The fourth quarter 2009 campaign finance reports were due today at the Missouri Ethics Commission. In the 121st Legislative District race Democratic challenger Courtney Cole again (also in the previous quarter) outraised incumbent Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA).

Let’s take a look at the numbers for Courtney Cole filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission today:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: COLE FOR HOUSE

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $6,790.00

6. IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $580.00

7. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD (SUM 5A + 6A) $7,370.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $23,414.73

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $18,181.74

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD

(SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $0.00

[emphasis added]

That’s a another really nice fundraising quarter, a healthy amount of cash on hand, and no debt.

Where did the money come from?:

Again, some of it came from me.

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: COLE FOR HOUSE

Report Date: 1/13/2010

Committee to Elect Beth Low Kansas City, MO 12/15/2009 $200.00

Committee to Elect Yvonne Wilson Kansas City, MO 10/25/2009 $50.00

IBEW Local #124 Kansas City, MO 10/15/2009 $250.00

Local #124 Voluntary Political Fund Kansas City, MO 10/12/2009 $250.00

Susan Montee Jefferson City, MO Missouri State Auditor 10/26/2009 $200.00

Michael Bersin & Joan Ferguson Warrensburg, MO 12/01/2009 $50.00

Deleta Williams Warrensburg, MO 12/01/2009 $100.00

[emphasis added]

Chalk one up for Courtney Cole in the CPA column. A few sitting Democratic state representatives, organized labor (representing working people) and a long list of individuals (I count eighty-seven) are also in the mix. Now, that’s some serious grass roots.

Representative Denny Hoskins also filed his campaign finance report with the Missouri Ethics Commission today:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $2,890.00

6. IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $0.00

7. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD (SUM 5A + 6A) $2,890.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $19,612.64

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $16,003.47

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD

(SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $2,000.00

[emphasis added]

Hmmm. Less cash on hand than his challenger.

Where did the money come from?:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS

Report Date: 12/31/2009

Brad Alpert Kingsville, MO 12/31/2009 $300.00

Missouri Pathfinders St. Louis, MO 12/30/2009 $1,000.00

Thomas F. Fitzpatrick Warrensburg, MO 10/19/2009 $40.00

Jerry Franklin Warrensburg, MO 10/1/2009 $500.00

Doug Milford St. Louis, MO Ernst & Young 10/27/2009 $150.00

MO Optometric PAC Jefferson City, MO 11/09/2009 $200.00

Ameristar – Kansas City Kansas City, MO 12/29/2009 $125.00

Ameristar – St. Charles St. Charles, MO 12/29/2009 $125.00

AT&T Missouri St. Louis, MO 12/22/2009 $200.00

MO Cable PAC Jeff City, MO 12/22/2009 $250.00

[emphasis added]

PACs, a few individuals, gaming, and a CPA(!). That’s the list of his contributors this past quarter in its entirety. Kind of has a grass rootsie feel to it, don’t you think? Not.

Let’s take a look at the report for the “Missouri Pathfinders” filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission today:

Detailed Summary of Expenditures And Contributions Made

Committe: MISSOURI PATHFINDERS

ReportDate: 1/15/2010

COMMITTEE TO ELECT TOM FLANIGAN CARTHAGE MO 12/30/2009 $1,500.00

CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS WARRENSBURG MO 12/30/2009 $1,000.00

[emphasis added]

Second place, again? And only among two?

And where do the “Missouri Pathfinders” get their money? Well, going back to 2009 some of it comes from PACs:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: MISSOURI PATHFINDERS

Report Date: 7/15/2009

SITEPAC ST. LOUIS MO 6/18/2009 $500.00

MCPAC ST. LOUIS MO 6/18/2009 $500.00

MISSOURI INDEPENDENT BANKERS ASSOC PAC LIBERTY mo 6/18/2009 $2,500.00

LONGTERM CARE LEADERSHIP JEFFERSON CITY, MO 4/3/2009 $2,500.00

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: MISSOURI PATHFINDERS

Report Date: 4/15/2009

Gallagher Consultants llc Jefferson City, MO 3/30/2009 $500.00

GENERAL MOTORS PAC WASHINGTON, DC 3/31/2209 $500.00

MISSOURI INDEPENDENT BANKERS ASSOC PAC LIBERTY MO 3/31/2009 $2,500.00

I guess one could say they bank on it.

