Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - kevinhillman

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »
I, as well as others, have asked several questions on the K2 thread that have gone unanswered.

Your questions about the K2 ban are a question about why should or can the government control what consenting adults want to ingest.  I am not a complete libertarian so my opinion is yes, the government can in a limited manner control what consenting adults ingest.  Let me explain why I come to that conclusion.  I have spent over a decade working in courtrooms prosecuting and defending criminal cases.  My guess is somewhere between 75-80% of crime committed is a result of a chemical dependency or a mental condition.  All of this property crime that is occurring in this county (burglary, break-ins, shoplifting etc) is because criminals are stealing so they can afford to buy another hit of heroin or another round of meth.  It is really sad to see what someone will do to feed their addiction.  Yes, I realize that alcohol has many of the same evils, but prohibition was tried and was a complete disaster.  Is it a perfect solution, no, but it is what the law says.

Therefore, as prosecutor, I intend on prosecuting drug crimes aggressively and fairly.  Many of these folks needs to be sent to prison, many need to be sent to rehab, some to both.  If the State outlaws K2 which seems likely, I'll prosecute those who break the law.

Ask each candidate how many times they have been questioned for over billing hours on legal aid cases?

I have never been questioned over this.  In fact, I have not taken legal aid cases.


I am happy to bring some out.  I sent you a PM for addresses so they are not broadcast to the public.


Our neighborhood could use a couple of your signs!  Our location is simple, almost directly across I-44 from the VFW.  Your opponent has one out there all by come on now!

Speaking of spaghetti and eating, you are all invited to my campaign kick-off dinner, the information is below:
Everyone is invited to a campaign kick-off dinner to support Kevin Hillman for Pulaski County Prosecutor.
Saturday May 15, 2010
6:00 pm to 8:00 pm
Pulaski County-Fort Wood Shrine Club
26920 Shrine Road (off Hwy 17 South)
Buckhorn, MO
Chicken and Roast Beef Dinner provided and a cash bar is available
Special Guest Speaker: Sheriff JB King
Please contact Allie Hillman at 573-336-0709 or to RSVP
Contributions suggested but not required

I refer such questions to my wife, as I am the expert at getting the stain on the shirt, not off.  I should have said questions about the prosecutor's race.  Thanks for calling me on that Taz:)

I'm in for the debate.  Just let me know the time and place.  Also, you can ask me questions here anytime.

I will have more signs out this weekend.  We have been working west to east.
I plan on voting for Kevin Hillman but he is going to have to get his name out there more if he expects to win.  I see a kazillion signs out there for Thomas and Hooper.  I see very few signs for Hillman.  And some people vote according to name recognition.

County Government Opinion / Re: How's the Prosecuting Attorney Doing?
« on: April 03, 2010, 12:22:55 AM »
Not sure I understand.   The judge  and/or jury didn't do their job because??

No, actually I think everyone did their jobs in that case.  As this case happened on Fort Leonard Wood, it went to the Federal Grand Jury for an idictment for felony DWI.  The Grand Jury indicted this individual based on Auctioneer Ed's testimony.  This individual was on probabtion from the State of Missouri for other cases, which was revoked and he was sent to Missouri state prison for 10 years if I remember.  He then entered a plea of guilty in Federal Court to felony DWI and received a Federal prision sentence that was consecutive to the Missouri sentence.

County Government Opinion / Re: How's the Prosecuting Attorney Doing?
« on: March 31, 2010, 04:12:04 AM »
Here are my answers to Darrell's questions.  Sorry for the delay, my girls had a soccer game tonight.  My oldest scored 2 goals any my youngest had an assist!

Others will ask lots of questions so I'll leave the obvious ones (i.e., why do you want the job, why vote for you and not your opponents) to others. I'll be asking those things later in a formal interview closer to the Republican primary in August.

But here are some more specialized questions others probably won't ask.

Question 1: Please describe your understanding of the Missouri Sunshine Law and how, if elected prosecutor, you will handle city councils, school boards, the county commission, and other government agencies that you believe are violating it.

