This is the fifty-fifth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

Yes, Aaron Podolefsky is the new president at Buffalo State College in New York. Faculty members of an ad-hoc committee supporting Aaron Podolefsky at the University of Central Missouri hosted a gathering this afternoon and presented Aaron and Ronnie Podolefsky with a few small tokens of our esteem:

Matthew Zupnick, professor of Art, presents Aaron and Ronnie Podolefsky with the plaques he created on behalf of the ad-hoc committee to commemorate the Podolefsky’s time at Central.

A photo of the faculty members who formed the ad-hoc committee which was presented to Aaron and Ronnie Podolefsky. The legend at the bottom of the photo, taken from the Maastricht Friendship Tower, states, “Who is wise? He who learns from every man.”

UCM is proud of its diversity

…sometimes.

Aaron M. Podolefsky,

we honor your leadership.

UCM is proud of our first lady

…oh, she’s a lawyer.

Ronnie Podolefsky,

we will miss you.

[bronze, wood, and steel]

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…” (December 7, 2009)

Oh brother, it’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics… (December 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a different choice of phrase would have made it all better (February 11, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: never mind the facts, here’s right wingnut talk radio (February 13, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and we should give weight to your opinion… (February 18, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools for spin (February 20, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools rush in… (February 21, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Who’s the more foolish… (February 25, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a phone call from out of the blue (February 26, 2010)

HASSLER to PHILLIPS Connect-the-Dots Game! (February 27, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: project much? (February 28, 2010)

These things sometime happen when you afflict the comfortable (March 12, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and some will think that it’s all over (March 18, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and some will think that it’s all over, part 2 (March 30, 2010)

Via Facebook:

“If a cop stops me and says ¿’papers’? and I say ‘scissors.’ Do I win?”

Yeah, yeah, we know, we didn’t get any photos in the Senate.

Representative Beth Low (D-39) speaking against ant-choice legislation for the “millionth time”.

Representative Low did not file for re-election and will not return to the House. Instead, she has taken a position as director of the Greater Kansas City Food Policy Coalition.

The ubiquitous right wingnut anti-choice bill, with the usual results.

A typical end of session scene on a representative’s desk on the floor of the House.

“…There is a constant hubbub of conversation and activity taking place barely below the debate and action on the floor…”

Representative Jason Holsman (D-45) in debate on the House floor.

The ceiling of the House chamber – photo taken during a recess.

Representative Jason Kander (D-44) during debate on ethics reform legislation.

State Treasurer Clint Zweifel (D) in conversation in a side gallery.

Is that, can it be? Yes, the stenographer in the press gallery above the dais!

We’ve been told that the Capitol press corps says we’re not allowed on that turf. Heh. That’s an interesting story for another day.

Last night House Minority Leader and Representative Paul LeVota (D-52) released a video on his assessment at the end of the legislative session:

…Representative Paul LeVota (D): Well, uh, we’re calling this the non-binding legislative session. The Republican majority decided to spend most of the time on non-binding resolutions telling the federal government what to do, not really dealing with the issues that the state should be dealing with. The biggest issue that was not done this session was dealing with our ongoing budget. House Democrats have continually said that we need to have a balanced approach. Cuts are necessary, but we need to look at tax credit reform and also other ways to bring in revenue. And, that simply wasn’t done, so next year we’re gonna have an even tougher budget year and no forward thinking on behalf of the, um, House leadership, the majority party. That’s a shame because all we did is kick down, kick down the road, uh, the issues that we have in our state.

Um, we’re glad that there’s an autism bill done. Hose Democrats worked very hard on that. Um, a, a little disappointed that ethics reform wasn’t stronger, but we know without House Democrats that never would have happened in the first place. But the, maybe the, besides the budget, maybe the biggest disappointment is we didn’t work enough on jobs for the people of Missouri. So, um, they’re going to continue to have to struggle without any action from, uh, this General Assembly. And it is my hope that all these issues get out over the summer and in the fall, um, we elect a new legislature and next January, finally we have a little more focus, we deal with some of the issues that the people of Missouri, uh, need to deal with. I’m optimistic that will happen and, uh, I’ll continue to believe in the people of Missouri.

Yesterday, while in the side gallery of the House covering the close of the legislative session I was made aware of a confrontation on the floor of the House during the previous day between Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) and Representative Michael Frame (D-105).