Bingo! $90,000 worth:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: MISSOURI PATHFINDERS

Report Date: 1/10/2009

Major Brands Inc. PAC Louis MO 11/13/2008 $5,000.00

RightCHOICE Managed Care Inc cincinnati OH 11/03/2008 $10,000.00

Holland Construction Swanesa IL 62226-1005 10/30/2008 $250.00

GRANDVIEW HEALTHCARE CENTER WASHINGTON MO 10/23/2008 $500.00

GREENE HAVEN SPRINGFIELD MO 10/23/2008 $500.00

HILLCREST CARE CENTER DESOTO MO 10/23/2008 $500.00

HILLVIEW NURING AND REHAB PLATTE CITY MO 10/23/2008 $500.00

JONESBURG NURING AND REHAB JONESBURG MO 10/23/2008 $500.00

LAKE VIKING HEALTH CARE GALLATIN MO 64640 10/23/2008 $500.00

LINCOLN COUNTY NURSING AND REHAB TROY MO 10/23/2008 $500.00

MALDEN NURSING CENTER MALDEN MO 10/23/2008 $500.00

MARIES MANOR VIENNA MO 65582 10/23/2008 $500.00

MARK TWAIN CARING CENTER POPLAR BLUFF MO 10/23/2008 $500.00

KANSAS CITY CHIEFS KANSAS CITY MO 10/23/2008 $4,500.00

HUNT MIDWEST ENTERPRISES KANSAS CITY MO 64161 10/23/2008 $2,500.00

ASA MIDWEST PAC ST LOUIS MO 63125 10/23/2008 $2,500.00

MCPAC ST. LOUIS MO 10/23/2008 $2,500.00

SITEPAC ST. LOUIS MO 10/23/2008 $2,500.00

GBC PROPERTIES LLC JEFFERSON CITY MO 10/23/2008 $2,500.00

PACE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ST. LOUIS MO 10/23/2008 $100.00

KIRK WOOD EXCAVATING FENTON MO 10/23/2008 $100.00

HOETTE CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION HAZELWOOD MO 10/23/2008 $100.00

BRYNE & JONES CONSTRUCTION ST. LOUIS MO 10/23/2008 $200.00

CRI BUILDING SUPPLY CO ST. LOUIS MO 10/23/2008 $50.00

KAREN FOGARTY C HESTERFIELD MO 10/23/2008 $50.00

SCI ENGERING INC UNION MO 10/23/2008 $50.00

WALTER BAZAN ST. LOUIS MO 10/23/2008 $50.00

RICHARD STOCKENBERG CLAYTON MO 10/23/2008 $50.00

DAVID FINGERHUT CHESTERFIELD MO 10/23/2008 $1,500.00

GGNSC ADIMINSTRATIVE SERVICES LLC FORT SMITH AR 10/23/2008 $2,500.00

NATHAN ADAMS JEFFERSON CITY MO 10/23/2008 $2,000.00

Harrahs Operating Company Inc Cordova TN 10/20/2008 $5,000.00

Missouri Healthcare Assoc PAC Jefferson City MO 10/20/2008 $5,000.00

Dealer Interested in Government JEFFERSON CITY MO 10/17/2008 $7,500.00

FREEMAN PHYSICANS PAC JOPLIN MO 10/17/2008 $3,000.00

Blue cross blue Shield of KC PAC Kansas City MO 10/15/2008 $2,500.00

Missouri Soybean assn state PAC Jefferson City MO 10/15/2008 $10,000.00

Guarantee Electrical St. Louis MO 10/10/2008 $1,000.00

RP Lumber Edwardsville IL 10/10/2008 $1,000.00

Michael Decola Clayton MO 10/10/2008 $1,000.00

LB Eckelkamp Washington MO 10/10/2008 $1,000.00

James Castellano Town & County MO 10/10/2008 $1,000.00

MARK BURKHART ST LOUIS MO 10/10/2008 $1,000.00

Charles Lock St. Louis MO 10/10/2008 $1,000.00

Missouri Healthcare Assoc PAC Jefferson City MO 10/07/2008 $5,000.00

Harrahs Operating Company Inc Cordova TN 38016 10/07/2008 $1,000.00

Do you get the sense that someone is getting propped up?

“…Oooh, I get by with a little help from my friends…”

Hmmm. $5000.00 from his CPA PAC friends in the previous quarter and $1000.00 from the “pathfinder” folks here and we’re talking over one third of his cash on hand from two single sources. Now that ain’t exactly a grassroots firestorm, is it?

Courtney Cole, the Democratic Party candidate in the 121st Legislative District, continued her fundraising juggernaut last night with an event in Warrensburg. There were seventy individuals in attendance.

Courtney Cole, the Democratic Party candidate in the 121st Legislative District.

Former State Representative Deleta Williams (D) introduced Courtney Cole:

….I would like to introduce an individual, to introduce an individual who has stepped up and committed to take back the 121st Legislative District seat. [applause] That seat has been in the hands of Republicans since I left there in early two thousand three. And I will have to say that my experience as a member of the legislature and having had that seat was an incredible experience and I know that the individual who has stepped forward will also find it an incredible experience. And I truly believe that with all of her capabilities she will also be an excellent person to serve the constituents of the 121st District while upholding the principles of the Democratic Party [applause]….

