TKC BREAKING AND EXCLUSIVE NEWS!!! AMID QUESTIONS OF NEW KANSAS CITY AIRPORT CONFLICT COUNCIL LADY JOLIE JUSTUS CLEARED BY CITY HALL!!! DO YOU AGREE WITH KCMO ETHICS LAWYER!?!



Kansas City 4th District Council lady Jolie Justus has been embroiled in an ethics crisis that was FIRST reported by this blog last week.

Accordingly . . .

AMID QUESTIONS AND DEBATE THAT BLEW UP AMONG OUR TKC BLOG COMMUNITY . . . COUNCIL LADY JOLIE JUSTUS ASKED THE CITY HALL LEGAL DEPARTMENT FOR A REVIEW OF HER ETHICAL STANDING AND AWESOME TKC TIPSTERS NOW SHARE THE STATEMENT 1ST & EXCLUSIVELY!!!

Here's the word written by KCMO lawyer Cecilia Abbott, City Attorney/Ethics Compliance Officer: 



Better still . . . Here's the money line:

"As you have explained to me, you are "of counsel" for a large Kansas City law firm, Shook Hardy & Bacon. You are director of pro bono services in your firm and report directly to the firm's chair. You are not on track for partnership and your compensation is not based on firm revenues. You receive an annual salary for your work. You are eligible for a merit-based bonus, but you are not eligible for any bonuses on production or firm revenues. This law firm employs over 500 attorneys in twelve offices in different cities.

"Burns & McDonnell is one of the proposers in the Airport Terminal Modernization Project. Although Burns & McDonnell is a client of your law firm, you do not and will not perform any legal work for it. You have not and will not receive any compensation for any work performed by your firm for Burns & McDonnell. Burns & McDonnell has retained a different law firm, Stinson Leonard Street, in connection with its proposal to build a new airport terminal and Stinson has been performing services in this regard.

"Conclusion . . . It is my opinion that no conflict of interest is presented by your service on the City selection committee to examine and rank proposals for the Airport Terminal Modernization Project. There is no personal or financial benefit to you that may result through your evaluations, discussions, and rankings of the proposals. For the purposes of this discussion and the issue raised, there is no benefit to you if the Burns & McDonnell proposal is ultimately recommended to the City Council and either subsequently approved or rejected by the Council. As there is no conflict of interest present, there is no reason for you to withdrawal from participation in this project, either on the selection committee or as a member of the City Council . . ."

Now . . .



Let's not forget that the word from City Hall is not gospel. The legal team for KCMO has been decimated by a hiring freeze, they are good lawyers but often overworked and overturned in quite a few court cases . . . And so we ask our blog community . . .

DO YOU AGREE WITH THE CITY HALL ETHICS LAWYER??? IS JOLIE WORKING FOR ONE OF THE FIRMS REPPING BURNS & MAC CAUSE FOR CONCERN AND STILL A CONFLICT???

The reality is that the court of public opinion might not agree with this estimation of insider connections that are part of the new airport deal. As this project moves toward an election, the perception among voters becomes increasingly important.

You decide . . .

Comments

  1. Back scratching city hall. Is the is the government that never did anything about harassment complaints until a councilman was accused of choking his aide?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The whole project seems crooked to me. Vote NO.

      Delete
    2. TK, here's a question for you: Now we are supposed to feel good about Stinson involved in this deal? They have given all the council and the mayor a lot of support. Just looks like more corruption to me.

      Delete
  2. Yup. I agree.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with this opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Make the airport consultants work overtime might not be good, KC will be paying for their bills anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  5. DO YOU AGREE WITH THE CITY HALL ETHICS LAWYER???

    Yes.

    IS JOLIE WORKING FOR ONE OF THE FIRMS REPPING BURNS & MAC CAUSE FOR CONCERN AND STILL A CONFLICT???

    No.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh I definitely agree.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Seems crooked. If she had any REAL ethics she should recuse herself from this decision. The City Hall lawyer opinion needs to be challenged.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^Agree. If she has an ounce of integrity she will simply recuse herself solely on principle.
      My bet is she won't.

      Delete
  8. I agree.

    Sounds like the only crisis are the voices in Tony's head.

    ReplyDelete
  9. No issues here.

    ReplyDelete
  10. what is cronyism?

    ReplyDelete
  11. This is why everybody loves lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
  12. corruption. Plain and simple. Shame that jolie's supporters are so scared and insulting and threatening anyone who would challenge her. Shows what kind of degenerates they are.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It is way too late for city hall to get prople to think there is even one single thing about the airport deal that is ethical. Jolie eats a lot of pussy so at least they have the lesbo vote.

    ReplyDelete
  14. ^^^ Gross.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Do I agree?

    Of course not.

    Remember, the rules of ethics for lawyers also call for "avoiding the APPEARANCE of impropriety".

    ReplyDelete
  16. "Informal advisory opinion."

    Rubber stamp.

    ReplyDelete
  17. And she's accomplished what besides rubber stamping development deals?

