Lawmakers press prosecutor's office on TJP selection and procurement as statute on advocacy is raised

During debate on the COMBAT education ordinance, several legislators raised concerns about the procurement pathway used to select TJP Strategies LLC and possible conflicts tied to campaign consulting. Legislator Smith and others asked why the office did not follow the usual Bonfire solicitation and whether any firms might have been left out when staff conducted targeted outreach by phone and email.

Prosecutor Johnson described a roughly month-long competitive process in which staff called and emailed candidate firms, received three formal proposals and constituted a selection committee. "We, put our feelers out. We asked around and saw who had capacity... They were notified via phone and email," she said in response to questions. Legislators requested scoring rubrics, committee member names and the proposals; Johnson said she would provide those documents promptly.

The legal risk of using public funds for advocacy was explicitly raised. One legislator cited "Missouri revised statute 115.646," noting the law "specifically prohibits spending tax dollars to advocate for elections." General counsel and Prosecutor Johnson said they had reviewed contract language with a fine-tooth comb and had consulted the Attorney General's office; they asserted the current contract restricts the vendor to educational content and excludes advocacy. Several legislators said the documentation provided so far left open factual questions about vendor selection, bid timelines and whether any retroactive payments were reflected in contract dates.