Dodge City News Starks CFAB Definition of a substantial interest RE: Conflict of interest questions

[old timer]

Given the development map showing the, basically, Gregory Starks (broker) Events Center/Butler National Mariah Center that is going around, seems that city commission needs a little update on conflict of interest law and Mr. Starks remaining on CFAB (note: he never quit).

Here's that. Wonder what a request to the AG on whether his position and the events center decision were legal would find out? I understand that done right, the Ks Attorney General has to answer.

Kansas: Definition of a substantial interest RE: Conflict of interest questions

February 21, 2002
Opinion No. 2002-01

K.S.A. 75-4301a provides the definition of a substantial interest. It states in pertinent part:

“(a) 'Substantial interest' means any of the following:

. . .

“(4) If an individual or an individual's spouse holds the position of officer, director, associate, partner or proprietor of any business, other than an organization exempt from federal taxation of corporations under section 501(c)(3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (10) or (19) of chapter 26 of the United States code, the individual has a substantial interest in that business, irrespective of the amount of compensation received by the individual or individual's spouse.”


Dodge City Municipal Code

(e) Conflict of Interest - No elected or
appointive city official or employee, whether paid or unpaid, shall engage in any business or transaction or shall have a financial or other personal interest, direct or indirect, which is incompatible with the proper
discharge of his or her duties in the public interest or
would tend to impair his or her independence of judgment
or action in the performance of his or her official
duties. Personal as distinguished from financial interest
includes an interest arising from blood or marriage
relationships or close business or political association.
Specific conflicts of interest are enumerated below
for the guidance of officials and employees:

(1) Incompatible Employment - No elected or
appointive city official or employee shall engage in or
accept private employment or render services for private interests when such employment or service is incompatible with the proper discharge of his or her official duties or would tend to impair his or her independence of judgment or action in the performance of his or her official duties.

(2) Disclosure of Confidential Information -
No elected or appointive city official or employee, shall,
without proper legal authorization, disclose confidential
information concerning the property, government or affairs
of the city. Nor shall he or she use such information to
advance the financial or other private interest of
himself, herself or others.

[Justoo]

We have similar issues/allegations in Ellis County also. I'm interested how it turns out for both situations.

[Mike B.]

OT,

Do you feel any part of SB66 may apply to what you are saying?

SENATE BILL No. 66--page 21
No state or local official or affiliated person shall hold, directly or
indirectly, an interest in, be employed by, represent or appear for a lottery
gaming facility or racetrack gaming facility, or for any lottery gaming fa-
cility manager or racetrack gaming facility manager, or any holding or
SENATE BILL No. 66—page 22
intermediary company with respect thereto, in connection with any cause,
application or matter.
No state or local official or affiliated person shall represent, appear for
or negotiate on behalf of any person submitting a proposal for a lottery
gaming facility or racetrack gaming facility, or on behalf of any lottery
gaming facility manager or racetrack gaming facility manager, or any hold-
ing or intermediary company with respect thereto, in connection with any
cause, application or matter.(c) No state or local official or affiliated person, within five years
immediately subsequent to the termination of the office or employment
of the official, shall hold, directly or indirectly, an interest in, be employed
by or represent, appear for or negotiate on behalf of any person submit-
ting a proposal for a lottery gaming facility or racetrack gaming facility,
or on behalf of any lottery gaming facility manager or racetrack gaming
facility manager, in connection with any cause, application or matter, or
on behalf of any holding or intermediary company with respect thereto,
in connection with any phase of development of a lottery gaming facility
or racetrack gaming facility or any other matter whatsoever related to
activities or operations of a lottery gaming facility or racetrack gaming
facility.

[old timer]

The day that SB66 passed, seems was the day that city commissioner Smoll and county commissioner Goodnight among others, quit the Boot Hill Gaming Board Inc.

But not Starks. He only quit after moving the events center to the property he brokers now. And only after much public outcry about his lack of ethics.

Clearly, with his name all over the (copyrighted? I'll post it otherwise.) drawing for the sell of property at "Mariah Center" (what a dumb name, huh, except for the Wind that will blow across the dusty land) and his personal gain possible only due to us paying for his infrastructure -- he still has no ethics and still has not resigned from CFAB. The new city commissioners must either be ignorant or lack ethics to put up with this.

Thanks for the Sumner County information. Interesting that they expect the casino to actually pay for their own costs, as required by state law. Gee, what a concept -- private companies NOT using huge amounts of tax money for their private benefit.

Seems like Dodge will be a great example, after the dust falls back, of how to jack a small town, take the money, use up the water, move the tourists out of town -- and no doubt, run.

I have an image of an under-used Events Center, empty lots all around, a couple of stores, and a very, very expensive infrastructure using up the last of our water. For what? Starks, Bogner, state of Kansas, and a casino management company. Dodge gets what? Huge, huge bills forever. And a couple of million dollars on the side. Oh, yes, almost forgot, massive increase in social problems, too.

What a painting. We should have a contest.