Former State Representative for the 121st Legislative District Deleta Williams introduces Courtney Cole.

Courtney Cole then spoke:

….[applause] I want to thank all of you, especially, thank you so much for your kind words Deleta. That means so much to me….

….You know, so often people ask me why I decided to run for state representative and get into this race. And there are so many good reasons. But the one that I think is most important is, considering so many families right now are hurting, there are so many people who are having a hard time, a very difficult time. And I go around and I’ve been speaking to a lot of individuals and there’s a lot of people who are out of work and there’s a lot of individuals who have spoken to me and they’re worried that they might soon be. And so, while we’re seeing on a national level things really start to pick up with our economy, on a local and a state level we know that there are still needs that are here….

….I’ve been kind of tired about the lack of accountability and responsibility that some of our leaders have. And, as a teacher I always try to teach my students to be responsible and be accountable for their actions. So, I want all of you to know that with my campaign I will always be honest with you, I will always be accountable, and I’m always going to come to you and talk to you about the issues….

….This campaign isn’t my campaign. You know, I’ve said that before. This is our campaign. And these are our voices….We need to turn the voice back to the people. And that’s what I plan to be for you if I am so privileged to be able to serve you in Jefferson City. I want to be your voice….

Gary Grigsby, the recently announced Democratic Party candidate in the 122nd Legislative District, attended Courtney Cole’s fundraising event in Warrensburg.

Among those attending the event was Gary Grigsby, a Johnson County small business proprietor, who has announced that he is a candidate in the 122nd Legislative District.

Our previous coverage of Representative Denny Hoskin’s (r – noun, verb, CPA) property tax issue:

Denny Hoskins: Noun, Verb…CPA? (November 12, 2009)

I think I was way too nice to Denny Hoskins when I gave him the benefit of the doubt (November 13, 2009)

Denny Hoskins (r) in the 121st District: who is to to blame for all this misfortune? (November 16, 2009)

Denny Hoskins (r) in the 121st District: “You must have been misinformed.” (November 17, 2009)

Well, the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal has been running a number of letters to the editor, the following from Monday, November 23rd (available on-line):

First he can’t pay, then pays next day

We are confused. The paper first says that Mr. Hoskins’ taxes are delinquent in the amount of nearly $20,000. … Then he suddenly finds the money to pay them [….]

There are a few more:

People struggle, but they pay taxes

Denny Hoskins all of the sudden came up with $20,000 in less than 24 hours to pay his delinquent taxes that he couldn’t pay for a year [….]

Astonishing news about taxes

[….] And to think: We elected this guy to guard our tax dollars in Jefferson City [….]

Thanks for making tax issue public

As a concerned citizen I am proud of the fact this tax issue was made public by you [….]

Then to come up with a lame excuse as Rep. Hoskins has made for non-payment of the tax is appalling [….]

CPA should make better choices

After reading and listening to the various articles and interviews regarding Rep. Denny Hoskins’ failure to pay his 2008 taxes, I am frustrated [….]

Interestingly, the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal has not made an editorial and several other letters to the editor on the same subject (which were in a printed edition from last week) available on-line.

We were curious about the reported statements about a “tax payment installation plan” and a “balloon payment” in regard to Representative Denny Hoskin’s (r – noun, verb, CPA) recent property tax issue. So, we asked office holders in Johnson County if there were any programs, agreements or documentation of such in their records:

November 13, 2009

Janet Jones

Johnson County Recorder

Johnson County Courthouse

Warrensburg, Missouri 64093

Dear Ms. Jones,

I am requesting the following information under RSMo 610:

1) Any document(s) showing verbal or written agreement between Denny Hoskins / Brian Hoskins / any representative of HOS Properties LLC and the Johnson County Recorder pertaining to a “balloon payment” or “tax payment installation plan” concerning the remittance of past due property taxes in Johnson County for any properties owned by the aforementioned entities.

2) Any document(s) showing a verbal or written agreement between Denny Hoskins / Brian Hoskins / any representative of HOS Properties LLC and Johnson County pertaining to a “balloon payment” or “tax payment installation plan” concerning the remittance of past due property. taxes in Johnson County for any properties owned by the aforementioned entities.

Please provide an estimate of the cost of the charges for providing this information under RSMo 610.026.

Please notify me either by phone or the e-mail address below when I can come by your office to pick up the document(s).

[….]

We sent similar requests to Ruthane Small, Johnson County Collector and Mark Reynolds, Johnson County Assessor. Mark Reynolds called me on Monday morning and stated that his office did not have any kind of documents as we described in our request, adding, “You must have been misinformed.”

Jan Jones and Ruthane Small provided written responses:

[….]

November 17, 2009

[….]

After a thorough review of the records in the Johnson County Missouri Recorder’s office, I am unable to find any records pertaining to your request.

