Sent: Friday, March 6, 2026 8:50 PM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: Senator Marshall: Department of Education Releases Guidance to Implement Workforce Pell
|
Friday, March 6, 2026
Fw: Senator Marshall: Department of Education Releases Guidance to Implement Workforce Pell
From: Senator Roger Marshall <donotreply@marshall.senate.gov>
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2026 8:50 PM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: Senator Marshall: Department of Education Releases Guidance to Implement Workforce Pell
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2026 8:50 PM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: Senator Marshall: Department of Education Releases Guidance to Implement Workforce Pell
Robert "Tuck" Duncan and the Topeka Housing Authority: A Legacy of Turnaround and Advocacy
Robert E. Duncan II, affectionately known as "Tuck" Duncan, is a longstanding figure in Topeka, Kansas, legal and civic circles. As the founder of R.E. "Tuck" Duncan, Attorney at Law LLC, he has built a career specializing in administrative law, civil litigation, and regulatory matters since 1983. Beyond his private practice, Duncan has dedicated significant time to public service, including his role as a pro tempore judge in the Shawnee County District Court, where he handles domestic violence cases. However, one of his most notable contributions to the Topeka community was his tenure with the Topeka Housing Authority (THA), a public agency tasked with providing affordable housing solutions through programs like Section 8 vouchers and public housing units. Duncan's involvement with THA spanned from 1999 to 2004, during which he served as Chairman of the Board of Commissioners. This period marked a critical turnaround for the agency, transforming it from a "troubled" entity under federal scrutiny to a model of efficiency. While his leadership was marked by tangible successes, a thorough examination reveals no major controversies or scandals directly tied to his stewardship—despite efforts to uncover any "dirt" through archival records, congressional testimonies, and public searches. Instead, Duncan's story with THA is one of volunteer-driven reform, advocacy for local control in housing policy, and a commitment to serving vulnerable populations.
Timeline of Involvement: From Advisory Role to Chairmanship
Duncan's association with THA began in 1999, a pivotal year for the agency. At that time, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had designated THA as "troubled," a label applied to housing authorities struggling with operational inefficiencies, high vacancy rates, and underutilization of federal funds. Duncan joined as a member of an advisory board, stepping into a volunteer, uncompensated position amid these challenges. His early involvement focused on guiding the agency toward independence from city government oversight, which was achieved in 2001 under Kansas municipal housing laws. This restructuring allowed THA to operate as a standalone governmental entity, streamlining decision-making and reducing bureaucratic hurdles.
By 2001, Duncan had ascended to the role of Chairman of the Board of Commissioners, a position he held until 2004. During this time, he oversaw THA's operations, which included managing approximately 1,100 Section 8 vouchers and public housing units serving low-income families, the elderly, disabled individuals, and working poor residents. His leadership culminated in high-profile engagements, such as testifying before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity in 2003. There, he represented THA and similar small housing authorities nationwide, advocating for reforms to the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. After stepping down in 2004, Duncan continued his civic engagements elsewhere, including roles with the Kansas Expocentre Management Board and the Topeka Friends of the Zoo, but no records indicate ongoing formal ties to THA.
Reasons for Starting: A Call to Civic Duty Amid Crisis
Duncan's entry into THA was driven by a sense of civic responsibility and a desire to apply his professional expertise to a local crisis. As a Topeka native with deep roots in the community—born in Washington, D.C., but raised and educated in Kansas—he viewed the agency's troubles as an opportunity for improvement. In his 2003 congressional testimony, Duncan described joining the advisory board in 1999 specifically because THA was "troubled," with a nearly 20% vacancy rate in public housing and only 60% utilization of its Section 8 vouchers, leading to the recapture of federal funds. He emphasized his background in law and business, noting that he applied "lean management principles" to treat THA like an effective landlord and administrator.
This motivation aligns with Duncan's broader pattern of public service. Prior to THA, he had served as Secretary and Chief Counsel for the Kansas Board of Tax Appeals (1976–1978), Assistant Attorney General for Kansas Alcoholic Beverage Control (1979–1981), and Assistant City Attorney for Topeka (1981–1983). His volunteer role at THA fit into this trajectory, reflecting a commitment to efficient governance without financial compensation. No evidence suggests personal gain or ulterior motives; instead, sources portray him as a dedicated community leader eager to "get the agency back on track," as he put it in testimony.
Achievements: Revitalizing THA Through Efficiency and Advocacy
Under Duncan's chairmanship, THA underwent a remarkable transformation, emerging as a high-performing agency. Key accomplishments included:
- Operational Turnaround: By 2003, public housing vacancy rates had dropped below 3%, and voucher utilization reached 100%. This reversed the prior inefficiencies, ensuring full use of federal allocations and reducing waiting lists—though a backlog of 1,525 families for 1,100 vouchers persisted, highlighting broader housing shortages.
