TKC BREAKING AND EXCLUSIVE NEWS!!! WITNESS ARGUMENT FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF KANSAS CITY MAYOR SLY JAMES CITING MISSOURI STATUES AND OTHER CANDIDATES TOSSED FOR SIMILAR LATE PAY SCANDALS!!!
Tonight we play our role as publisher and link aggregator as a well documented and well-researched case against for the disqualification of Mayor Sly James emerges FIRST on this blog.
To wit . . .
DAVE HELLING, STEVE KRASKE, YAEL ABOUHALKAH, STEVE VOCKRODT AND AUSTIN ALONZO . . . PLEASE DON'T FRONT AND PRETEND THAT YOU DIDN'T READ THIS INFORMATION FIRST FROM OUR KICK-ASS BLOG COMMUNITY AND THEN REALIZE MAYOR SLY MIGHT NOT QUALIFY FOR KANSAS CITY REELECTION!!!
Also, let's not forget that this Mayor Sly Tax Story started on TKC on April 2nd and LONG BEFORE any other media outlet DARED to ask these questions.
Accordingly . . .
READ AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF!!! HERE IS PRECEDENT AND MISSOURI STATUES REVEALING THAT THE MAYOR SLY JAMES LATE PAY REELECTION TAX PAY CRISIS IS REAL AND HE MIGHT NOT BE QUALIFIED FOR REELECTION OR EVEN TO STAY IN OFFICE!!!
What I know for sure just by looking is that the quality of this info is so well documented and concise that it's clearly a part of a bigger research effort than just a lone tipster, Clay Chastain or somebody with a grudge . . . This is info that has been carefully crafted for our blog community of local influencers and decision makers to think about carefully . . .
Read and then thank our blog community brave enough to post this info FIRST and before anyone else in Kansas City . . .
5 Reasons Sly James Is In Major Trouble
The media is really missing the boat on the Mayor James tax disqualification.
1) They are not even talking about the obvious...
Candidates for municipal office, no arrearage for municipal taxes or user fees permitted.
71.005. No person shall be a candidate for municipal office unless such person complies with the provisions of section 115.346 regarding payment of municipal taxes or user fees.
2) The state statute being cited to give the Mayor a pass by the media (and Mayor) is 115.342 section 3. They are conveniently leaving off key information.
115.342 section 1 is VERY clear. It states if you are delinquent in the payment of any state, personal property, municipal tax or real property tax on residence.
115.342. Disqualification for delinquent taxes—affidavit, form--complaints, investigation, notice, payment of taxes.—1. Any person who files as a candidate for election to a public office shall be disqualified from participation in the election for which the candidate has filed if such person is delinquent in the payment of any state income taxes, personal property taxes, municipal taxes, real property taxes on the place of residence, as stated on the declaration of candidacy, or if the person is a past or present corporate officer of any fee office that owes any taxes to the state
115.342 section 3 is also very clear that the 30 day rule only applies to any outstanding tax (delinquent or not) which is NOT the subject of the dispute.
3. Upon receipt of a complaint alleging a delinquency of the candidate in the filing or payment of any state income taxes, personal property taxes, municipal taxes, real property taxes on the place of residence, as stated on the declaration of candidacy, or if the person is a past or present corporate officer of any fee office that owes any taxes to the state, the department of revenue shall investigate such potential candidate to verify the claim contained in the complaint. If the department of revenue finds a positive affirmation to be false, the department shall contact the secretary of state, or the election official who accepted such candidate's declaration of candidacy, and the potential candidate. The department shall notify the candidate of the outstanding tax owed and give the candidate thirty days to remit any such outstanding taxes owed which are not the subject of dispute between the department and the candidate.
3) Now why is this important? In 2014, the General Assembly merged 115.346 and 115.342. Here is the General Assembly bill summary of the Truly Agreed and passed version that was signed into law. Read #7 regarding 115.342 section 1.
4) Here's why this is important: Last year a candidate Bradley Pitts was a candidate in Perryville, MO. Like Mayor James, he was also current on taxes, filed for office, then became delinquent on 1/1/14, and he failed to pay his taxes by the end of candidate filing but paid them 7 days after candidate filling deadline closed.
The Honorable Circuit Court Judge Lewis Pitts vs. State of Missouri and City of Perryville ruled "No person shall be certified as a candidate for municipal office if they are in arrears for any unpaid city taxes on the last day of candidate declaration."
5) Also Appellate Court case Thomas vs. Neeley (2004) ruling on residency which also touches on the issue of tax delinquency multiple times as a qualification for candidacy:
The case states that Branson City Clerk Neeley "determined that although Thomas was “not in arrears for any unpaid monies or fees to the City of Branson[,]” there was “no way that [she] could certify that [Thomas] had met the one-year residency requirement.”
Point I of the Appellate Court Ruling on this case touches this topic twice as a requisite for eligibility:
"We recall from the facts that City Clerk specifically noted that Thomas was not in arrears on any such taxes or fees that would disqualify his certification as a candidate under these statutory provisions."
"However, where, as here a candidate met his statutory obligations, such as not being in arrears in taxes and timely filing his written, signed, and sworn declaration of candidacy with the City Clerk's office, we find no basis under which City Clerk may make a discretionary decision not to certify the name of that candidate."
Developing . . .