Please let me know if you need any further information.

Sincerely,

s/

Jan Jones

Recorder of Deeds

From Ruthane Small, Johnson County Collector on November 17, 2009:

[….]

In response to your request dated November 13, 2009, Johnson County does not have a payment plan or installment plan to pay taxes. Please refer to the attached copy of RSMo 139.052 stating that “The governing body of any county may by ordinance or order provide for the payment of all or any part of current and delinquent real property taxes, in such installments and on such terms as the governing body deems appropriate.” I have served as Johnson County Collector since January 26, 1993 and no order ordinance or order has been written since that date.

To be very clear, “Partial payment or pro-ration of tax is not accepted by law.” is preprinted on all Johnson County Tax Statements.

Another Missouri Statute, RSMo 139.050, discusses partial payment of taxes and it applies to constitutional charter cities which have a population of 750,000 or more. This, again, does not apply to any city within Johnson County.

I know of three counties in Missouri that accepts partial payment. Jackson County allows senior citizens age 62 and over to pre-pay quarterly payments of tax. I believe St. Louis County also has a similar program as well as Boone County. All of these programs are to help the taxpayer pre¬pare for future tax, not payment plans for delinquent taxes. Information obtain from the internet is attached for Jackson County and Boone County.

Due to the reasons outlined above, I have no written or verbal agreement with Denny Hoskins, Brian Hoskins, or any representative of HOS Properties LLC regarding a payment plan of any type regarding real estate (property) taxes. I am not that the term “balloon payment” would apply to taxes at all. Balloon payment is usually associated with a repayment of loan, not taxes.

If you need further information on the subject, please let me know.

Sincerely,

s/

Ruthane Small

Johnson County Collector

We must have been misinformed.

This evening we attended a fundraising event for Courtney Cole, the Democratic Party candidate in the 121st Legislative District, at the Pi Gallery in Kansas City. State Auditor Susan Montee (D) and State Representative Jason Kander (D) also attended the event and later addressed the crowd.

Courtney Cole, the Democratic Party candidate in the 121st Legislative District, addresses the crowd.

State Representative Jason Kander introduced Courtney Cole who then spoke to the crowd about her call to public service and why she was running for office.

State Auditor Susan Montee (D) spoke of the importance of taking back the majority in the Missouri House of Representatives.

Courtney Cole’s third quarter fundraising numbers were quite good. This event will add to her fourth quarter fundraising total.

Several attendees speak with Chris Moreno (right), Executive Director of the Missouri House Democratic Campaign Committee.

The third quarter 2009 campaign finance reports were due today at the Missouri Ethics Commission. In the 121st Legislative District race Democratic challenger Courtney Cole outraised incumbent Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA). It could have been worse for Denny Hoskins. If he hadn’t had $5000 of help from his CPA friends it wouldn’t have even been close.

Let’s take a look at the numbers for Courtney Cole filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission today:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: COLE FOR HOUSE

ReportDate: 10/15/2009

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $0.00

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $14,401.21

3. ALL LOANS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $0.00

4. MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD $0.00

5. SUBTOTAL MONETARY RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD ( SUM 2A + 3A + 4A ) $14,401.21

6. IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $1,643.52

7. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD (SUM 5A + 6A) $16,044.73

8. FUNDS USED FOR REPAYING LOANS THIS PERIOD $0.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $16,044.73

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $11,898.38

[emphasis added]

That’s a really nice fundraising quarter. From zero to sixteen thousand in one quarter. With no loans.

Where did the money come from?:

Some of it came from me.

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: COLE FOR HOUSE

Report Date: 10/11/2009

…Pipefitters Local Union 533 Kansas City, MO 08/27/2009 $1,000.00

Journeymen Plumbers Union #8 Kansas City, MO 08/20/2009 $500.00

Labor’s Educational & Political Club Independent Kansas City, MO 08/20/2009 $200.00

Michael Bersin Warrensburg, MO 06/25/2009 $200.00

Chris Moreno Lees Summit, MO MHDCC 09/30/2009 $1,000.00…

[emphasis added]

Organized labor (representing working people) and a long list of individuals.

I wonder if Denny Hoskins did anything to upset Chris Moreno? Just asking.

