Tuesday, May 26, 2026

Spencer is OK today

In Topeka (Shawnee County), Kansas, the mayor is subject to recall under state law (Kansas Statutes Annotated 25-4301 et seq., grounded in the Kansas Constitution). There is no indication that Topeka's city charter overrides or significantly alters the standard process for local elected officials like the mayor.

Grounds for Recall

Recall isn't limited to felonies. Kansas law specifies these grounds for local officials (including mayors):

  • Conviction of a felony.
  • Misconduct in office — A violation of law by the official that impacts their ability to perform official duties.
  • Failure to perform duties prescribed by law.

The grounds must be described specifically in the petition (in not more than 200 words). The district attorney reviews them for sufficiency (a low bar — insufficiency of grounds generally doesn't invalidate a recall that reaches voters). Policy disagreements, unpopularity, or minor issues typically wouldn't qualify; it needs to tie to legal violations, non-performance of duties, or felony conviction.

Step-by-Step Process to Start a Recall Petition

  1. Form a recall committee: At least 3 registered electors (voters) from the election district (Topeka for mayor).

  2. Prepare the petition: It must include the mayor's name/office, specific grounds (≤200 words), a statement that signers are registered Topeka voters, committee members' names/addresses, required warnings, etc. Use the official form or substantially similar. Legal counsel is strongly recommended.

  3. File a copy before circulation: Submit to the Shawnee County Election Officer (in Topeka). They send it to the district attorney for a quick review (within 5 business days) of grounds and format.

  4. Timing restrictions: Cannot start in the first 120 days or last 180 days of the term. Other limits may apply (e.g., after a failed recall).

  5. Circulate for signatures: Up to 90 days. Must gather valid signatures equal to 40% of the votes cast for that office in the last general election for mayor. This is a high threshold.

    • For example, in the 2025 Topeka mayoral general election, the winner received over 12,000 votes. 40% of recent turnout would likely require thousands of valid signatures from registered Topeka voters.
  6. File the completed petition: Shawnee County Election Officer verifies signatures (30 days). If sufficient, a recall election is scheduled (typically 60-90 days later, avoiding conflicts with other elections).

If successful, the mayor is removed, and a successor is chosen (either at the same election or via appointment/election rules).

Practical Realities

  • High bar: The 40% signature requirement for local recalls is demanding compared to many states, making successful recalls rare without broad, organized support and strong grounds.
  • Not just felonies: Misconduct or failure to perform duties can suffice if well-documented and tied to official impact.
  • Costs and effort: Organizers handle petitioning; verification and election costs fall on the county/city. Courts can get involved on challenges.
  • Contact for details: Reach the Shawnee County Election Office (Topeka) for forms, exact signature numbers based on the last election, and guidance. They provide samples.

This is a summary of public statutes and procedures — for your specific situation, consult the county election office or an attorney, as details like exact signature counts depend on the prior election's turnout. Recalls are serious and resource-intensive.

37 - sidewalk today 5 26 2026










 

Fw: Kansas Schools: Failing Our Children, Bankrupting Us

A point of view - not voting for her  

From: Charlotte O'Hara <charlotte@oharaforkansas.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 5:59 AM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: Kansas Schools: Failing Our Children, Bankrupting Us
 
͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌     ͏ ‌    ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­

Sunday, May 24, 2026

In a crowded primary, the contrast with outsiders like Sarnecki—who built and scaled larger private enterprises without bankruptcy—will likely be a key talking point through August 4.

Trump and Masterson: Birds of a Feather on Bankruptcy?

In politics, endorsements often reveal more about alignments than policy speeches. President Donald Trump’s recent endorsement of Kansas Senate President Ty Masterson for governor highlights an interesting parallel: both men have histories tied to business bankruptcy.

Trump’s Corporate Bankruptcies

Donald Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy. However, his businesses filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection six times between 1991 and 2009. These were primarily Atlantic City casino and hotel ventures:

  • Trump Taj Mahal (1991)
  • Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino (1992)
  • Trump Castle (1992)
  • Plaza Hotel (1992)
  • Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts (2004)
  • Trump Entertainment Resorts (2009)

Trump has described these as smart uses of U.S. bankruptcy laws, allowing restructuring amid heavy debt, recessions, and an oversaturated casino market. Critics argue the filings left investors, contractors, and bondholders with losses while Trump continued building his brand. The repeated Chapter 11 filings became a staple attack line against his business acumen during campaigns.

Ty Masterson’s Personal Bankruptcy

Ty Masterson’s business record centers on Masterbuilt Homes, a small construction company he owned in the Andover, Kansas area. The company struggled and ultimately failed. In late 2010, Masterson filed for Chapter 7 personal bankruptcy, listing debts estimated between $885,000 and over $1.1 million. Court records cite issues with an employee mismanaging projects and unauthorized charges, alongside broader business difficulties. Chapter 7 is a liquidation bankruptcy, unlike Trump’s reorganization filings.

Masterson moved from small business ownership into full-time politics, serving in the Kansas Legislature since 2005 and rising to Senate President. His campaign and Trump’s endorsement highlight him as a “highly successful small business owner,” though public records show the construction venture ended in bankruptcy before his deeper political career.