On Thursday the House was considering SCR 31 on international education. Representative Hoskins (r) was the handler for the bill. From the bill summary:

SCR 31 – This resolution encourages students and faculty in Missouri to promote international education as part of curricular and extracurricular life at Missouri’s colleges and universities.

This resolution is substantially similar to SCR 13 (2009) and to HCR 7 (2008).

[emphasis added]

Representative Michael Frame (D) at his desk on the floor of the House

on May 14, 2010 at the far side and back of the Democratic side of the aisle.

I interviewed Representative Frame yesterday:

Show Me Progress: Could you describe what happened with, Representative Hoskins on the floor yesterday?

Representative Michael Frame (D):  Sure…and, yesterday there was a, a House, a resolution, for international students or international studies. We spent a great deal of time on it, which I found a bit odd with this time of the year, spending so much time on a, on a, you know, for a non-binding resolution. When he finished, when he, when he closed he said that, this is a very good resolution and I turned to one of my, colleagues and said, it’s the best resolution in the universe, kind of making fun of what Representative [Bryan] Pratt [r] had claimed about the ethics bill, a day or two earlier. I didn’t intend for him to hear that, but I guess he had heard it and, and there’s a lot of this talking going on the floor. And while he was still on mic he said, come on over here and say that. Or something like that and, and I didn’t, I just kind of ignored his, his invitation and began to reach down, and actually, I was going to vote in favor of it. And as I was looking at, at my screen I heard my colleague Representative [Trent] Skaggs say, “He’s coming over here, he’s coming over here.” And I really didn’t know, you know, what he was referring to, I did hear him say those words. And when looked up, when I turned up again he was almost nose to nose with me. And asking me if, if I had a, a problem, with some few other cuss words thrown in there as well, too. And, and do I have a problem, do I have problem. I told him he was, you know, to paraphrase, was, was way out of line. He really needs to step back. And Representative Skaggs and Representative [John] Burnett physically got between the two of us. And again informed him you really need to return to your other side. Burnett, there was a bit of an exchange there, Burnett said you [inaudible], you, you charged over here in a very physical way that was, you know, a bit intimidating and, and a little bit threatening. And you just need to back off. And, and I didn’t see him charge over here, I’ll take their word for it he did. I was looking at my monitor. But, informing him he needed to back off, back off. At that point some of his Republican colleagues came over and, and encouraged him to return to his side of the aisle…

Representative Denny Hoskins (r) in conversation on the floor of the House on May 14, 2010.

…Show Me Progress: Do you think that this is a symptom, one of the symptoms of, maybe, the environment?

Representative Frame: Yes. And, I, I think he’s a frustrated legislator. I’m not sure about that. I, I’m not sure what it was. I don’t know if he was having a really bad day or, or why it was. I, I really didn’t think what I said, and again, it wasn’t directed at him, but I don’t know why he took such great offence to me calling his resolution the best resolution in the universe. I thought that would actually be a compliment, but, to tell you the truth, it wasn’t directed at him, it was really more directed at Representative Pratt. But wasn’t even talking with representative, I was actually talking with Representative Skaggs, but my comment was, was more directed at Pratt and just making a bit of fun. And he, he became very angry though and, and charged over at me. And like I said, when I looked up, it was nose to nose. I got to think that there was something else behind it. That it was a pretty, I won’t say innocent, but, but a very casual statement that I made. I don’t think it was any way majorly offensive enough that you would actually enter into some type of physical violence because of it.

Show Me Progress: All right, well thank you.

Representative Frame: Okay, thanks.

The vote on the bill, at the time of the incident (from the Journal of the House, May 13, 2010):

SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS

           SCR 31, relating to international education, was again taken up by Representative Hoskins (121).

           On motion of Representative Hoskins (121), SCR 31 was adopted by the following vote:

AYES: 137

NOES: 012

Biermann

Bringer

Calloway

Frame

Hodges

Kuessner

LeVota

McClanahan

Newman

Quinn

Skaggs

Still

[emphasis added]

Maybe behavior on the floor can influence a few votes.

A non-binding resolution takes up a chunk of floor time on the House during the second to last day of the session. Does anyone think it’s possible that the majority leadership was throwing one of their members a public relations bone?

…and satire is dead.

May 13

Incident spurs call for school use review

A city School Committee member says she’s ‘appalled’ at how GOP guests treated a classroom.

