sports Complex, though, is increasingly in doubt as the franchises ponder options on both sides of the state line and as officials in the Jackson County Legislature and Missouri General Assembly struggle to coordinate a 'Missouri solution' to keep the teams in the state. Stadium uncertainty surged after the Royals announced they were exploring stadium options elsewhere, including downtown and North Kansas City. The Chiefs, meanwhile, said they were exploring ways to upgrade Arrowhead Stadium as well as other options, including moving to Kansas. Both teams said they would stay in Jackson County if voters renewed a 3/8-percent sales tax to help them upgrade or build their stadiums. But an overwhelming majority of Jackson County voters rejected that idea in April 2024. The debate comes at a time when stadium costs are soaring. Washington, D.C., just announced a deal to build a new football stadium for the Washington Commanders, which comes with a $3.7 billion price tag. The District of Columbia will contribute $1.1 billion in public financing to help cover costs of the stadium and surrounding housing and commercial projects, including $500 million from a city tax on large corporations. This year, Kansas City-area lawmakers in the Missouri General Assembly have coalesced around two main efforts to keep the teams in the state. But a push to make state funding available to the teams appears doomed as the legislature enters the final weeks of session. In February, three Kansas City-area lawmakers proposed identical bills to create a state assistance program for stadiums and other event venues. Under the bills filed by Rep. Mark Sharp, a Kansas City Democrat, Rep. Sherri Gallick, a Belton Republican, and Sen. Barbara Washington, a Kansas City Democrat, the state would incentivize investment in new and existing facilities through grants, withholding-tax retention and tax-increment financing. To participate in the program, the project must be at least one-third privately funded, be able to seat at least 20,000 people and have a minimum $250 million price tag. Those bills were filed days after House Speaker Jon Patterson, a Lee's Summit Republican, said he believed 'time is running out' on keeping the teams in Missouri but said 'this is going to be something that has to happen in the county first and then the state.' None of those bills has been referred to a committee, even as the legislative session enters its final weeks. When asked why there had been little movement on the bills, House Majority Floor Leader Alex Riley, a Republican from Springfield, said that 'as of now, that's not something I've spent a lot of time looking at. I haven't heard a lot about those bills.' Sharp said House and Senate leadership have declined to move forward with his, Gallick's and Washington's bills until Jackson County passes a new sales tax. 'The state legislature won't do anything until Jackson County renews the 3/8-percent sales tax,' Sharp said. 'There is no reason why the state needs to wait. The state could move forward with this legislation as it currently stands. They're just choosing not to.' 'You have people — mainly Republicans — who looked at the failed vote last year and think, 'Oh well, people must not want these sports teams anymore,' which could not be further from the truth,' Sharp added. Citing conversations with his constituents and other local residents, Sharp believes most residents want the teams to stay in the county, ideally at their current stadium locations. The April 2024 ballot question had included a proposal for a new Royals stadium in downtown Kansas City. 'Most folks who paid any attention know that the vote failed last year because people didn't want a Royals stadium where they were trying to put it, not because we don't want professional sports teams in our city,' Sharp said. 'It was a shame those two things were coupled together.' After voters rejected the proposal to build a new Royals stadium at a site in the Crossroads, Kansas City officials began exploring the possibility of a new stadium at Washington Square Park instead. A local firm entered a contract to buy part of the site and began working with investors to get the pieces in place to pitch the new location to the Royals. After eight months with no concrete commitment from the team, the firm decided to terminate its contract. Jackson County — which is currently mired in a battle over the county budget — will not be able to get something over the finish line in time and hasn't shown interest in doing so, Sharp said. Asked why, he replied, 'Dysfunction.' Because the Chiefs set a deadline of June 20 — when they want to be able to announce a decision about future stadium plans — the path forward looks 'rough,' Sharp said. 'June? We're not going to have anything done by June. June? That's almost like a slap in the face. There's no way we can get anything done by June,' he said. Caleb Clifford, the chief of staff for Jackson County Executive Frank White Jr., said that while White had been involved in discussions with the Chiefs and Royals, 'there are not active discussions happening right now.' However, he said it is probable that the teams are involved in discussions with members of the county Legislature. 