Our Western Heritage

Our Western Heritage
Front Street, Dodge City, circa 1879

Monday, July 23, 2007

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.”

[Blogger Note: Seems that Mr. Starks, by being a director of Boot Hill Gaming Inc., does hold a "substantial interest" -- whether the decisions involving $30 million dollars of tax money is affected by his interest in the private casino group that is wanting a certain placement of the Events Center to benefit the casino is THE question .......]

2 comments:

Joe said...

[Blogger Note: Seems that Mr. Starks, by being a director of Boot Hill Gaming Inc., does hold a "substantial interest" -- whether the decisions involving $30 million dollars of tax money is affected by his interest in the private casino group that is wanting a certain placement of the Events Center to benefit the casino is THE question .......]

So, my question is, "what are you going to do about it?" Are you going to step forward and take some action or sneek around in the shadows here in a BLOG and do nothing?

Why Not Dodge! said...

If Mr. Starks would ask for questions or statements from the citizens in the audience, instead of cutting off the meetings with loud slam on desk, it would certainly be easier to get something done and talked about. The CFAB Chair acts as though the money was his (almost is, isn't it?), not ours. Actions would be indicated by the continued conflicts -- especially if Boot Hill Gaming Inc. actually gets the contract. That's not a for sure thing, as two major casino management firms are interested. Ones with money and experience, something Boot Hill Gaming has neither.