….The Republican State Convention was held at the Portland Exposition Building, which is on Park Avenue, near the middle school. Party members from Knox County caucused in a classroom used by eighth-grade social studies teacher Paul Clifford…

…Later, Clifford learned that his classroom had been searched. Republicans who had attended the convention called Principal Mike McCarthy to complain about “anti-American” things they saw there, including a closed box containing copies of the U.S. Constitution that were published by the American Civil Liberties Union….

The Constitution is anti-American? Go figure. That would explain a lot.

Via Balloon Juice.

Representative Jason Kander (D) speaks in favor of the bill during debate on the House floor this afternoon.

Ethics reform legislation finally passes. Representative Jason Kander (D-44) issued the following release:

Statement by Rep. Jason Kander regarding passage of ethics reform bill

Friday, May 14, 2010

This bill represents an improvement over current law, but I will not declare victory over corruption when we have merely tip-toed into the fight. I voted today to limit political money laundering, outlaw the obstruction of ethics investigations, and expand the powers of the Missouri ethics commission.

However, I’m disappointed that we missed an important opportunity to restore campaign contribution limits, to prohibit lawmakers from working as political consultants for one another, to close the revolving door between legislators and lobbyists, or to disclose potential conflicts of interest. That is why I whole-heartedly support the comprehensive, bipartisan ethics bill passed by the Speaker’s special committee on ethics. As I said when I filed a bipartisan proposal last year, my bill alone cannot tackle the ever-evolving and wide-ranging problem of public corruption.

There is lots of work remaining. I will continue my efforts to advance true, comprehensive ethics reform to a vote in the next legislative session.

The Senate breathed new life into ethics reform by stripping the poison pills from the bill and the conference report followed up.

I spoke with Representative Kander this morning in the House side gallery. When I stated that it looked like ethics reform legislation was dead last week he replied that at that point he was not going to give up until the end.

A number of Democratic representatives stated in debate that the bill is far from comprehensive, but it was a good start.

The tally.

Previously:

HCS #2 for SB 844: the republican majority in Jefferson City lays an egg on ethics reform (May 11, 2010)

Rep. Paul LeVota (D): republican ethics reform bill a “sham” (May 6, 2010)

Ethics Reform Legislation in Jefferson City: well, that didn’t go very well (April 27, 2010)

Lucy yanks the football…again, part 2 (April 26, 2010)

The Missouri General Assembly opens the 2010 legislative session, part 2 (January 6, 2010)

Kander (D) and Flook (r): ethics reform legislation in Jefferson City

Kander (D) and Flook (r): ethics reform legislation in Jefferson City, part 2

Kander (D) and Flook (r): ethics reform legislation in Jefferson City, part 3

Kander (D) and Flook (r): ethics reform legislation in Jefferson City, part 4

Both those who favor the anti-puppy mill petition drive and those who oppose it are overlooking the most relevant factor:

According to the HSUS, the reason Missouri needs this new initiative is because Missouri is the leading state in the US when it comes to the number of ‘puppy mills’. HSUS projects that there are around 3,000 ‘puppy mills’ in the state. According to the US Department of Agriculture, there are 1,525 licensed commercial breeders in the state — nearly 3x more than any other state.  The rest, to get to HSUS’s projected number of breeders are unlicensed.   In other words, Missouri could CUT IN HALF the number of ‘puppy mills’ just by closing down all of the unlicensed operations in the state.

Unfortunately, one of the big reasons we are unable to close down these operations is due to a severe lack of state inspectors.  As of right now, the state only has 13 licensed inspectors–who not only have to inspect all of the licensed operations, but also are charged with identifying and closing down unlicensed operations.  There are 120 unlicensed operations per state official assigned to close them down — and another 120 that they have to actually inspect each year. Even though Missouri shut down nearly 150 operations last year, more could be done with the same laws, but more enforcement officials.

According to some unconfirmed reports from people I know involved in this, HSUS has pledged nearly half a million dollars in order to get the 130,000 needed signatures to get this initiative on the ballot.  A couple of million dollars more will be needed once it’s placed on the ballot in order to get enough advertising out there to pass the bill.  This doesn’t even count the number of man hours that will be required to get the ballot signatures.  All I can think about is what this type of money, and this type of human support, could do if it were all channeled toward shutting down the commercial breeding operations that are operating illegally without a license — instead of working on a bill that will have minimal, if any, impact.