'That is part of what led us to the situation that we had last year where they stopped talking with the administration because they weren't getting the answers they wanted, then they went to the Legislature and got everything they wanted and more,' he said. Clifford said that since White hadn't supported the initial plan out of concern that the county and residents would bear a disproportionate burden, the vote only affirmed his opposition to the plan. But he said White was open to working with the teams and other stakeholders to create a new plan and put the question on the ballot again in the future. 'The county executive's position has been clear from the beginning. We will not start planning for an election until we have an agreement in place, and at this point, that agreement's not in place,' Clifford said. 'Once that happens, we will work collectively with the teams and other interested parties to determine the best timing of an election.' Asked what the plan would need to look like, Clifford said, 'It would have to be a detailed plan that's substantive and provides significant benefits to the community while balancing the amount of investment that the taxpayers are making to these facilities.' White 'is not interested in moving forward with the status quo,' Clifford added. 'He believes that Jackson County deserves better, and he thinks they can get better.' Another bill before the Missouri legislature has gotten considerably more traction. It would establish a Clay County Sports Authority, a regulatory body responsible for developing and maintaining sports and other event venues in the county. Identical bills were sponsored by Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Kansas City Democrat, Sen. Kurtis Gregory, a Marshall Republican, and Rep. Bill Allen, a Kansas City Republican. Since the Royals began looking at potential sites for a new stadium, Clay County has vied to be a contender and has pushed to create a sports authority to help it work with and attract the team, Nurrenbern said. She said a new stadium — which she and others in the county envision as a Wrigley Field-esque ballpark district, with shops and restaurants surrounding the facility — would bring new life to 70 acres of predominantly industrial land in North Kansas City and drive economic development in the area. 'When we look at a sports team, the reality is there are hundreds of people employed by those teams,' she said. 'Eighty-two games a year brings in a lot of people to your area, people who are going to stop and grab a bite to eat (or) run by a grocery store and (get things to) have a tailgate.' Jerry Nolte, presiding commissioner of the Clay County Commission, has visited Jefferson City several times this session to testify in favor of the sports authority legislation. He's been very encouraged by the lack of pushback on the proposal, which was recently passed by the Senate and voted out of a House committee. The Royals recently polled Clay County residents about whether they would support the team coming to the county, as well as a new sales tax to help fund stadium construction. The poll's findings are not yet publicly available, but Nurrenbern said her 'understanding is that the polling results have been favorable.' Nurrenbern — who said she has not been in touch with either team this legislative session — said constituents 'reach out constantly about this,' with many 'interested in learning more.' 'Many of them shared reservations about spending significant state revenue on the stadium when, for example, the governor's (budget) proposal didn't fully fund the (public school) foundation formula. We fund a lot of our social services at rates lower than nearly every other state in the nation,' she said. 'A lot of my constituents wanted to make sure that we continue to make investments in vital services and really were hesitant to see any state funding go towards the stadium.' Nurrenbern said she understood and shared these concerns, which is why she did not ask for any funding to be appropriated in the 2026 budget for the Clay County Sports Authority. But if the bill passes, the sports authority would legally be able to get upwards of $3 million annually from the state legislature. She also said she understood constituents' concerns about giving financial incentives to teams specifically. 'While I get that some might have frustrations about why we make special exceptions for professional sports teams, if we were talking about any other type of business that employs hundreds of (people) and injects millions and millions of dollars into our revenue every year, we would certainly be having those conversations about how to keep them here,' she said. The path forward should be put to a vote, Nurrenbern said. 'It's up to our county commissioners to put it to a vote of the people. I think voters deserve a voice in this,' she said. 