I deal with the Sunshine Act on a daily basis in my capacity as city attorney for St. Robert.  Basically, everything is an open record/open meeting unless it deals with very specific exceptions.  The main ones that we deal with on a daily basis are personnel issues, pending litigation, and real estate purchases/sale/leases. 

I would try and advise each of the boards of the rules of the Sunshine Act to help with compliance.  Keep in mind that the prosecutor is the attorney for the county commission, but each city and school board has their own separate attorney to advise them.  I will have to be careful not to interfere their attorney's advice.  If it is a serious violation, one that I think was knowing and purposeful, then criminal charges may be appropriate.  That would be reviewed on a case by case basis.

Question 2: Sheriff JB King appears to have already endorsed you on this board and even more clearly on the "other board." Please outline your relationship with local law enforcement agencies, how you will treat requests from them to file charges, and how you will handle situations where you do not believe the police officer or deputy has given you enough in the probable cause statement to file a credible charge against an alleged offender.

I believe that I have a good relationship with the local law enforcement agencies.  I have worked very closely with St. Robert PD and have worked with the Waynesville PD as well.  I have also gotten to know many in the Sheriff's Department and I am very proud that Sheriff King has expressed his support so strongly.  I have not worked with the police departments in Crocker, Richland, and Dixon as much because I have been in St. Robert.  However, I think I am a pro police prosecutor.  What I mean by that is I am here for them.  If they need to call me in the middle of the night to ask me a questions, that is fine with me.  I would rather them get it right, instead of trying to fix the screw up later.  I also am here to try and make their lives easier.  I will do everything in my power to try and take their viewpoint into account.  There are times when the prosecutor and police will disagree.  But, if I tell them why and explain it, then we both come out ahead.  I plan on filing all charges that warrant being filed.  If it does not meet the standard that I set, which is that I am convinced that the case is solved, then I'll ask for more investigation and explain why.  The prosecutor is charged with not just winning every case, but seeking justice. 

I hope that answers your questions!


County Government Opinion / Re: How's the Prosecuting Attorney Doing?
« on: March 30, 2010, 10:08:07 PM »
I filed for prosecutor today and welcome any questions folks may have about what my plans are, who I am, my experience, why I want the job etc.  I hope to have my website up and running tonight.
Kevin Hillman
Candidate for Pulaski County Prosecuting Attorney

County Government Opinion / Re: How's the Prosecuting Attorney Doing?
« on: March 20, 2010, 05:22:22 PM »
I believe that meet the candidate night is for school board candidates only.  The Chamber and the Senior centers do some later in the summer for the August/November election.

Ok, let me try and answer all of the questions.  If I miss one, I apologize.  The ordinance does not go into effect for 14 days, so those individuals and stores could get rid of what they had.  After that date, it is illegal to possess or sell.  There is not going to be any compensation.
This was not done to raise revenue.  After speaking with the store owners who were selling this stuff, my guess is the city is going to lose money based upon lost sales revenue.  The revenue that is generated from marijuana cases is very minimal, and is easily consumed by the costs of the case i.e. police officer, tests, prosecutor, clerk, judge etc.
Finally, if the state would legalize medical marijuana, their statute would trump a local ordinance.  I wouldn't hold your breath on that one, as my guess is it is far more likely that they are going to outlaw K2.
I am as big supporter of limited government as you will get, what is going on in Washington makes me sick.  However, the one area that I do believe government, especially local government, has a legitimate place is law and order.  I believe that this is what this ban is about.  I realize many disagree, but that's what this board is all about.

I realize you do not agree with this ordinance, but it was done with the blessing of the command of the Freedom Fighters you reference.  Just because there is not a chemical test does not mean we should not do what is right.  Have you seen what the doctor who invented this stuff said about human use?  He called using it Russian Roulette. 
I am not sure if you were trying to imply we were targeting soldiers, but that is not the case.  Keep in mind that many on the St. Robert Board of Aldermen are retired military, married to retired military, or are DA civilian employees.  In addition, I am a veteran and still serving in the Guard and the City Administrator is a retired Marine.  This City is proud to support our military.
I'll be happy to spend time in court on this one so a 14 year old does not buy something they have no business doing or trying.  That's what they pay me to do!
Again, I realize you don't agree and I have seen the debate on drugs and alcohol.  However, it is our opinion that this K2 stuff is dangerous and that is the sole reason we acted.  I suspect the state legislature is getting ready to do the same thing, except they are going to make it a felony.
Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney

My former neighbor is correct, the ex post facto clause of the Constiution prohibits criminal laws to be retroactive.  As such, it will not be retroactive but take effect on Monday more than likely. 