Representative Denny Hoskins filed his campaign finance report with the Missouri Ethics Commission on October 14th:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS

ReportDate:

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $3,049.91

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $11,899.00

3. ALL LOANS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $873.73

4. MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD $0.00

5. SUBTOTAL MONETARY RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD ( SUM 2A + 3A + 4A ) $12,772.73

6. IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $900.00

7. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD (SUM 5A + 6A) $13,672.73

8. FUNDS USED FOR REPAYING LOANS THIS PERIOD $0.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $16,722.64

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $14,407.22

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD

(SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $2,873.73

[emphasis added]

Where did the money come from?:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS

Report Date: 9/30/2009

MSCPA PAC ST. LOUIS, MO 9/30/2009 $5,000.00

FRIENDS OF TILLEY PERRYVILLE, MO 09/20/2009 $500.00

POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE FOR HEALTH  JEFF CITY, MO 08/24/2009 $1,000.00

AMERISTAR CASINO KANSAS CITY, INC. KANSAS CITY, MO 08/11/2009 $125.00

AMERISTAR CASINO ST. CHARLES ST. CHARLES, MO 08/11/2009 $125.00

[emphasis added]

I wonder if that Tilley thing included a plane ride? Just asking. I wonder if the “health” PAC is promoting single payer? Nah. Casinos! And a short list of individuals. What? Nothing from organized labor?

Let’s take a look at that CPA PAC money report, filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission on October 14th:

Detailed Summary of Expenditures And Contributions Made

Committe: COMMITTEE FOR POLITICAL ACTION OF MO CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS

ReportDate: 10/14/2009

Engler for Missouri Farmington MO 09/02/2009 $250.00

Missourians for Steve Hobbs Mexico MO 09/23/2009 $150.00

Citizens for Otto Jefferson City MO 09/24/2009 $10,000.00

Citizens for Hoskins Warrensburg MO 09/24/2009 $5,000.00

[emphasis added]

Wow. That’s a lot of money. And he came in second with his CPA PAC friends. Here’s hoping that this is a a sign of the times – the coming in second part.

It looks like Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) has friends in the CPA world who want to prop up his quarterly campaign fundraising numbers. On September 30th, via the Missouri Ethics Commission [pdf]:

MISSOURI ETHICS COMMISSION

CONTRIBUTION OF MORE THAN $5,000.00 RECEIVED BY ANY COMMITTEE FROM ANY SINGLE DONOR – TO BE FILED WITHIN 48 HOURS OF RECEIVING THE CONTRIBUTION

CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS 9/30/2009

C081024

MISSOURI CPA PAC

540 MARYVILLE CENTRE DRIVE, SUITE 200

ST. LOUIS, MO 63141 9/29/2009

5,000.00

[emphasis added]

They can’t be supporting him because of his stellar legislative achievements, that’s for sure. The republican incumbent industrial complex must be feeling the heat from Courtney Cole (D).

Can’t you just feel that Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) grass roots wave washing over you?

Now, we found a previous contribution from this organization for someone else:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: FRIENDS FOR JASON SMITH

Report Date: 4/10/2009

MISSOURI CPAPAC 540 MARYVILLE CENTRE DRIVE, SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS, MO 63141 03/27/2009

$300.00

Evidently they’re getting more generous. It must be the booming economy.

We’ll keep digging.

Mid-morning on Thursday I walked into the County Clerk’s office in the Johnson County Courthouse and asked the deputy clerk at the counter if I could get a copy of the “Report of Findings” for the recount. The County Clerk was on the phone, overheard me ask for the report, and told the deputy clerk he would address this. I asked again. He said, “No.” [I kid you not, it was a one word response.] I asked him why. He told me that it had not been sent in yet and it could only be released by the Secretary of State’s office. I shrugged, turned to the door, and left the premises.

Then I read this in today’s Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal:

12/19/2008 11:15:00 AM

Hoskins wins by less

Sue Sterling

Staff Writer

…In the recount, Hoskins picked up four additional votes and Democratic challenger Jim Jackson gained 11 votes, for a net gain of seven votes for Jackson…

…Powers’ staff forwarded results to the secretary of state Wednesday. He received an e-mail about mid-day Thursday authorizing him to release the results…

[emphasis added]

A 122 vote margin.

You gotta love the headline.

I get the distinct feeling that the republican Johnson County Clerk doesn’t like me.

On to the recount.

The dirty little secret of our elections is that not all legal votes get picked up by the optical scan machines on Election Day (see the Minnesota U.S. Senate recount). That’s why you always ask for a recount when it’s within the margin as allowed by law.

There are so many levels of irony in today’s news about the 121st Legislative District recount. Denny Hoskins (r – “Noun, verb, CPA”) is publicly whining about the messy inconvenience to his legitimacy in this recount business:

Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal

12/15/2008 11:23:00 AM

Hoskins against recount

…Hoskins said in a prepared statement the recount will cost thousands of dollars.

“It is unfortunate in these challenging economic times that the recount will cost the county’s taxpayers between $5,000-$15,000,” he said in the statement.

Jackson on Sunday said he does not expect the recount to cost anywhere near that amount, based on a conversation with the Secretary of State’s Office.

“The only cost is for the election judges to be paid at the same rate as (they) would be paid in an election,” Jackson said. “That is the only cost to the county.”