'If this is something they want for their region, this is something they should be able to think about and make a decision (on) at the ballot box.' Nolte said he and other county officials are planning to 'open the process up' for more public comment once the team makes a decision. 'I would hate to build up people's hopes and then not be able to deliver,' Nolte said. 'If we should continue forward on this, we need to have as much public input as we possibly can.' If the bill is passed and signed into law, Nolte said he didn't think there would be a 'terribly long process' to get the authority established and operating. From there, he said, the county would need to figure out what funding a new stadium in the Northland would look like. He said solid numbers about cost and other factors are needed to know what the best approach could be, but said one option would be a sales tax, which would have to be approved by voters. 'I think it's certainly doable,' he said. 'We need to make sure that we are able to provide (residents) with information that would convince people that this was indeed a benefit to them, but I think there's a good deal of excitement.' Nolte said that had the sales tax vote succeeded in Jackson County, 'we might not be having this conversation. But here we are.' Nurrenbern said she's tried to push back against the idea that Clay County's efforts are creating a competition between it and its southern neighbor. 'This is simply another option for the teams, (so) that if they choose to move north, we have this in place for them,' she said. 'I always wanted to make clear that this wasn't going to be Clay vs. Jackson. It's up to the Royals to choose where they want to move their team.' Nolte said he doesn't see it as a competition between counties, either. 'We very much look at this in terms of being a team, part of a Missouri solution to retain the teams,' he said. 'We're all just trying to put out the best set of options to keep these institutions in Missouri and to keep that economic engine and those jobs here in Missouri.' As different governments and groups on the Missouri side of the border work to keep the teams in the Show-Me State, the Sunflower State last year made its move to attract the teams, passing a law during an emergency session to enable the use of STAR bonds to help cover the cost of building new stadiums. STAR bonds — or sales tax and revenue bonds — are used to pay for tourist attractions and are paid off through sales taxes on products sold at those sites and nearby businesses. For a new sports stadium, that could include taxes on tickets, food and merchandise. The bonds have been marketed as a way to cover upwards of 70% of the cost of a new stadium without diverting taxpayer dollars from the state's general revenue fund. But they still divert a portion of state revenue that might have otherwise been used to pay for public services. While the Kansas Department of Commerce said most of the state's STAR bond-funded projects are expected to be paid off early — including Children's Mercy Park, home of Sporting KC — a 2021 audit found some projects may need over a century to do so, and several prominent projects have in recent years defaulted on their bonds. The 2021 audit also found most STAR bond projects in Kansas haven't drawn much out-of-state tourism, limiting their ability to generate enough tax revenue to pay off their bonds in a timely manner. Given the potential limitations of Kansas' plan, Sharp said he believes Missouri legislative leaders and other lawmakers 'are just hoping that Kansas can't or won't follow through on what they proposed.' 'We're not taking a position of being aggressive. We're taking a position of being passive, which I think will ultimately have us end up looking like St. Louis,' he said, referring to the Rams NFL team, which moved from St. Louis to Los Angeles in 2016. Sharp said that despite his efforts, the teams 'won't speak to us.' 'They haven't spoken with me. They haven't spoken with folks in the Democratic caucus. They probably have talked with the (Kansas City) mayor. They probably have talked to the Jackson County (Legislature's) Chairperson DaRon McGee. They probably have talked to some other folks. But they haven't talked to anybody in Jeff City about (our) bill,' he said. Gov. Mike Kehoe and legislative leaders hosted a closed-door meeting in February to discuss the situation with Kansas City and Jackson County officials. The teams were not present at the discussion. Kehoe — who also met with representatives from the Royals in February — in January told reporters he is 'not a fan of just throwing money at stadiums, but I'm a fan of keeping the economic activity that those two teams provide, and we're going to continue to work and put our best foot forward to make sure they stay.' This article first appeared on Beacon: Kansas City and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Missouri Senate Democrats filibuster GOP effort to repeal voter-approved sick leave law