Birds of a Feather?

The phrase “birds of a feather flock together” fits the optics here. Both Trump and Masterson experienced significant business setbacks that led to bankruptcy protection. Trump turned repeated corporate failures into a narrative of resilience and deal-making; Masterson transitioned into long-term government service.

For Kansas voters in the August 4 Republican primary, this raises questions:

  • Does a history of business failure (followed by success in other arenas) demonstrate the kind of executive judgment needed to manage a state budget, property taxes, and economic growth?
  • Or does it reflect the risk-taking common among entrepreneurs, where failures are learning experiences?

Critics of Masterson, including challenger Philip Sarnecki, argue Masterson embodies career politician problems—two decades in office with mixed results on taxes and spending—while pointing to his pre-politics business outcome as evidence of poor stewardship. Supporters counter that Masterson’s legislative experience and Trump alignment outweigh past business challenges, much as Trump’s supporters dismiss his corporate bankruptcies as irrelevant to his overall success.

Trump’s endorsement frames Masterson as the fighter who will champion conservative values, cut taxes, and protect Kansas priorities. Yet the shared bankruptcy history gives ammunition to those who see Masterson as part of an establishment that hasn’t delivered enough results on issues like property taxes and economic incentives.

Kansas voters must decide whether this “flock” represents pragmatic resilience or a cautionary tale about entrusting leadership to those with troubled business track records. In a crowded primary, the contrast with outsiders like Sarnecki—who built and scaled larger private enterprises without bankruptcy—will likely be a key talking point through August 4. 

I have a story to tell -

Rob Fillion, as Executive Director of the Kansas Republican Party (KSGOP), has filed at least one notable FEC complaint as of mid-2026. Searches turn up no evidence of other FEC complaints or formal filings directly attributed to him or RJF Consulting in public records.

The Adam Hamilton Complaint (April 24, 2026)

This is the primary (and only prominently reported) complaint. Fillion filed it on behalf of the KSGOP against Rev. Adam Hamilton (founding pastor of the large Church of the Resurrection in Leawood, KS) and the church itself.

Core Allegations:

  • Hamilton used church resources (website, YouTube channel, internal email list, staff time, facilities, and databases) to announce and promote his exploratory committee for a potential 2026 U.S. Senate run (initially floated as independent, later as Democrat against incumbent Sen. Roger Marshall).
  • This constituted an illegal in-kind corporate contribution by a 501(c)(3) nonprofit to a federal candidate/exploratory effort, violating the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA).
  • Churches and nonprofits are prohibited from making contributions (including in-kind) to federal candidates. The complaint highlighted the lack of effective "firewalls" between Hamilton's pastoral role and political activity.

Requested Action: Investigation by the FEC and "appropriate sanctions" against Hamilton and the church.

Context and Timing:

  • Filed shortly after Hamilton publicly explored a Senate bid.
  • Hamilton later officially entered the Democratic primary.
  • Fillion framed it as a rule-of-law issue and concern over church-state separation: “This is a clear and blatant violation of federal law... No one is above the law.”

Criticisms of the Complaint:

  • Democrats and critics viewed it as a preemptive political attack on a potentially strong opponent to Marshall. Some accused the GOP of selective enforcement or hypocrisy on church-state issues.
  • Hamilton's side downplayed it, with spokespeople responding to media inquiries.
  • Common in partisan politics: Opponents often use ethics complaints to generate negative headlines, force responses, or tie up resources, even if the FEC takes limited action.

Legal/Regulatory Background

Under FECA and FEC rules:

  • 501(c)(3) organizations (like churches) face strict limits on political activity. They cannot endorse candidates, contribute to campaigns, or use resources to support them.
  • "Exploratory committees" are treated similarly to candidate activity.
  • Violations can lead to fines, but the FEC is often slow, deadlocked (due to its structure), or dismisses many complaints. Many such filings serve more as political messaging than guaranteed enforcement.

No public updates indicate a final FEC resolution on this complaint as of late May 2026. Hamilton's campaign proceeded.

Overall Assessment of Fillion's Approach

  • Standard Operative Tactic: Filing FEC complaints against opponents (especially high-profile ones) is common partisan strategy. It puts issues on the record, generates media, and signals aggressive defense of the party's interests. Fillion's role involves communications and strategy, so this fits.
  • No Pattern of Frivolous Filings: Only this one stands out in searches. It appears targeted and tied to a specific, documented event (the church-hosted announcement).
  • Effectiveness: It succeeded in creating controversy and press coverage right as Hamilton entered the race, potentially raising questions about his judgment or the church's tax-exempt status (though the complaint was to FEC, not IRS).
  • "Scumbag" Angle: From a neutral view, this is typical hardball politics rather than personal corruption. Critics on the left see it as hypocritical or harassing; supporters see it as enforcing rules Democrats allegedly ignore. No evidence of fabricated claims or personal gain for Fillion.

If more complaints surface later or you have details on others, they could be checked. FEC dockets are public but often lag. This action aligns with Fillion's spokesperson role: proactive, combative messaging against perceived Democratic overreach.