County Clerk Gilbert Powers said Monday the county will employ four judges and four watchers at a cost of $10 per hour each. Based on eight-hour days, the total would come to $1,280 for two days…

[emphasis added]

Heh. Who’s counting?

So much for being the only CPA in the legislature, eh? Lord help the Missouri General Assembly and the people of Missouri.

Let’s take look at the cost of the Minnesota U.S. Senate race recount via Minnesota Public Radio (also going on at this time):

…the cost of a recount is about 3 cents per ballot. Since there are nearly 3 million ballots to count, the total will be about $90,000. It will be paid by taxpayers…

Even accounting for an economy of scale in Minnesota the claim that it could take $15,000.00 to count a little over 13,000 ballots (at over a dollar a vote) in Johnson County, Missouri is way off the mark and doesn’t quite fit with what the republican Johnson County Clerk says either. But, given the massive amount of money the Missouri Republican State Committee and other right wingnut enablers “independently” spent to get Hoskins ahead in the Election Day vote count he probably does have a unique view of the value of a dollar. Maybe he should ask for his CPA school money back. And maybe he should actually read RSMo 115.610 before he whines in public about a recount. I expect Hoskins’ (r – “Noun, verb, CPA”) next press release will claim he has a mandate. In his world that would probably add up.

There will be a recount in the 121st Legislative District race. What follow are the documents pertaining to the proceedings in a recount.

“Notification of Recount” for the 121st Legislative District race from Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan.

STATE OF MISSOURI

Office of

Secretary of State

NOTIFICATION OF RECOUNT

Pursuant to Section 115.601, 3, RSMo.

THE MISSOURI SECRETARY OF STATE

To the Johnson County Clerk:

WHEREAS, I have been duly notified that the results of the General Election November 4, 2008 for the Office of State Representative, District 1211, established the defeat of one candidate by less than one percent of the votes cast; and

WHEREAS, I have been requested by Jim Jackson, the candidate who received the second highest number of votes and was defeated by less than one per cent of the votes cast, to hold a recount of the votes in the race for State representative, District 121, pursuant to Section 115.601, RSMo.

NOW THEREFORE, I ROBIN CARNAHAN, SECRETARY OF STATE OF MISSOURI, do hereby issue this Notification of Recount to the Johnson County Clerk and further authorize the Johnson County Clerk to recount the ballots cast in his jurisdiction during the November 4, 2008, General Election for the Office of State Representative, District 121. The recount of ballots in this jurisdiction shall be conducted according to procedures directed by the Secretary of State. The Johnson County Clerk shall certify and deliver results of this recount to the Secretary of State’s Office on or before December 19, 2008.

[Seal of the Secretary of State]

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I

herunto set my hand and affix the

Seal of my office. Done at the City

of Jefferson, this 4th day of December,

2008.

[signed: Robin Carnhan]

Secretary of State

The Secretary of State’s office issued a memo outlining the documents and procedures used in the recount:

ROBIN CARNAHAN

SECRETARY OF STATE

STATE OF MISSOURI

PO BOX 1767 • JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI • 65102

http://www.sos.mo.gov

JAMES C. KIRKPATRICK

STATE INFORMATION CENTER

(573) 751-4936

ELECTIONS DIVISION

(573) 751-2301

MEMO

TO: Johnson County Clerk

FROM: Michael Bushmann

Deputy Secretary of State for Elections

DATE: December 4, 2008

RE: Notification of recount

Enclosed are the official Notification of Recount and related documents for conducting the

recount of the race for State Representative, District 121:

1. Notification of Recount

2. Recount procedures and timeline

3. Schedule for recount

4. Report of findings

5. Tally summary sheet

6. Recount checklist

7. Oath

8. Rules 15 CSR 30-9; 15 CSR 30-10.010, 10.040, 10.140

9. Dolan v. Powers

Should you have any questions regarding these materials, please call our office at

(800) 669-8683.

Enclosures

There’s a certain irony to having the standard recount documentation which includes a court precedent from a previous recount case sent to the County Clerk whose name is on the actual precedent.

In the following document “LEA” refers to “Local Election Authority” (in this case, the Johnson County Clerk, Gilbert Powers); “DRE” refers to the electronic voting machine (in this case, Diebold touchscreen machines).

MISSOURI SECRETARY OF STATE

OFFICIAL PROCEDURES AND TIMELINE

RECOUNT OF NOVEMBER 4, 2008 STATE REPRESENTATIVE,

DISTRICT 121 RACE

The recount of the November 4, 2008, State Representative, District 121 race will be conducted under the following timeline and procedures established by the Missouri Secretary of State in accordance with Section 115.601, RSMo.

This comprehensive recount is designed to ensure that the final results are complete, accurate and reflect the intent of every voter. To do this, every ballot should be manually reviewed as set forth in these procedures. You will note that these recount procedures provide for a combination of human review, electronic counting, and hand tallying to ensure the most accurate, efficient, and fair recount possible.