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – Missouri Senate Democrats engaged in a lengthy filibuster Wednesday to block a Republican-back bill aimed at rolling back a voter-approved sick leave law. HB 567, sponsored by Rep. Sherri Gallick (R-Belton), would repeal several key provisions of Proposition A, a measure that voters passed in November to expand paid sick leave benefits for workers across the state. The Democratic-led filibuster stretched more than nine hours, beginning Wednesday and continuing into 1 a.m. Thursday before the Senate adjourned, according to the Missouri Independent. The salary needed to take home $100K after taxes in Missouri and Illinois Under Proposition A, which is currently in effect, most employees of private businesses are entitled to accrue one hour of 'earned paid sick time' for every 30 hours worked. Accrual is set to begin May 1, while employers were also required to post notice of their sick leave policies by April 15. The measure also included annual minimum wage increases tied to inflation. As currently in effect, Proposition A was passed with a 58% voter approval. However, it is now facing efforts in the legislature to overturn or weaken it. The Missouri Secretary of State's Office previously told FOX 2 that while voters can pass statutory ballot measures, the state has no guaranteed statutory protections to prevent lawmakers from challenging, modifying or repealing voter-approved propositions through standard legislative action. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now According to the Missouri Independent, some Republican lawmakers argue that the sick leave mandate creates a burdensome, one-size-fits-all policy for businesses. They've also questioned whether voters fully understood the measure when they approved it. Meanwhile, Missouri Senate Democrats, on social media platform X, acknowledged the filibuster as an effort from Democrats who are 'fighting back' to protect what they describe as essential rights for working families. HB 567 has already cleared the Missouri House, and with Senate approval, it would head to the governor's desk. Missouri's ongoing legislative session ends on May 16. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
27-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
GOP lawmakers in two states take aim at voter-approved sick leave laws
A worker helps a customer at a Chipotle restaurant. Lawmakers in Nebraska and Missouri are considering changes to voter-approved laws requiring paid sick leave. () Missouri lawmakers are on the verge of gutting a voter-approved law requiring most employers to provide workers with paid sick leave. On Wednesday, a state Senate committee approved a bill overturning the sick leave requirement. Already approved by the House, the bill has only Senate approval left before being sent to Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe, who has voiced support for the proposal. In November, Missouri's Proposition A passed with 58% of the vote. The law increased the minimum wage from $12.30 to $15 per hour and required employers to provide one hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours worked. Business groups filed a court challenge in December, asking the Missouri Supreme Court to overturn the ballot measure's outcome. That lawsuit argues the election results should be overturned because of several alleged constitutional violations, including of the state constitution's single-subject requirement and a lack of a clear title. Legislative sponsor state Rep. Sherri Gallick said the ballot initiative dealt a blow to Missouri businesses, particularly small businesses and would increase the cost of goods and services. Gallick, a former executive in the food industry, has also said employees would 'abuse' the sick leave provision, the Missouri Independent reported. On Wednesday, backers of last fall's ballot measure said it was modeled on paid sick leave policies in more than a dozen other states. 'Opponents made their argument, we made our argument, and the voters spoke,' said Richard von Glahn, policy director for Missouri Jobs with Justice, the organization that helped lead the November campaign. A similar debate is making its way through Nebraska's unicameral legislature this session. Nebraska voters approved a ballot measure in November that mandates businesses with at least 20 employees provide employees up to seven days of paid sick leave, with smaller businesses require to provide five days a year. Lawmakers have proposed several bills in Lincoln seeking to roll back some of those requirements. One bill would exempt owner-operators and independent contractors from the sick time rules. An amendment debated this week would exclude seasonal agricultural workers, workers under the age of 16 and employers with fewer than 10 employees. Republican lawmakers argued that voters did not appreciate the negative consequences of the sick leave mandate, particularly for smaller employers. 'While I trust the will of the voters, I do believe that they did not understand the cost of this, and specifically the cost of this to a small employer,' state Sen. Tony Sorrentino, a Republican, said, according to a report from Nebraska Public Media. But Nebraska Democrats say the moves undermine the will of the voters and could endanger public health by forcing sick people to go into work. 'Why does the Legislature keep trying to change what the people voted for?' Democratic state Sen. George Dungan asked Wednesday. Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Missouri bill to overturn voter-approved paid sick leave clears Senate committee
