Joplin City Council Candidate Forum – March 30, 2026

This candidate forum, hosted by Missouri Southern State University and moderated by Lisa Olegis, featured eight candidates for the Joplin City Council. Two candidates (Rob O'Brien and Eli Moran) are running unopposed for zone seats, while the other six (Josh Ditar, Natasha Klue Michael, Brian Cowells, Jamie Hammond, Mary Price, and Matthew Woolsey) are competing for general seats with four-year terms. Each candidate gave a one-minute introduction and then responded to questions on topics including homelessness, representation, development, decorum, affordable housing, and public safety. The election is scheduled for April 7, 2026.

Candidate Introductions

• Josh Ditar (incumbent, mayor pro tem): Joplin native, wants to continue serving, emphasized his committee work.
• Natasha Klue Michael: Barber and planning & zoning commissioner, previously ran in 2024, wants to be a voice for all Joplin residents.
• Brian Cowells: Former sales and marketing professional, interned in city manager’s office, seeks safer, more affordable, and responsibly grown city.
• Jamie Hammond: Social worker, organizes Food Not Bombs, wants to represent people and foster collaboration.
• Mary Price: Concerned about transparency and accountability, had questions unanswered by current council.
• Matthew Woolsey: Young candidate, believes council has ignored the will of the people, wants to listen and give citizens what they want.
• Rob O'Brien (Zone 1, unopposed): Former chamber president, wants to build consensus, focus on public safety and community amenities.
• Eli Moran (Zone 4, unopposed): Chief Strategy Officer at Lafayette House, serves on police advisory committee, wants to advance Joplin as a place for families.

Discussion: Homelessness

Candidates were asked about current city actions (regional commission, director of homelessness response, coordinated entry, anti-dumping ordinance) and what they would bring.

• Josh Ditar: Supported the coalition, excited about new director; city should be a partner, not run it.
• Natasha Klue Michael: Would have preferred spending the $90,000 study on local affordable housing instead of outside consultants; wants to listen to local organizations.
• Brian Cowells: Called for triaging individuals, criticized reliance on the charity report; wants experienced people on the commission.
• Jamie Hammond: Emphasized uniting existing nonprofits and churches; cited personal success story of two people getting sober; city should support collaboration.
• Mary Price: Raised concern about homeless being bused into Joplin (17 people in five weeks); suggested too many nonprofits may waste resources; wants to pull resources together.
• Matthew Woolsey: Not an expert, would defer to experienced locals; believes city should directly fund and oversee solutions; noted that 17 homeless people in five weeks is not many.
• Rob O'Brien: Acknowledged long-standing issue; praised homeless coalition but cautioned some organizations may not collaborate; city should support a 'coalition of the willing'.
• Eli Moran: From experience at Lafayette House, noted data collection difficulties and inefficiencies with clustered organizations; city should coordinate with experts, not be the solution itself.

Discussion: Role of a Council Member (Representation)

Candidates were asked whether a council member should be a delegate (following constituent opinions) or a trustee (using independent judgment), and how to handle divided public opinion.

• Natasha Klue Michael: Both roles; council must listen but make decisions when constituents are divided; council members are not required to answer questions per charter, but she would follow up.
• Brian Cowells: Council should listen to citizens; when divided, consider short- and long-term effects; healthy disagreement is acceptable.
• Jamie Hammond: Council members are civil servants; if opinion is 50-50, put it to a vote of the people.
• Mary Price: Elected to make decisions based on research; social media is not the place for airing concerns, but speaking at council is.
• Matthew Woolsey: Council members are mouths for the legislative body, constituents are the brain; when divided, give the decision to the people; supports charter review for accountability.
• Rob O'Brien: A citizens' council – members are citizens too; need to consider impact on all 53,000 people; major issues require public input, but routine business is handled by council.
• Eli Moran: Servant and representative; use data and context, avoid 'me versus you'; collaboration over compromise; clear communication reduces uncertainty.
• Josh Ditar (added after a correction): Council must gather all information and make the best decision for the community long-term; accessible to citizens via phone and meetings; sometimes people are satisfied after a conversation.

Discussion: Development and Growth

Candidates were asked whether they would apply the same scrutiny to new industries as was applied to the data center (which faced opposition over environmental concerns and water use) and how to ensure responsible growth.