Look for this to be on the agenda at the St. Robert city council meeting on Monday at the request of the police chief.  We know of lots of it being sold in stores in St. Robert with the target audience being military members.  I believe that the legislature is going to make it a felony to sell or possess this but we want to be proactive and stop the sale of it right now as it does appear to be dangerous.

City Government Opinion / Re: St. Robert Aquatic Park
« on: February 02, 2010, 03:44:23 AM »
No discussion on prices.  You would not believe how much work was involved in the design and bid process for this size project.  I am sure the park committee and the newly hired pool manager, whoever that is, will work on that in the future.  I am sure that it will be very reasonable.

City Government Opinion / Re: St. Robert Aquatic Park
« on: February 02, 2010, 02:40:32 AM »
Correct, the outdoor pool will open in Spring 2011.  We could not have it ready for Summer 2010.  However, we hope to get the indoor part open for Winter 2010-2011.
Bales Construction in Waynesville was awarded the bid this evening so we should get a much better timeline soon.

City Government Opinion / Re: St. Robert Aquatic Park
« on: February 01, 2010, 10:34:10 PM »
We hope to have the indoor facility ready for next winter.  There was no way we could ever have the outdoor portion ready for next Spring.  The amount of design and prep work was amazing, but you should see some actual construction soon.  The contractor will be selected tonight at city council.
Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney

I thought you all may want to see the updated alert sent out by the NRA after speaking with them.  Hopefully, this puts to rest the idea that we were somehow trying to restrict self-defense in St. Robert.  Here is the link:
Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney

I have attached a letter from Mayor Sanders in regards to the supposed ban on firearm discharge in St. Robert.  I also put the text below.  I hope it also helps clear up the confusion.  As I stated earlier, we were actually trying to allow for hunting in the city this season, not ban anyone's firearms or prevent them from defending themselves.
Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney
November 25, 2009

Re:  Recent Changes to City Code Regarding Firearms and Hunting

It has come to my attention that a recent posting on a website has stated “City of St. Robert Passes Discharge Ban!”  The information contained in that posting is not correct and has left out important information.

On October 5, 2009, the City Council adopted an ordinance to amend Section 200.240 of the City Code which is the section that deals with firearms.  The amendment actually relaxed the firearm restrictions and allowed for hunting with a firearm in areas of the city that are zoned agricultural.  In addition, the amendment allowed for hunting with a bow or cross-bow in other areas of the city. 

The intent of the city council was to allow for hunting within the city limits.  There was no intent to limit the ability of anyone to defend their persons or homes with a firearm.  It should be noted that Section 200.240 of the City Code also has a specific section allowing a city resident to be “engaged in an act of lawful defense.”  As such, the “Castle Doctrine” of self-defense as stated in Sections 563.031 and 563.074 R.S.Mo. is clearly recognized by the City of St. Robert.

After that meeting, it was discovered that another existing section of the city code did not allow for the use of air guns, cross bows, or bows and arrows within the city limits.  That section does not mention firearms.  This was Section 200.250 of the City Code, which is the section cited by the website.  Therefore, in order to allow hunting in the city limits, the city council amended Section 200.250 to allow for bow and cross-bow hunting.

It appears that Section 200.250 has been in the City Code for over 20 years.  It should also be pointed out that the section that was amended specifically to relax the restrictions in place for a number of years for weapons other than firearms.  It was not done to restrict the ability to own a firearm or use it in an act of lawful self-defense.

Finally, it should be noted that state statutes always take precedence over a municipal ordinance.  As such, Sections 563.031 and 563.074 R.S. Mo. which state Missouri’s “Castle Doctrine” apply in the City of St. Robert and take precedence over the ordinances.

