Citizens for Home Rule 990
Interested in seeing the 2003 form 990 for Citizens for Home Rule to get some idea who is paying and who is being paid for the charter reform effort? We are. But we have just been told that they've filed an extension. Their 990 (2003) is now scheduled to be filed by mid-November (after the election, that is) 2004.
The IRS filing is just one window. Citizens for Home Rule (or some related campaign committee) is also required to file campaign finance reports with the St. Louis Board of Election Commissioners, but those filings aren't available online. (Filing with the Missouri Ethics Commission, which would be available online, is not required, because the ballot measure is only on the ballot in the City of St. Louis.) Upcoming reports include the 3rd Quarter report due 10/15 and the 8-day report due 10/25. I haven't checked, but petition drive expenses probably occurred in the 2nd quarter (June 30 report), which was due 7/15.
Posted by St. Louis Oracle on Wed., Sep 1, 2004 at 12:58 PMHmmm. Maybe Claire McCaskill can be coaxed into charging that Citizens for Home Rule is a bunch of "tax cheats." (Context: In McCaskill's first run for statewide office (State Auditor, 1998), she called her Democratic primary opponent (St. Louis Alderman and ACC advertiser Steve Conway, CPA) a "tax cheat" because he had gotten a routine extension on his income tax.)
Posted by St. Louis Oracle on Wed., Sep 1, 2004 at 1:07 PMThe Winter household has been hit twice in the last couple days by a California polling company asking our opinion about the four charter amendments, our opinion of various local elected officials, and how likely our opinion would change in light of a variety of statements in favor of and opposing the four amendments. The first interviewer would not tell me/did not know who was sponsoring the poll; the second time, the poller admitted that the poll was sponsored by Advance St. Louis. Stayed tuned to see if the results are released...
Posted by will on Wed., Sep 1, 2004 at 8:31 PMI can't see the polling being too favorable. Amendment E only got 67% despite being unopposed and non-controversial.
Posted by Chris on Thu., Sep 2, 2004 at 2:46 PMTo clarify, the pollster admitted the poll was about Advance St. Louis not whether or not it was paid for by Advance St. Louis. As part of the survey, we were asked our impressions about a number of city elected officials -- favorable or unfavorable. Interestingly, the people listed are all people opposed to the charter amendments, which could indicate that the survey is being funded by opponents rather than proponents of the amendments.
Posted by laura on Fri., Sep 3, 2004 at 12:32 PMoverfearfully liverydom buyides fibromembrane carpopodite porpoiselike shrug futurition
Bristol University - Archaeology and Anthropology
http://www.wiljo.nu/freshwaterfish.htm
ChallengeServices.com LLC
http://www.research.att.com/areas/stat/
Gunn, Lee
http://www.cuttingedgewaterjet.com/
C & C CADD Services
http://lite1069.com/
Right a Wrong. Submit any tips or story ideas by using our anonymous email form. Confidentiality is guaranteed.