    ReplyDelete
  18. that's right, 7:46.

    in a more sophisticated city with high standards, this wouldn't fly because of the appearance of a conflict on a billion-dollar matter.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I can't believe Philatio Cardarella has not provided an opinion. He must be busy smoking some pole.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Does this count as pro bono work for Sly?

    ReplyDelete
  21. That's interesting I have seen lawyers recuse themselves for a lot less just by the simple reason they are a part of the firm. Or said lawyer advise a client they can't rep them due to past dealings with a firm or something similar to it.

    ReplyDelete
  22. not a very rigorous analysis for normally overly wordy evasive lawyers, yet ppl 'agree' lol. when they say 'will not', is that in perpetuity.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Jolie's main accomplishment is her absolute failure to lead on the most important issue facing the city, that being a huge spike in murders. It's obvious that her participation and (cough) leadership of a crime prevention task force was so much empty resume fodder.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Do I agree?

    Of course.

    "lol"

    ReplyDelete
  25. Well, looks like we all agree!!! Guess that's settled huh?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Why has she been recusing on Kemper Arena votes?

    ReplyDelete
  27. ^^^^^^^^ Good point! If she has to recuse herself on Kemper Arena votes, because her firm represents the American Royal, she should have to recuse herself on KCI!!!

    The KCMO legal department is grossly incompetent!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  28. No big deal. They don't let her touch real cases. It's the firm's way of paying patronage to a city council member. Nothing out of the ordinary.

    ReplyDelete
  29. KC is home to corruption.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Remember the Cindy Circo conflict with tif money, kcpl, right hand to mayor, trainer of new council candidates at burn em Mac, yeah right no conflict there.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Crooks hardly fakin should ask her to recuse on the case. They are obviously not neutral they are compromised.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Sly and his lawyer cabal just turn everything into rigged deals then blather about civility. They have been losing ground with the people who think rigged games don't reflect who we should be.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Her firm sponsors to do pro bono, she chooses politics with Sly on their behalf. Their person on the inside rubber stamping sly who is rubber stamping what the chamber told him, they in turn are working as directed for the big special money fix. Unravel this mess. That they are not disqualified after this was obviously what happened. Reprint Stan Rose editorial talking about obvious fix setting.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Sly is now in the witness protection program because he couldn't even pose as not being actively setting fix or being sincere. Just doing the usual suspects rigged bidding.

    ReplyDelete
  35. This "informal" legal opinion zeroing in only on her connection to Shook Hardly My Bacon

    is like

    Investigating a bank robber for having an expired driver's license!

    What about the bank robbery? Or in Jolie Justus' case, what about her directly benefiting from campaign cash from multiple members of the Burns and McDonnell proposal team, her public comments endorsing the Burns and McDonnell proposal, the fact that she's running for Mayor and will be soliciting cash from everyone involved in the airport terminal construction after she steers the selection to Burns and McDonnell.

    Jolie Justus has NO ethics!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Kcpl sponsors Cindy, then crooks hardly fakin sponsors Jolie as she furthers the burn em Mac fix. How mediocre and compromised can it be. Then Mayor Bullhorn poses as if he is a servant of the people. More a servant of inside fixes for the usual suspects. But the Rockhurst fix is getting a lot of attention these days. Quick, let's act like a few pork boondoggles in the billion plus range are emergencies when the public clearly voted they were not. Clean out the full fixin gravy train. Instead we get the low integrity fixes.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Byron Funkhouser8/28/17, 11:38 PM

    Can't you people see that she's just regular folk?

    But then, if she were just regular folk, you wouldn't think she was a viable candidate for mayor. Come election season, you'll say that the person paid the most bribes (oops, I mean campaign contributions) is winning, & everyone backs a winner, so the person who receives the most bribes becomes mayor.

    You already know that she'll out Kay Barnes, Kay Barnes. Maybe, the new hotel will be her legacy that she can put on her resume in preparation for her moving to DC. Cleaver's gone, Squitiro's gone & James probably already has dreams of a bright future in the beltway.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I am glad to see that Jolie is absolutely doing the best thing for her constituents just as I said yesterday.

    Thank you Tony for reporting both sides of the story.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I agree with the ethics advisers opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Jolie must have really done a good job eating Cecelia's pussy.

    ReplyDelete

  41. This Jolie character is so gross and ugly, she makes me want to hit her.
    Jolie if I see you on the street can I hit your head really hard?

    ReplyDelete
  42. To heck with the city lawyer.

    You REALLY want an ethics opinion?

    Contact the MISSOURI BAR ASSOCIATION!

    ReplyDelete
  43. We have to go out and vote NO on this issue. If you don't vote, the City will claim that they and B&M won.

    No surprise that the investigation found no issues with Msz. Justus. Of course not...wink wink.

    ReplyDelete
  44. You mean sitting on the city council while eating pussy isn't a conflict of interest? Fuck how do I run?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

TKC COMMENT POLICY:

Be percipient, be nice. Don't be a spammer. BE WELL!!!

- The Management