It is my hope that this clears up any misunderstanding that may have arisen from the steps city council took to allow for hunting this firearm and bow season in the City of St. Robert.  I believe I speak for the majority of the City Council in stating that we support the Second Amendment and the right of all Americans to own and use a firearm for their protection.


George Sanders
Mayor, City of St. Robert, Missouri

[attachment deleted by admin]

My former neighbor Matrsnot is correct.  The castle doctrine and state law would preempt any ordinance.  So, you are still allowed to defend yourself and it was never anyone's intention to take that away.
The prohibition against firing any projectile was actually already in the city code and has been there for many years.  We amended that section to allow firearm hunting in areas zoned agricultural and to allow bow hunting in other areas of the city. 
I think you'll find that most, if not all, members of the city council are strong supporters of the 2nd Amendment and this was not done to restrict anyone's right to their firearms.  In fact, it was done to allow some hunting and to clarify where you could do that.  I wrote the changes so I have it on pretty good authority that there was no secret agenda.
I hope that clears up any confusion.
Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney

Local News / Re: Where's the Chimney?
« on: November 19, 2009, 02:54:01 PM »
The chimney was removed as part of an effort headed by Mayor Sanders and others to preserve it.  The plan is for it to be placed in a park as a memorial in recognition that it was part of the African-American USO Club.  I am sure that there will be more information to follow as they are working out the engineering right now.  Bottom line, it is safe and will be back out in a spot where it can get the recognition it deserves.
Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney

Local News / Re: Plans for Ramada Inn announced
« on: November 15, 2009, 04:25:39 AM »
TIF stands for Tax Increment Financing.  Basically, it allows a developer to recoup some of the money they have invested in infastructure costs like roads, sewer, water, etc.  It can be used only under certain criteria and Rep. Day is correct, it has to have an economic benefit.  The most common criteria used is blighted property, which means basically run down or getting run down for TIF purposes.  That is what is being used for the Ramada.  The folks that own it now have done a great job maintaining it, but it is at the end of its lifespan and the building either needs to be gutted and completely remodeled or torn down.
Here is how TIF works.  You have 2 types of taxes in a TIF, property and sales:
For property, you take the base assessed value at the time of the TIF, so for example lets say the property generates $100.00 in real estate taxes.  If the developer is able to build and attract new business to the site and the property begins to produce $500.00 in real estate taxes, the difference is $400.00.  The additional revenue goes into a special fund that is used to reimburse the developer.  The original $100.00 gets paid to the school district, city, county etc.
For sales tax, the developer gets 1/2 of the new sales tax produced.  Again, say the property produces $100.00 of sales tax when you put the TIF into place and $500.00 is the new amount produced, then the developer gets $200 of the additional $400 and the the other $200 plus original $100 goes to the taxing districts.
TIFs last for 23 years or until they reimburse the developer.  TIF #1 in St. Robert which included Ruby Tuesday and the Fairfield Inn paid off 7 years early.  The assessed value in that area went for a few thousand dollars to millions.  TIF #2, which includes Oak Point Apartments, Aussie Jacks is set to pay off a couple of years early and again it is a huge gain in value.  If they do not pay off, the developer eats the costs.
In the case of the Ramada, there is going to be some significant demolition and remodeling costs.  There is no way for this to be profitable without TIF.  However, the City believes that in the end, this will greatly improve one of the highest visibility intersections in our area and bring new business, new jobs, and ulitmately better retail and dining selections to our area. 
The hearing is November 30th at 6:00 pm at City Hall if you are interested.  You can always stop by and see me and ask questions.  Sorry to be so wordy, but you asked and I am a lawyer.
Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney
p.s. By the way, anyone can propose a TIF plan.  However, they generally cost the developer close to $100k in legal fees.  The developer has to pay their own fees and the City's fees and must put up a deposit of $15k to the City right off the back.  Not to mention the millions they have to dump into a project in hopes that it works.

City Government Opinion / Re: stoplight timing
« on: July 21, 2009, 01:43:55 PM »
We'll contact MoDOT this morning and let them know there is a problem.  I saw it today when I came to work.  The City does not control the light so we'll have to wait for MoDOT.
Kevin S. Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney

It was Alan.  He will be giving the presentation on the 15th as well.  I hope folks come and tell us what they want.  The Mayor and the City Council are really trying to repond to what people are telling them they want.  If the park sales tax along with the elimination of the personal property tax is approved, there is a lot more than just an aquatics center/ new community center that we are looking at.  However, we need to know what people want.  We toured a number of facilities other cities have last summer so we have some ideas as to what is out there.