Timeline

Activity Deadline

SOS send procedures to LEAs & candidates 12/4

LEAs FAX recount date/time/place to SOS 12/5 by 4:00 p.m.

SOS sends spreadsheet with schedule of recount date/time/place to candidates 12/5

Candidates send “disinterested person” lists to SOS 12/8

SOS sends lists of disinterested persons to LEAs ASAP

Deadline for return of certified findings to SOS 12/19

SOS certifies recount results 12/23

PROCEDURES

Selection and notification of disinterested persons

1. Only the LEA, LEA staff, bipartisan teams, the contestant (or his attorney), and contestee (or his attorney), and the appointed disinterested persons (two persons per candidate for each jurisdiction), shall be present during the recount.

2. The two candidates shall provide to the Secretary of State a list of disinterested persons to assist in the recount. These disinterested persons shall be selected pursuant to Section 115.601, RSMo. They will observe the recount and sign the Report of Findings.

3. The Secretary of State shall deliver the list of disinterested persons appointed to assist in the recount to each LEA.

4. The LEA shall administer the oath to all participants identified in step 1, including the contestant (or his attorney), contestee (or his attorney), and their disinterested persons.

5. LEAs will use the list of disinterested persons provided by the SOS and ensure that only two of the named individuals from each candidate (four total) are allowed to participate.

Administration of recount

1. Only LEA, LEA staff, bipartisan teams, the appointed disinterested persons, the contestant (or his attorney), and contestee (or his attorney) may be present during the recount.

2. The LEA shall administer the oath to all participants identified in step 1, including the contestant (or his attorney), contestee (or his attorney), and their disinterested persons.

3. The disinterested persons present shall sign the Report of Findings, along with the local election authority. If disinterested persons are not present for the recount, the local election authority shall be the only signer of the Report of Findings.

4. The following original forms specified by SOS shall be returned to the SOS no later than December 19, 2008.

. Report of Findings (provided)

. Oath (provided)

. Tally summary sheet (provided)

The LEA shall also keep copies of these documents in its office.

5. The LEA shall pay all election judges and disinterested persons from local funds using appropriate local forms and procedures.

6. No documents or copies of documents, other than the Report of Findings to the Secretary of State, shall be released to anyone present at the recount, although the candidates and disinterested persons may receive copies of the oaths they execute. (Sec. 115.601.4, RSMo)

Ballot counting – optical scan

NOTE: Only the LEA, LEA staff, and the bipartisan teams will conduct the recount, without additional assistance. Everyone else may observe, but may not handle the ballots.

1. After all participants have been sworn in, the LEA will conduct a test of the voting equipment to be used in the recount. The test deck shall consist of General Election ballots marked as

follows:

3 with votes for Hoskins;

2 with votes for Jackson;

1 with no votes for any State Representative, District 121 candidate (undervoted);

1 with votes for at least two State Representative, District 121 candidates (overvoted).

Refer to 15 CSR 30-10.040 and 15 CSR 30-10.140 (copy enclos
ed).

2. The LEA shall break the seal on ballots.

3. Only ballots with votes for State Representative, District 121 shall be counted. The bipartisan team shall sort the ballots as follows:

Group A) Ballots with a distinguishing mark in the designated area for a State Representative, District 121 candidate. (This does not include overvotes.)

Group B) Ballots without distinguishing marks, or with marks outside the designated area for a State Representative, District 121 candidate. (This includes undervotes and overvotes.)

4. For these ballots:

Group A) Prepare for counting through optical scan tabulating machine.

Group B) Review to determine if there is any distinguishing mark of voter intent, in accordance with the current Counting Standards (15 CSR 30-9.020), a copy of which is enclosed. See also Dolan, et al. v. Powers, et al., (WL220223)

(Mo.App.W.D. January 29, 2008), a copy of which is enclosed (Ballots containing marks in or around a candidate’s party affiliation constitute a distinguishing mark adjacent to the party name.) Prepare for hand-tallying.

5. The bipartisan team, under the observation of the disinterested persons, shall feed the ballots in Group A above, face-up, into the counting machine(s). During this process, participants will also be watching for any distinguishing mark of voter intent, as described above. The results of the electronic recount will be recorded on the tally summary sheet (form provided) and added to the final results in the Report of Findings.

6. For the ballots in Group B above, the bipartisan teams, observed by the disinterested persons, will determine whether there is indication of voter intent in accordance with current Counting Standards regulations and the Dolan case and record those votes on a tally sheet. Regular tally sheets should be used for this purpose. These results will be recorded on the tally summary sheet (form provided) and added to the final results in the Report of Findings.

7. Post Test. After the electronic recount is completed, the LEA shall run a post test of the voting equipment using the test deck used in Step 1.