State Rep. Sherri Gallick, a Republican from Belton, speaks in March during Missouri House debate. (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications) A Republican-led push to overturn the paid sick leave law adopted by Missouri voters last year was debated and approved Wednesday by a state Senate committee. The bill, sponsored by Republican state Rep. Sherri Gallick of Belton, was passed by the House earlier this month and would gut Proposition A, a voter-approved law requiring most employers starting May 1 to provide paid sick time off for hundreds of thousands of qualifying workers. Gallick called the law, which also increased the state's minimum wage, a 'one-two punch for Missouri businesses' that will increase the cost of goods and services and have an adverse impact on small businesses in rural parts of the state. She has said workers will 'abuse' the leave. Gallick's bill would also modify the minimum wage law by removing the requirement that it be indexed to inflation. The bill was passed out of committee Wednesday on a 5 to 2 vote party-line immediately following a contentious public hearing, with Democrats opposing. The committee chair, state Sen. Curtis Trent of Springfield, said that although usually there is at least one week between the public hearing and committee vote, it's 'extremely clear…there is not really an opportunity for further deliberation by the committee' and that pushing the bill forward immediately would allow 'robust debate and consideration' by the full Senate. If approved by the Senate without changes, the bill would go to Gov. Mike Kehoe, who has voiced support for the proposal. There is no emergency clause, so it wouldn't go into effect until Aug. 28 — months after the sick leave law goes into effect. Richard Von Glahn, policy director for Missouri Jobs with Justice, the organization that helped lead the campaign for Proposition A, said it was modeled on paid sick leave policies in 18 other states. The initiative petition passed in rural, suburban and urban counties across the state and received 58% of the vote statewide. 'Opponents made their argument, we made our argument and the voters spoke,' Von Glahn said. Gallick's bill is 'refutation of the public will,' he added. 'It will make Missouri workers more likely to have to go to work while sick, jeopardizing their own health, the health of their coworkers and of Missouri workplaces.' Many of the same industry groups who are challenging Proposition A in the state Supreme Court testified in support of the bill Wednesday. Kara Corches, president and CEO of the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, called the law, especially paid sick leave, a 'job killer.' 'We believe that this one size fits all approach to paid sick leave is unworkable,' Corches said. Buddy Lahl, from the Missouri Restaurant Association, called the requirements on businesses 'extremely cumbersome' and said the law is a 'slippery slope' for what businesses will be required to provide. 'Fixing Proposition A is not even an option, fixing the sick pay. It just needs to be eliminated. It's just too erroneous. And I only listed some of the bigger issues. Every line in there is a problem for a small business,' Lahl said. When Lahl said the only fix is to eliminate the law, state Sen. Stephen Webber, a Columbia Democrat, responded: 'That's not happening, The only path you have is to maybe make some small changes.' State Sen. Tracy McCreery, an Olivette Democrat, said restaurant workers without sick time who go to work because they need a paycheck for public health. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Proposition A passed with the support of numerous unions, workers' advocacy groups, social justice and civil rights organizations, as well as over 500 business owners. It guarantees sick leave for hundreds of thousands of workers and gradually hikes the minimum wage to $15. The measure won by a margin of over 400,000 votes. Under the law, beginning May 1, the law requires employers with business receipts greater than $500,000 a year to provide at least one hour of paid leave for every 30 hours worked. Employers with fewer than 15 workers must allow workers to earn at least 40 hours per year, with larger employers mandated to allow at least 56 hours. The law also gradually increases the minimum wage. Under Gallick's bill, the minimum wage would still increase to $15 per hour in 2026, as voters approved, but it would not be adjusted for inflation thereafter — a policy that has been in place since 2007. The sick leave provisions would be repealed entirely. Because the measure changed state law and not the constitution, the legislature can modify or overturn it without returning for a new vote of the people. The bill passed out of the House on a vote of 96 to 51 earlier this month.
