2010 Election-What issues are most important to you and your family in the up-coming Election?--Voter Poll Click Here
2010 November Election Ballot Measures-Sample Ballot
Scotty encourages everyone to VOTE this November, 2010 on the issues and People that design the Laws effecting you and your family
THE OFFICIAL BALLOT WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY
IN THE FOLLOWING FORM
INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS: In today's election, you have your choice of using either an electronic, touch screen voting machine or an optical scan voting machine to cast your ballot.
IF YOU USE THE OPTICAL SCAN VOTING MACHINE to cast your ballot, you must completely darken the oval to the left of the name of the candidate of your choice. For judges, if you are in favor of retaining a judge in office, completely darken the oval to the left of the word "YES." If you are against retaining a judge in office, completely darken the oval to the left of the word "NO." For amendments and propositions, if you are in favor of an amendment or proposition, completely darken the oval to the left of the word "YES." If you are against an amendment or proposition, completely darken the oval to the left of the word "NO." Do not try to punch through the ballot. Use only the marking device provided to you. If you tear, deface or make a mistake and incorrectly mark your ballot, return it to the Election Judges and obtain a new ballot.
IF YOU USE THE ELECTRONIC, TOUCH SCREEN VOTING MACHINE, follow the directions on the screen to cast your ballot. For each candidate, touch the box on the screen to the left of the name of the candidate of your choice. For judges, if you are in favor of retaining a judge in office, touch the screen to the left of the word "YES." If you are against retaining a judge in office, touch the screen to the left of the word "NO." For amendments and propositions, if you are in favor of an amendment or proposition, touch the screen to the left of the word "YES. If you are against an amendment or proposition, touch the screen to the left of the word "NO." If you need assistance in using this machine, please ask the Election Judges to help you.
OFFICIAL BALLOT
GENERAL ELECTION
CITY OF ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI
FOR U.S. SENATOR
(Vote for One)
ROBIN CARNAHAN DEM
ROY BLUNT REP
JONATHAN DINE LIB
JERRY BECK CST
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE AUDITOR
(Vote for One)
SUSAN MONTEE DEM
TOM SCHWEICH REP
CHARLES W. BAUM LIB
Write-in______________________________
FOR U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 1
(Vote for One)
LACY CLAY DEM
ROBYN HAMLIN REP
JULIE STONE LIB
Write-in______________________________
FOR U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 3
(Vote for One)
RUSS CARNAHAN DEM
ED MARTIN REP
STEVEN R. HEDRICK LIB
NICHOLAS J. (NICK) IVANOVICH CST
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE SENATOR
DISTRICT 4
(Vote for One)
JOE KEAVENY DEM
NICK P. GARTELOS IND
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 57
(Vote for One)
KARLA MAY DEM
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 58
(Vote for One)
PENNY V. HUBBARD DEM
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 59
(Vote for One)
JEANETTE MOTT OXFORD DEM
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 60
(Vote for One)
JAMILAH NASHEED DEM
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 61
(Vote for One)
CHRIS CARTER DEM
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 63
(Vote for One)
TISHAURA O. JONES DEM
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 64
(Vote for One)
SUSAN CARLSON DEM
PATRICIA VERDE REP
MARK ROBERT OPHEIM CST
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 65
(Vote for One)
MICHELE KRATKY DEM
Write-in______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 66
(Vote for One)
GENISE MONTECILLO DEM
BILL HARTZOG REP
Write-in_______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 67
(Vote for One)
MIKE COLONA DEM
CURTIS FARBER REP
Write-in_______________________________
FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
DISTRICT 108
(Vote for One)
JACOB W. HUMMEL DEM
JOE RUSCH REP
Write-in_______________________________
FOR COLLECTOR OF REVENUE
(Vote for One)
GREGORY F.X. DALY DEM
Write-in_______________________________
FOR LICENSE COLLECTOR
(Vote for One)
MICHAEL MC MILLAN DEM
Write-in_______________________________
FOR RECORDER OF DEEDS
(Vote for One)
SHARON QUIGLEY CARPENTER DEM
Write-in_______________________________
FOR CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
(Vote for One)
JANE SCHWEITZER DEM
Write-in_______________________________
SUBMITTING TO THE VOTERS WHETHER THE JUDGES NAMED BELOW, WHOSE TERMS EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2010, SHALL BE RETAINED IN OFFICE FOR NEW TERMS. VOTE ON EACH JUDGE.
MISSOURI SUPREME COURT JUDGE
Shall Judge ZEL FISCHER of the Missouri Supreme Court be retained in office?
YES NO
MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE EASTERN DISTRICT
Shall Judge MARY KATHRYN HOFF of the Eastern District Court of Appeals be retained in office?
YES NO
CIRCUIT JUDGES
22ND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
Shall Judge MICHAEL K. MULLEN, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 2), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge MARK H. NEILL, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 5), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge ANGELA TURNER QUIGLESS, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No 22 (Division No. 8), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge PHILIP D. HEAGNEY, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 10), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge BRYAN L. HETTENBACH, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 11), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge DENNIS M. SCHAUMANN, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 12), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge ROBIN RANSOM VANNOY, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 15), be retained in office? YES NO
Shall Judge DAVID C. MASON, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 17), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge LISA S. VAN AMBURG, Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 19), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge THOMAS J. FRAWLEY, Circuit
Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 22), be retained in office?
YES NO
ASSOCIATE CIRCUIT JUDGES
22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Shall Judge THERESA COUNTS BURKE, Associate Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 14), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge MICHAEL F. STELZER, Associate Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No 25), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge PAULA PERKINS BRYANT, Associate Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 26), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge ELIZABETH BYRNE HOGAN, Associate Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No 27), be retained in office?
YES NO
Shall Judge BARBARA TINA PEEBLES, Associate Circuit Judge of Judicial Circuit No. 22 (Division No. 29), be retained in office?
YES NO
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT NO. 1
Proposed by the 95th General Assembly
(First Regular Session) SJR 5
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require the office of county assessor to be an elected position in all counties with a charter form of government, except counties with a population between 600,001-699,999?
It is estimated this proposal will have no costs or savings to state or local governmental entities.
YES - FOR THE AMENDMENT
NO - AGAINST THE AMENDMENT
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT NO. 2
Proposed by the 95th General Assembly
(First Regular Session) HJR 15
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require that all real property used as a homestead by Missouri citizens who are former prisoners of war and have a total service-connected disability be exempt from property taxes?
The number of qualified former prisoners of war
and the amount of each exemption are unknown,
however, because the number who meet the qualifications is expected to be small, the cost to local governmental entities should be minimal. Revenue to the state blind pension fund may be reduced by $1,200.
YES - FOR THE AMENDMENT
NO - AGAINST THE AMENDMENT
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT NO. 3
Proposed by Initiative Petition
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prevent the state, counties, and other political subdivisions from imposing any new tax, including a sales tax, on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate?
It is estimated this proposal will have no costs or savings to state or local governmental entities.
YES - FOR THE AMENDMENT
NO - AGAINST THE AMENDMENT
_______________________________________
STATUTORY MEASURES
PROPOSITION A
Proposed by Initiative Petition
Shall Missouri law be amended to:
* repeal the authority of certain cities to use
earnings taxes to fund their budgets;
* require voters in cities that currently have
an earnings tax to approve continuation of
such tax at the next general municipal
election and at an election held every 5
years thereafter;
* require any current earnings tax that is not
approved by the voters to be phased out
over a period of 10 years; and
* prohibit any city from adding a new
earnings tax to fund their budget?
The proposal could eliminate certain city earnings taxes. For 2010, Kansas City and the City of St. Louis budgeted earnings tax revenue of $199.2 million and $141.2 million, respectively. Reduced earnings tax deductions could increase state revenues by $4.8 million. The total cost or savings to state and local governmental entities is unknown.
YES - FOR THE PROPOSITION
NO - AGAINST THE PROPOSITION
_________________________________________
PROPOSITION B
PROPOSITION B
Proposed by Initiative Petition
Shall Missouri law be amended to:
* require large-scale dog breeding operations
to provide each dog under their care with
sufficient food, clean water, housing and
space; necessary veterinary care; regular
exercise and adequate rest between
breeding cycles;
* prohibit any breeder from having more than
50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling
their puppies as pets; and
* create a misdemeanor crime of "puppy mill
cruelty" for any violations?
It is estimated state governmental entities will incur costs of $654,768 (on-going costs of $521,356 and one-time costs of $133,412). Some local governmental entities may experience costs related to enforcement activities and savings related to reduced animal care activities.
YES - FOR THE PROPOSITION
NO - AGAINST THE PROPOSITION
_____________________________________
PROPOSITION F
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CHARTER
Proposition to amend the Charter of the City of St. Louis to increase the maximum fine to one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), by repealing existing Section 24 of Article IV and enacting a new Section 24 of Article IV relating to fines.
YES - FOR THE PROPOSITION
NO - AGAINST THE PROPOSITION
PREFERENTIAL PROPOSITION L
The Missouri Legislature took governance of the St. Louis Police Department during the Civil War. Do you believe that governance of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department should be returned to the City of St. Louis?