• Brian Cowells: Yes, scrutiny is needed; new developments (movie theater, apartments) are exciting but must be affordable and consider infrastructure; worker housing is key.
• Jamie Hammond: Committed to environmental accountability; opposed data center due to water and electricity use; will work with Joplin Sustainable Technology Alliance; must consider jobs and ethics.
• Mary Price: Will scrutinize development for contamination (e.g., sports complex land); supports growth but responsibly.
• Matthew Woolsey: Industry is vital but must be scrutinized to protect the Ozarks’ beauty and ecosystem; water and land are essential.
• Rob O'Brien: Scrutiny already happens; utilities and environmental studies are standard; some companies are told they are not a good fit; industrial parks help control impacts.
• Eli Moran: Agrees with scrutiny; federal and state agencies ensure safety; supports using existing land before over-annexation; higher-paying jobs can help affordable housing.
• Josh Ditar: Growth for growth’s sake is not best; infrastructure and public safety must be in place; quality of life (parks, trails, momentum bike park) attracts people and jobs.
• Natasha Klue Michael: Pro-economic development but voted no on Wildwood Ranch annexation (data center) because it would use 5 million gallons of water per day for only 10 permanent jobs; contrasts with current industries using 1 million gallons for hundreds of jobs; also stressed need to support police and fire when annexing.

Discussion: Decorum

Candidates were asked how they would restore decorum after contentious meetings and how to handle groups that clash with the city.

• Jamie Hammond: Decorum issues arose because people felt unheard; would schedule meetings with dissenters; she was once kicked out for defending a council member; called for compassion.
• Mary Price: Disruptive behavior (clapping, stomping) is disrespectful; would not tolerate that in a workplace; citizens can speak but must follow rules.
• Matthew Woolsey: Decorum broke because council wasn’t listening; the escalation came from council threats; accountability is needed.
• Rob O'Brien: Communication is two-way; council should reach out before meetings; regardless, citizens must treat fellow citizens with respect; common ground is the goal.
• Eli Moran: Seek to understand before being understood; communication and collaboration are key; personal interaction is important.
• Josh Ditar: Decorum means professionalism; louder does not mean heard; council must listen; reminded of a positive example where a citizen’s idea led to a crosswalk.
• Natasha Klue Michael: Council should lead by example; she emailed all council members about Wildwood Ranch and got no response; she stood up at a meeting because she felt lied to, but remains friendly with council members.
• Brian Cowells: Council should be respected; decorum is not blaming council for a death or accusing of bribes; citizens should have respect for council and vice versa.

Discussion: Affordable Housing

Candidates were asked about the city’s role in supporting affordable housing and specific tools (zoning changes, incentives, public-private partnerships, etc.).

• Mary Price: Supports J HAP and home repair programs; would rely on experts like Rob O'Brien; wants to build as many low-income homes as possible.
• Matthew Woolsey: This is a nationwide issue; suggests studying past mistakes and solutions globally; housing is essential for survival.
• Rob O'Brien: Positive steps exist (J HAP, demolition program, ARPA funds); funds expire at year-end; suggests a loan fund for low-income neighborhoods and pre-approved house plans to reduce costs.
• Eli Moran: Federal funds are becoming scarce; suggests state contracts (Missouri Housing Development Commission); emphasizes J HAP program which requires 10-year residency, building tax base.
• Josh Ditar: J HAP and demo programs were very successful; ARPA funds will end; wants to find new funding; tiny home projects are a transition; the work is never done.
• Natasha Klue Michael: Excited to work with Eli on grant writing; notes 20 homes torn down, 7-8 rebuilt; voted yes on tiny homes; disappointed a text amendment to allow duplexes on smaller lots failed; believes changing zoning can lower housing costs.
• Brian Cowells: Partnerships are key; suggests tax incentives for builders; low-barrier permitting and zoning; many vacant lots exist but are expensive to service; city could invest in those lots.
• Jamie Hammond: As a social worker, sees the crisis daily; Joplin has more options than other towns; supports annexation for housing, home repair, and any innovative ideas from citizens.

Discussion: Public Safety (Proposition B sales tax renewal)

Candidates were asked what they would do if voters reject the sales tax extension for police, fire, and dispatchers.

• Matthew Woolsey: Nervous about funding; supports more funding for fire and EMS but is on the fence about police; would need to study the specific needs.
• Rob O'Brien: The city will face tight budgets after grant funds end; would require departments to make hard choices, cut services, or find new revenue from other parts of the budget.
• Eli Moran: Public safety is foundational for economic development and quality of life; without it the city regresses; difficult budget prioritization would be needed.
• Josh Ditar: Believes citizens will pass it; if not, would regroup and find a different ask; failure would mean cuts to other vital departments.
• Natasha Klue Michael: Did a ride-along and learned first responders want to go home; overtime is excessive; if tax fails, would redirect funding from the Flock program to public safety salaries.
• Brian Cowells: Confident voters will pass it; failure would lead to worsening conditions, officer attrition, and cuts to other departments; it’s a renewal, not a new tax.
• Jamie Hammond: Saw public support for the tax; wants assurance funds go to salaries; would work to cement that.
• Mary Price: 110% for it; if it fails, would put a hiring and salary freeze across the city and cut budgets; public safety is essential.

Key Outcomes

This was an informational candidate forum, not a voting meeting. No formal decisions or votes were taken. The event concluded with an encouragement to vote on April 7, 2026, with polls open 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. The forum will be rebroadcast on KGCS TV and YouTube.