The forum is open to all who want to come and express their ideas for what you think is needed in the St. Robert park system and what you would like to see in a Community Center/Aquatics Facility if we are able to build one.  You are welcome to attend, even if you do not live in the City.  We realize that many of the folks who use the parks do not live in the city.
Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney

City Government Opinion / Re: SR police getting sued
« on: May 31, 2008, 03:11:21 AM »

The lawsuit is proceeding in U.S. District Court in Springfield.  It is in the discovery phase.  It is set for trial in July 2009.

Kevin Hillman
St. Robert City Attorney

City Government Opinion / Re: What is TIF?
« on: May 14, 2008, 06:36:40 PM »
The movie theater would be in the redevelopment area where the old burned out motel is now in St. Robert.  Right now it is just a proposal, but it is in the plan.  There is about 100 acres of land in that area so more than enough for lots of businesses.  I feel your pain about the kids, I have two small daughters myself.

Kevin Hillman, St. Robert City Attorney

City Government Opinion / Re: What is TIF?
« on: May 14, 2008, 04:56:40 PM »
Rick, no the developer pays all of the costs of the plan.  He had to deposit $20k with the city before we would even start. 
The big issue in Rolla was that they were trying to force folks to move through emminent domain.  We are not doing that, and as a policy do not do that in St. Robert.  This is all voluntary by the owner.
As a fellow Shriner I have thought about whether we could do anything at the club.  A TIF would not work because the area would not meet the blight standards and the expense would be too great.  You are in the ballpark with $100k in expenses for the developer to set this up.  A CID could work but CIDs need a business that produces sales tax and the only business out there is our own club.  As such, we would be taxing ourselves.  The only benefit would be in the types of bonds we might be able to issue.  I still do not think it is economically feasable but I will do some more reasearch. 
I also want to clarify something that was incorrect in the paper.  The convention center would be built by the developer and not the city.  If anything, we are looking at a recreation center and aquatic center but I want to emphasize that we are merely laying the groundwork for the future.  If we don't lay the groundwork now, then we can never do it. Once we get this in place, we will probably see if the other cities want to cooperate.   Family entertainment is something that is being looked at very seriously for this area, and I can tell you a new movie theater is in the plans already.
Finally, I want to emphasize that the law enforcement tax has nothing to do with this plan.  I am sorry it is getting tied to this, but none of us here at the city even thought of it as we have been working through all of this.  We are simply trying to fix a bad area of St. Robert and make it into something that everyone can benefit from instead of the eyesore and hazard that it is now.
Hope that helps answer some of the questions.  Keep them coming as I want to make sure everyone knows what we are doing.
Kevin Hillman, St. Robert City Attorney

City Government Opinion / Re: What is TIF?
« on: May 14, 2008, 01:56:50 PM »
I agree that the developer gets an advantage under TIF, but he also is taking care of a blighted area that no one is going to fix without assistance.  Please keep in mind that Rolla, Lebanon, and the Lake area are waiting with the same type of proposals.  As such, if St. Robert does not stay competitive with those cities by offering incentives, we will lose the new development and that would hurt the exisiting businesses even more.  The Fields property as it exists now is hurting the city and all of the business on Missouri Ave because it is a blighted area.  It is the 1st thing folks see when they come off FLW.
The CID is not meant to help or hurt the Law Enforcement tax issue, we have been working this plan long before that debate came up.  Also, we were in this process when Waynesville came with the pool idea and we could not reveal where we were at that time because of this plan.  We are trying to put into place a mechanism that would allow us to have funding to do something everyone in the community seems to want.  You are right that a lot of things have to come together to make it work, but we are trying.
Again, if anyone wants to look at the plan or see what we are doing, please come by St. Robert City Hall and see me.  I am more than happy to show you.  I am glad that so many folks are interested in what we are doing.
Kevin Hillman, St. Robert City Attorney

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »