ST. LOUIS – The November general election is fast approaching, and Missouri has several key amendments and issues on the ballot. Amendment 6 is one of the modifications the state is proposing to Missouri voters. The proposed change to the Missouri Constitution that would allow the levying of costs and fees to support salaries and benefits for current and former sheriffs, prosecuting attorneys, and circuit attorneys, framed as ensuring access to courts of justice for all Missourians.
What is Amendment 6?
The Senate joint resolution suggests repealing Article I of Section 14 and adopting the following wording:
“In order to ensure that all Missourians have access to the courts of justice as guaranteed by this Constitution, the administration of justice shall include the levying of costs and fees to support salaries and benefits for sheriffs, former sheriffs, prosecuting attorneys, former prosecuting attorneys, circuit attorneys, and former circuit attorneys.”
When voters are at the polls, the amendment will be presented as the following:
“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to provide that the administration of justice shall include the levying of costs and fees to support salaries and benefits for certain current and former law enforcement personnel? State and local governmental entities estimate an unknown fiscal impact.”
If this amendment were to pass, a $3 court fee would be reinstated to fund the retirement system for sheriffs after it was deemed unconstitutional in 2015. During that time, the court’s opinion stated that retired sheriffs “had nothing to do with the administration of justice,” according to Greene County Sheriff’s Office.
What a yes or no vote means
A vote on “yes” will be in favor of changing the amendment, agreeing to levy costs and fees to support salaries and benefits of current and former sheriffs, prosecuting attorneys, and circuit attorneys to ensure all Missourians have access to the courts of justice.
A vote on “no” will reject the proposal of amending the section, disapproving of levy costs and fees to support salaries and benefits of current and former sheriffs, prosecuting attorneys, and circuit attorneys to ensure all Missourians have access to the courts of justice.
What are differing stances on the amendment?
Republican Sen. Rusty Black of Missouri’s 12th District is in favor of the amendment, citing in late April, “a resolution that I filed, would ask voters to enshrine into the state’s constitution that sheriffs play a crucial role in the administration of justice, which would ensure a robust retirement fund for sheriffs as they approach the end of their careers.”
On the other hand, the Reason Foundation has announced its disapproval of the amendment, stating in part, “In addition to justice and fairness concerns, Amendment 6 also violates some basics of public finance and fiscal stewardship. Proponents of the amendment are justified in their concern for the funding of retirement systems. Public pensions are constitutionally protected benefits promised to public workers, and government employers are obligated to ensure they are paid in full, regardless of market conditions or revenue generation.”
Republican Sen. Mike Bernskoetter is also in favor of the proposal, noting, “Currently, the pension system for sheriffs is in dire need of support in Missouri. A common story heard across the nation is pension funds – designed for a different economy and estimated life spans – are coming under duress. This is because of a number of factors. One of the most prominent being a large generational group having reached retirement age at the same time. Combine that with the fact people are living longer than ever before and you can see the financial pressure put on the system. Now, don’t get me wrong, a well-earned retirement and longevity are both good things, but they do put out-of-date pension systems under financial pressure, so new avenues of funding must be explored.”
Another individual opposing the changes comes from Director of Municipal Policy David Stokes with the Show-Me Institute. He says, “As if the misleading language and targeting of one county wasn’t enough to object to, the fact is that funding pensions by court fees is a bad policy. That is why previous attempts to fund a sheriff’s pension in this manner were thrown out as unconstitutional by the Missouri Supreme Court. Imposing court fees that make it harder to seek justice in court, or harder to pay fines ordered by court—especially when those fees financially benefit the law enforcement officials who impose some of them—creates a perverse incentive…Missouri sheriffs and prosecutors deserve our support, but Amendment 6 is not the way to show it.