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Missouri sick leave law, minimum wage hike face rollback in legislature, Supreme Court
The Missouri Supreme Court Building in Jefferson City on Wednesday (Clara Bates/Missouri Independent). Months after Missouri voters overwhelmingly approved a minimum wage increase and paid sick leave requirements, the new laws face challenges this week in court and the state legislature. On Wednesday, the state Supreme Court Court heard arguments in a lawsuit seeking to strike down Proposition A, which guarantees sick leave for hundreds of thousands of workers and gradually hikes the minimum wage to $15. A day earlier, the Missouri House gave initial approval to a bill repealing the sick leave law and modifying the minimum wage. 'This is a one-two punch to businesses, and it creates a one size fits all approach,' said Republican state Rep. Sherri Gallick of Belton, who is sponsoring the legislation targeting the paid sick leave law. A coalition of business groups and individuals argued Wednesday morning to the Missouri Supreme Court that the minimum wage and paid sick leave laws should be thrown out for violating constitutional rules on ballot initiatives. 'Both on the statutory side and the constitutional side, voters were misled,' Marc Ellinger, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, told the court. 'The constitution was not complied with.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE The lawsuit, filed late last year, argues the election results should be overturned because of several alleged constitutional violations, including violations of the state constitution's single-subject requirement and a lack of a clear title. It also contends that sick time and minimum wage are distinct issues that violate the single-subject rule, which should result in the election outcome being invalidated. It requests a new election be held, alleging the ballot title, which includes a summary of the proposition and its potential cost to the state, was misleading. 'This case is an example of where all of those procedures have been ignored,' Ellinger said. A lawyer for Missouri Jobs with Justice, which led the campaign in support of Proposition A, said the court should uphold the law if at all possible, since voters approved it. 'The challengers ask you to overturn the will of the voters who exercised their fundamental right of the initiative,' said attorney Loretta Haggard, 'based on technical issues that were not raised before the election.' The measure won by a margin of over 400,000 votes. Haggard and other attorneys representing the responding parties wrote in a recent filing that the plaintiffs are asking the court 'to tell these voters that their votes do not matter, and the court, not the people, will decide whether Proposition A should stay in effect,' calling it an 'extraordinary request.' Andrew Crane, an assistant attorney general representing the Secretary of State on Wednesday, defended the single subject of employee compensation, saying sick leave and pay 'logically relate together… these are the kind things that employees and lawyers consider in any hiring decision.' Robert Tillman, representing the auditor's office, defended the fiscal note summary and said the plaintiffs didn't prove any alleged irregularities that would have impacted the election. 'Even if contestants could establish election irregularities, they must then demonstrate that such irregularity sufficiently cast doubt for the entire election, to justify a new election.' Tillman said. '…As you can see from the record, contestants have offered no such evidence.' The judges asked a few questions about whether they have jurisdiction to review the case, or whether a lower court would be the more appropriate venue. Prop A passed with 58% of the vote and had the support of numerous unions, workers' advocacy groups, social justice and civil rights organizations, as well as over 500 business owners. A group of businesses filed a friend-of-the-court brief in this case defending the proposition. Under the law, beginning May 1, the law requires employers with business receipts greater than $500,000 a year to provide at least one hour of paid leave for every 30 hours worked. Employers with fewer than 15 workers must allow workers to earn at least 40 hours per year, with larger employers mandated to allow at least 56 hours. On Tuesday, a bill in Missouri's House to overturn the sick leave provisions and modify the minimum wage provisions was given initial approval. It needs to be approved one more time in the House before heading to the Senate for consideration. Because the measure changed state law and not the constitution, the legislature can modify or overturn it without returning for a new vote of the people. Gallick's bill would repeal the paid sick leave provisions approved by voters. It would also modify the minimum wage increase by no longer indexing it to inflation, a policy that has been in place since 2007. The minimum wage would still increase to $15 per hour in 2026, as voters approved, but it would not be adjusted for inflation thereafter. Gallick has argued employees will 'abuse' the sick leave. In states that have adopted sick leave mandates, employees take, on average, two more sick days a year than prior to the law going into effect, a National Bureau of Economic Research report found. Studies have found that offering paid sick time can increase workers' productivity and reduce illness, and generally adds little or nothing to business expenses. Republican state Rep. Scott Miller from St. Charles said 'just because 57% of the people that voted that day, voted in favor of something, that doesn't make it right. 'They're taking away the choice of businesses to engage in free market.' Businesses are not equipped to handle the additional expenses from the proposition, said Republican state Rep. Jeff Vernetti of from Camdenton. 'I know that the will of the people will be brought up several times in this and I think that we've also got to represent the 87 counties that did not vote for this,' Vernetti said. 'I think it's our duty to respect the will of the people, but also at the same time, safeguard the long term prosperity of Missouri.' Rep. Eric Woods, a Democrat from Kansas City, pointed out that Prop A passed in rural counties as well, including Clark, Adair, Mississippi and Henry. 'This isn't a situation where Proposition A just passed in the cities,' he said, 'this was a broad acceptance percentage wise.' Lawmakers are wrong to treat voters as having been oblivious to what they were voting on, said state Rep. Keri Ingle, a Democrat from Lee's Summit. 'The part that irks me is that you guys repeatedly call your constituents dumb,' Ingle said.'You say that they're too stupid to understand what they voted for,' Ingle said. 'I mean, you don't use those words, but they hear you loud and clear, and they continue to vote for these policies.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