I sympathize with those who want puppy mills regulated. Of course I do. Joy Ward, a national activist who has written a science fiction novel involving a dog, told me that those who want the dog breeders left alone do not care what happens to those animals:

They are just taking the mill and Hunte Corp money and moving on. They don’t care about the tortured animals and they sure as hell don’t care about the thousands of people who buy these dogs thinking they are getting healthy family members only to find out their dogs will require thousands of dollars in vet bills, hundreds of hours of behavioral work due to the poor rearing experiences and still may have to euthanize their beloved pets because the vets can do nothing to remedy the insurmountable problems.

Obviously, the situation needs to be remedied.

But I also understand that our rural senators, especially those who are farmers themselves, feel they’ve been shoved from pillar to post these last couple of decades. They’re having a hard go of it, what with Big Ag shouldering them out of the hog and chicken raising business. Some are surviving by raising dogs instead, and they don’t want any interference, particularly from city folk.

All that makes sense, except that their hostility is aimed at the wrong target. CAFOs and Big Ag are the enemy here. Getting CAFOs regulated so that they have to treat the environment and their animals responsibly, instead of raping both, harming the public health with antibiotics and hormones, and then paying no penalties for their sins–that’s where the senators’ efforts should be focused.

Ward responds to those rural senators this way:

The main problem is that dogs are not being bred to be eaten, they are being bred to live in homes with people, Completely different things. If there are genetic problems with a slaughter hog, it won’t cost the buyer thousands of dollars and a ton of family pain.

Like I said, as far as how she feels and as far as how Senators Shoemyer and Purgason feel, I get it. But I don’t think the legislature’s attempt to require that the petition about puppy mills get a two thirds majority to pass is fair, constitutional or helpful as far as solving Missouri’s problems with inhumane treatment by dog breeders. The anti-puppy mill petition, on the other hand, has at least this to be said for it: it has raised awareness of the problem. But if we pass that petition and do nothing to get more regulators, we’ll be kidding ourselves if we think we’ve done anything to solve the problem.

Folks, hear this, and make some calls this morning. It is our last chance to get PACE passed.

Pace, one of the best self-help bills to happen in decades, is on the cusp of failing in Missouri, with no opponents. What a shame.

PACE, rapidly spreading across the US, ingeniously allows homeowners to lien or borrow against a future property tax assessment to pay for energy improvements today. Whatever the future assessment is, the utility savings will always pay for it.

Two Leadership Senators hold the reins. If Charlie Shields (573-751-9476) and Kevin Engler (573-751-3455) want it, it will pass.

Their minions will join them. Tell them that this is a win/win bill that will cost the state NOTHING, even as it improves our homes and our economy, creating jobs in rural areas for a change. And the senators will get green bragging rights for decades if they pass PACE.

I drove an hour and a half through steady rain and arrived at the Capitol a little after 9:15 a.m. I made my way to the House Communications Office and checked in with the director. Shortly before the start of the day’s session he escorted me to one of the side galleries on the floor and later introduced me to one of the doorkeepers.  I set up my camera on a tripod and then watched and photographed the proceedings.

Representative Luke Scavuzzo (D-124) (center, seated) in conversation on the House floor while other representatives (standing in the background) wait to be recognized by the Speaker.

Over the course of the day I was able to have a number of brief conversations with representatives and longer conversations with others. At this point in the session votes can come fast and furious. There is a constant hubbub of conversation and activity taking place barely below the debate and action on the floor.

Representative Mary Still (D-25) (center, standing at microphone) in debate on the “sexually oriented businesses” bill – HCS SS SCS SBs 586 & 617.

HCS SS SCS SBs 586 & 617 [pdf] on “sexually oriented businesses” was originally sponsored by Senator Matt Bartle (r). A earlier iteration of this bill in a previous session was killed in a House committee and those circumstances have been the subject of a federal investigation and grand jury.

The tally on one of several votes on the “sexually oriented businesses” bill – HCS SS SCS SBs 586 & 617.

Curiously, during today’s proceedings (and reportedly during yesterday’s, too), debate on the “sexually oriented businesses” bill was not subjected to a previous question vote (a parliamentary procedure designed to end debate and move to a vote) as quickly as other bills.

Speaker Ron Richard on the dais (center, right) and Minority Leader Paul LeVota (D-52) on the floor (right, standing). The press gallery is directly above the dais.