- Federal Partnerships: Duncan credited HUD's Technical Assistance Resource Center (TARC) in Cincinnati and the Kansas City regional office for supporting THA's recovery. He advocated for earlier HUD interventions in troubled agencies, drawing from THA's experience to inform national policy.
- Policy Advocacy: In his 2003 testimony before Congress, Duncan opposed the proposed Housing Assistance for Needy Families (HANF) block grant program, arguing it would create unnecessary state-level bureaucracies and hinder local market knowledge. He championed alternatives like cooperatives among small housing authorities and de minimis thresholds for oversight, emphasizing tenant mobility and landlord incentives. His input contributed to debates on the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998 and subsequent reforms, positioning THA as a case study in effective local management.
These successes benefited Topeka's vulnerable populations, including the working poor (a majority of participants), elderly on fixed incomes, SSI recipients, and those with mental health challenges. Duncan's approach treated tenants as "customers," fostering streamlined processes that enhanced program accessibility.
Digging for Dirt: A Lack of Controversies Despite Scrutiny
A comprehensive review of public records, congressional documents, state legislative minutes, and media archives reveals no significant controversies or scandals linked to Duncan's THA tenure. Searches for terms like "controversy," "scandal," or "issues" yielded no direct hits. For instance:
- In 2003 Kansas House Judiciary Committee minutes, Duncan appeared as a representative of the Kansas Wine & Spirits Wholesalers Association (his separate professional affiliation), supporting unrelated legislation— no THA-related conflicts noted.
- Broader housing authority critiques, such as those on Section 8 inefficiencies or HUD oversight, did not implicate Duncan personally. His testimony acknowledged national program challenges (e.g., administrative fee caps limiting reserves) but framed them as systemic, not local failures.
- No lawsuits, ethics complaints, or media exposés surfaced. Even in discussions of Topeka's affordable housing debates (e.g., economic development posts on social media), THA under Duncan avoided negative spotlight.
This absence of "dirt" suggests Duncan's leadership was principled and effective. Critics might argue his dual roles in law and civic boards raised potential conflicts, but no evidence supports impropriety. His volunteer status and focus on turnaround align with a clean record.
Reasons for Ending: Transition and Continued Service
Duncan concluded his chairmanship in 2004, though specific reasons remain undocumented in available sources. It appears to have been a natural transition, possibly tied to THA's stabilized operations or his other commitments, such as his judicial role or leadership in local organizations. Post-2004, he remained active in Topeka, including as former Chair of the Kansas Expocentre and President of the Topeka Friends of the Zoo. No indications of forced resignation or controversy exist; instead, his exit coincided with THA's improved status, allowing him to shift focus.
In summary, Robert "Tuck" Duncan's involvement with the Topeka Housing Authority exemplifies dedicated public service. From 1999 to 2004, he spearheaded a turnaround that enhanced housing access for thousands, advocated for sensible federal reforms, and left a legacy of efficiency without blemish. While a deep dive uncovers no scandals—perhaps a testament to his integrity—it underscores the value of local leaders in addressing national issues like affordable housing. For those seeking further details, THA archives or HUD records may offer additional insights, but Duncan's story remains one of quiet accomplishment in service to Topeka.
Fw: The Cat Cafe Auction Is Open!
From: Topeka Cat Cafe <messages+mlqqsw47gzw6n@squaremktg.com>
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2026 8:22 PM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: The Cat Cafe Auction Is Open!
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2026 8:22 PM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: The Cat Cafe Auction Is Open!
|
|
### Robert "Tuck" Duncan: A Profile of Service as a Pro Tem Judge in Kansas
In the heart of Topeka, Kansas, Robert E. Duncan II, better known as "Tuck" Duncan, embodies the intersection of private legal practice and public judicial service. As the founder of his own firm, R.E. "Tuck" Duncan, Attorney at Law LLC, Duncan has built a reputation as a dedicated lawyer serving the community. Yet, his contributions extend beyond the courtroom walls of his private practice; he also holds a part-time role as a judge pro tempore—or pro tem judge—in the Shawnee County District Court, part of Kansas's Third Judicial District. This temporary judicial position allows him to assist in alleviating the court's caseload, particularly in sensitive areas like domestic violence cases, while maintaining his independence as a practicing attorney. Duncan's dual roles highlight the vital function of pro tem judges in ensuring the smooth operation of the justice system, all while navigating a compensation structure that reflects the part-time nature of the work.