Ballot counting – DREs

NOTE: Only the LEA, LEA staff, and the bipartisan teams will conduct the recount, without additional assistance. Everyone else may observe, but may not handle the paper trails, containers, and DREs.

1. The LEA shall break the seal on the DRE component that contains the voter verified paper audit trail and retrieve the paper trail.

2. The voter verified paper trail shall be examined by the bipartisan team and the votes hand tallied for the State Representative, District 121 race using a separate tally sheet. The results will be recorded on the tally summary sheet (form provided) and added to the final results in the Report of Findings.

3. In the event that the voter verified paper trail is not usable for the recount, the LEA shall next use the audit trail* from each DRE that was created contemporaneously with the voter verified paper trail (*as defined in 15 CSR 30-10.010), and proceed with the process described in #2. The LEA shall then separately seal and secure any such DRE component for possible further inspection.

Report of Findings

The bipartisan team shall record the total result from the tally summary sheet on the Report of Findings form. The disinterested persons present shall sign the Report of Findings, along with the local election authority. If disinterested persons are not present for the recount, the local election authority shall be the only signer of the Report of Findings.

The Report of Findings form shall be returned to the Secretary of State’s office with the oaths and the tally summary sheet. The LEA shall retain copies of all these documents in its office.

Exception

The above procedures shall apply except as otherwise agreed to by both candidates and approved by the SOS. Any exceptions to the above procedures shall be submitted to SOS in writing and signed by each candidate no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 8, 2008.

The Secretary of State’s office issed a checklist:

RECOUNT CHECKLIST

State Representative, Dist. 121

____Lock door(s) to counting room

____Note all persons in attendance (No unauthorized persons in attendance)

____Ballots are locked up

____County clerk swears in all attendees, other than Secretary of State officials

____County clerk unlocks ballots

____Remind attendees that, pursuant to their oath, they are not allowed to disclose any details from this recount

____Manual recount begins

____County clerk re-locks ballots

____Complete Report of Findings

____Obtain signatures on Report of Findings

____County clerk certifies results

____Door(s) may be unlocked

Considering the procedures outlined above, this is a bare bones checklist.

All parties present at the recount take an oath:

I solemnly swear that I will impartially discharge the duties of judge according to law, to the best of my ability and that I will not disclose how any voter has voted unless I am required to do so as a witness in a proper judicial proceeding. I also affirm that I will not allow any person to vote who is not entitled to vote and that I will make no statement nor give any information of any kind tending in any way to show the state of the count prior to the close of the polls on election day.

I further swear that I will not disclose any facts uncovered by the recount, except those which are contained in the Report of Findings.

Sworn and subscribed to before me this … day of …, 20..

…………………….

Judge of Election

…………………….

Election Authority (Judge of Election) witnessing oath

Interestingly enough, it is the election judge’s election day oath. Some of the prohibitions contained herein don’t actually have any bearing on a recount, but this is the oath required by statute.

According to statute only information contained in the “Report of Findings”, signed by the disinterested parties and the local election authority, can be publicly divulged:

REPORT OF FINDINGS

STATE REPRESENTATIVE, DISTRICT 121

RECOUNT GENERAL ELECTION

NOVEMBER 4, 2008

_________________________________________________

County/Jurisdiction

___________________________________________

Name of Local Election Authority

We the undersigned hereby certify that the recount conducted of the State Representative, District 121 General Election race revealed the number of votes cast for these candidates was as follows:

Number of Votes

Denny L. Hoskins ______________

Jim Jackson ______________

Disinterested persons assisting:

___________________________

___________________________

___________________________

___________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

Local Election Authority

If the verifiable paper trail is not usable then the machine audit trail is used. If that’s the case the machine is to be sealed. Though, if there is no way to notate such in the Report of Findings no one other than those present will know of the failure of the voter verified paper trail. And if it’s not in the Report of Findings, no one can talk about it.

That’s one good reason for the parties to the recount having an attorney present.

See also the Uniform Counting Standard (pdf) in the Missouri Code of State Regulations and C. Kay Dolan, Respondent, and Monica Penrose, Plaintiff, v. Gilbert Powers, Defendant, and Teresa A. Collins, Appellant and Lynn Stoppy Brackin, Def
endant.: WD68098 (rtf). The appeals court held (in part):

…Ballots containing marks in or around a candidate’s party affiliation were properly counted, as they constituted distinguishing mark adjacent to the party name…

In addition to the examples in the Code of State Regulations the appellate decision should inform the judgement of ballot judges.

The process gets messy if there’s a lack of consensus on a particular ballot. Again, that’s why there will probably be attorney’s present.  The “disinterested parties” can refuse to sign the report if they dispute the contents. Ultimately any dispute in this particular recount would be resolved by the Missouri House of Representatives.

We should know the date(s) for this recount by the close of business today.