YES - FOR THE PROPOSITION
NO - AGAINST THE PROPOSITION
FOR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION
(Four-Year Term – Vote for Two)
DONNA R. JONES
BILL MONROE
TODD EVANS
DOUGLASS PETTY
WILLIAM (BILL) HAAS
DEREK CRAFT
Write-in__________________________
Write-in__________________________
OFFICIAL BALLOT
SPECIAL ELECTION
CITY OF ST. LOUIS MISSOURI
NOVEMBER 2, 2010
LOCUST CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
PROPOSITION S
Shall a tax of $0.85 per $100.00 valuation be imposed on all real property, located in the Locust Central Business District as established by Ordinance No. 58728, approved December 23, 1982, as amended by Ordinance No. 59248, approved September 10, 1984, as amended by Ordinance No. 60530, approved October 30, 1987, as amended by Ordinance No. 65133, approved on or about January 18, 2001, enlarging the boundaries thereof, and Ordinance No. 66767, and Ordinance No. 68721 to include all areas of real property for the purposes set forth in said Ordinance No. 58728, Ordinance No. 59248, Ordinance No. 60530, Ordinance No. 65133, Ordinance No. 66767 and Ordinance No. 68721?
YES – FOR THE PROPOSITION
NO – AGAINST THE PROPOSITION
OFFICIAL BALLOT
SPECIAL ELECTION
CITY OF ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI
NOVEMBER 2, 2010
FOR ALDERMAN WARD 14
(Vote for One)
CAROL HOWARD DEM
ROGER BAILEY REP
YOU HAVE NOW COMPLETED VOTING { View or Download Sample Ballot Here}
_______________________________________
IN WITNESS WHEREOF: The undersigned, comprising the Board of Election Commissioners for the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri, have caused this notice to be signed and the official seal of the office to be affixed at the office of the Board in St. Louis, this 20th day of September, 2010.
BOARD OF ELECTION COMMISSIONERS
EILEEN M. MC CANN
Chairman/Member
CAROL A. WILSON
Member
CLARENCE E. DULA
Member
(Seal) Attest: JACK LARY
Secretary/Member
___________________________________________________
Voter Poll Click Here
{ View or Download Sample Ballot Here}
Posted at 06:10 PM on Tuesday, October 19, 2010 by District 12 Missouri in Dept Postings
Article Supplied by the VFW from this web page:http://vfwwebcom.org/mo/dist12/85046/
MISSOURI BALLOT MEASURES FOR NOVEMBER 2 GENERAL ELECTION
AMENDMENT #1:Official Ballot Title: Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require the office of county assessor to be an elected position in all counties with a charter form of government, except counties with a population between 600,001-699,999?
A “yes” vote amends the Missouri Constitution to require that assessors in charter counties be elected officials. This proposal will affect St. Louis County and any Missouri county that adopts a charter form of government. The exception is for Jackson County.
A “no” vote will not change the Missouri Constitution and will keep the St. Louis county assessor position an appointed one.
Fiscal Impact: This amendment is estimated to have no impact on taxes or general revenue or any costs or savings to local government entities.
This amendment was placed on the ballot after passage of Senator Eric Schmitt’s SJR 5 in 2009.
A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to exempt any Missouri citizen who is a former prisoner of war with a total service-connected disability from having to pay property taxes on all real property used as a homestead.
A “no” vote will not change the Missouri Constitution to add this exemption for former prisoners of war.
Fiscal Impact: Because the number of citizens estimated to meet this definition is very few, this amendment is estimated to have a minimal impact on local governments and is estimated to decrease the state blind pension fund by $1,200.
This amendment was placed on the ballot due to passage of Representative Maria Chappelle-Nadal’s HJR 15 in 2009.
Official Ballot Title: Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prevent the state, counties, and other political subdivisions from imposing any new tax, including a sales tax, on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate?
A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to prevent the state, any county, or other political subdivision from placing a tax on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate. This includes any transfer tax or sales tax.
A “no” vote will not change the Missouri Constitution to prevent the imposition of such a tax.
Fiscal Impact: This measure is estimated to have no impact to the costs or savings of local governments or state entities.
This amendment was placed on the ballot by Missouri’s initiative petition process.
A “yes” vote amends Missouri law to repeal the authority of certain cities to use earnings taxes to fund their budgets. The amendment also requires voters in the cities that currently use earnings taxes as a revenue generator (St. Louis and Kansas City) to approve continuation of the earnings tax at the next general municipal election and at an election held every five years, or if voted down, phase out the tax over a period of ten years.
A “no” vote will not change Missouri law regarding the use of earnings taxes by Missouri cities.
Fiscal impact: For 2010, Kansas City budgeted earnings tax revenue of $199.2 million and St. Louis budgeted earnings tax revenue of $141.2 million. Reduced earnings tax deductions could increase state revenue by approximately $4.8 million. The total cost or savings to state and local governmental entities is unknown.
This proposition was placed on the ballot by Missouri’s initiative petition process.
A “yes” vote will amend Missouri law to require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space; necessary veterinary care; regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles. The amendment also prohibits any breeder from using more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets and creates the misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations.
___________________________________________________
Voter Poll Click Here
2010 Election-What issues are most important to you and your family in the up-coming Election?--Voter Poll Click Here
{ View or Download Sample Ballot Here}
MISSOURI BALLOT MEASURES FOR NOVEMBER 2 GENERAL ELECTION
Posted at 06:10 PM on Tuesday, October 19, 2010 by District 12 Missouri in Dept Postings
Article Supplied by the VFW from this web page:http://vfwwebcom.org/mo/dist12/85046/
MISSOURI BALLOT MEASURES FOR NOVEMBER 2 GENERAL ELECTION
AMENDMENT #1:Official Ballot Title: Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require the office of county assessor to be an elected position in all counties with a charter form of government, except counties with a population between 600,001-699,999?
A “yes” vote amends the Missouri Constitution to require that assessors in charter counties be elected officials. This proposal will affect St. Louis County and any Missouri county that adopts a charter form of government. The exception is for Jackson County.
A “no” vote will not change the Missouri Constitution and will keep the St. Louis county assessor position an appointed one.
Fiscal Impact: This amendment is estimated to have no impact on taxes or general revenue or any costs or savings to local government entities.
This amendment was placed on the ballot after passage of Senator Eric Schmitt’s SJR 5 in 2009.
AMENDMENT #2:Official Ballot Title: Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require that all real property used as a homestead by Missouri citizens who are former prisoners of war and have a total service-connected disability be exempt from property taxes?
A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to exempt any Missouri citizen who is a former prisoner of war with a total service-connected disability from having to pay property taxes on all real property used as a homestead.
A “no” vote will not change the Missouri Constitution to add this exemption for former prisoners of war.
Fiscal Impact: Because the number of citizens estimated to meet this definition is very few, this amendment is estimated to have a minimal impact on local governments and is estimated to decrease the state blind pension fund by $1,200.
This amendment was placed on the ballot due to passage of Representative Maria Chappelle-Nadal’s HJR 15 in 2009.
AMENDMENT #3:
Official Ballot Title: Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prevent the state, counties, and other political subdivisions from imposing any new tax, including a sales tax, on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate?
A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to prevent the state, any county, or other political subdivision from placing a tax on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate. This includes any transfer tax or sales tax.
A “no” vote will not change the Missouri Constitution to prevent the imposition of such a tax.
Fiscal Impact: This measure is estimated to have no impact to the costs or savings of local governments or state entities.
This amendment was placed on the ballot by Missouri’s initiative petition process.
PROPOSITION A:Official Ballot Title: Shall Missouri law be amended to: repeal the authority of certain cities to use earnings taxes to fund their budgets; require voters in cities that currently have an earnings tax to approve continuation of such tax at the next general municipal election and at an election held every 5 years thereafter; require any current earnings tax that is not approved by the voters to be phased out over a period of 10 years; and prohibit any city from adding a new earnings tax to fund their budget?
A “yes” vote amends Missouri law to repeal the authority of certain cities to use earnings taxes to fund their budgets. The amendment also requires voters in the cities that currently use earnings taxes as a revenue generator (St. Louis and Kansas City) to approve continuation of the earnings tax at the next general municipal election and at an election held every five years, or if voted down, phase out the tax over a period of ten years.
A “no” vote will not change Missouri law regarding the use of earnings taxes by Missouri cities.
Fiscal impact: For 2010, Kansas City budgeted earnings tax revenue of $199.2 million and St. Louis budgeted earnings tax revenue of $141.2 million. Reduced earnings tax deductions could increase state revenue by approximately $4.8 million. The total cost or savings to state and local governmental entities is unknown.
This proposition was placed on the ballot by Missouri’s initiative petition process.
PROPOSITION B:Official Ballot Title: Shall Missouri law be amended to: require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space, necessary veterinary care, regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles; prohibit any breeder from having more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets; and create a misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations?
A “yes” vote will amend Missouri law to require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space; necessary veterinary care; regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles. The amendment also prohibits any breeder from using more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets and creates the misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations.
A “no” vote will not change the Missouri law relating to dog breeders.
Fiscal impact: It is estimated that state entities will incur costs of approximately $650,000 for enforcement. Some local government entities may experience costs related to enforcement of the law as well as possible savings from reduced animal care activities.
This proposition was placed on the ballot by Missouri’s initiative petition process.
Fiscal impact: It is estimated that state entities will incur costs of approximately $650,000 for enforcement. Some local government entities may experience costs related to enforcement of the law as well as possible savings from reduced animal care activities.
This proposition was placed on the ballot by Missouri’s initiative petition process.
Information compiled from www.sos.mo.gov & www.house.mo.gov
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com