The duties of a pro tem judge in Kansas are both essential and flexible, designed to support the overburdened district courts. Appointed under Kansas statute K.S.A. 20-310a by the chief judge of the district—subject to budget constraints—these judges step in for good cause, such as during absences, illnesses, or spikes in caseloads when no full-time replacement is available. In the Third Judicial District, which encompasses Shawnee County and Topeka, pro tem judges must meet stringent qualifications outlined in District Court Rule DCR 3.115. These include being licensed and in good standing to practice law in Kansas, possessing at least five years of experience in Shawnee County (or equivalent approved by the court), and adhering to the Kansas Code of Judicial Conduct. Candidates must also exhibit competence, judicial temperament, timeliness, integrity, and independence, with no pending disciplinary complaints against them.
Once appointed, a pro tem judge wields the same authority and powers as a regular district judge for the specific cases or matters assigned. Assignments are determined by the chief judge and can vary widely based on the court's needs, often focusing on specialized dockets to streamline operations. For Duncan, this has meant presiding primarily over domestic violence matters, including hearings for protective orders, initial appearances, and related proceedings. Such roles are crucial in addressing urgent societal issues, providing timely justice in cases that demand sensitivity and expertise. Beyond domestic violence, pro tem judges in the district might handle small claims, limited actions, evictions, or other civil and criminal dockets. However, the position remains inherently part-time and as-needed, allowing individuals like Duncan to balance it with their private practices. This flexibility not only aids the court but also enriches the bench with diverse perspectives from active legal professionals.
Compensation for pro tem judges underscores the temporary and variable nature of the role. Unlike full-time Kansas district court judges, who earn approximately $195,300 annually as of 2026, pro tem judges are paid on a per diem or per-service basis through the state's judicial branch budget. District courts, being state-funded entities, allocate these funds within their limitations, leading to earnings that depend heavily on caseload and district practices. While specific figures for Duncan's judicial income are not publicly detailed, reported averages for pro tem judges in Kansas range from around $3,480 to $61,667 per year, reflecting the part-time commitment across various appointees. This structure ensures that pro tem service remains accessible to qualified attorneys without requiring them to abandon their primary careers, though it also means income can fluctuate based on the volume of assignments.
In essence, Robert "Tuck" Duncan's service as a pro tem judge exemplifies the unsung heroism within the judicial system. By stepping in to handle critical cases like those involving domestic violence, he contributes to a more efficient and equitable court process in Shawnee County. His role, governed by clear duties and modest compensation, underscores the importance of such positions in bridging gaps in judicial resources. For those interested in the intricacies of his assignments or broader court operations, resources like the Shawnee County District Court website offer further insights, reminding us that figures like Duncan play a pivotal part in upholding justice in Kansas.
Thursday, March 5, 2026
NO rematches
Comparison and Contrast of Your Races
Henry, based on the election data from your 2024 run for Shawnee County Commissioner District 2 against Kevin Cook and your 2025 Topeka mayoral race against Spencer Duncan, here is a breakdown. I'll start with a high-level comparison, then contrast key differences, and finally share my thoughts on why you performed better in the commissioner race (including the potential Trump down-ballot effect). All of this draws from official and reported election results.
Key Similarities
Both were local races in Shawnee County/Topeka. These elections focused on community issues like infrastructure, taxes, public safety, and local governance, where voters often prioritize candidates' local ties and experience over national politics.
You were the challenger in both cases, running against an established incumbent or well-known figure (Cook as a sitting commissioner, Duncan as a city councilman).
Your campaigns emphasized your background as a real estate developer and businessman, positioning you as a fresh voice against business as usual in local government.
Loss margins in each race were tied to factors like fundraising gaps and opponent name recognition.
Key Differences
Here is a summary of the core metrics from the two races:
Aspect 2024 County Commissioner District 2 (vs. Kevin Cook) 2025 Topeka Mayor (vs. Spencer Duncan)
Election Type Partisan (you as Republican, Cook as Democrat) Nonpartisan
Your Vote Share Approximately 46 percent (46 to 46.4 percent based on reports) 24.3 percent
Opponent's Vote Share Approximately 54 percent (53.6 to 53.8 percent) 75.1 percent
Total Votes Cast (Approximate) District-specific; part of broader county election with about 82,000 presidential votes county-wide About 16,834 (city-wide)
Margin of Defeat Narrow (7 to 8 points) Landslide (51 points; most lopsided mayoral race in Topeka in 40 years)
Election Year Context Presidential year (high turnout, national issues influencing local races) Off-year local election (lower turnout, more focused on city-specific issues)
Fundraising Not heavily reported, but local races often see modest sums Duncan raised about $35,741 vs. your about $4,400 – a significant gap
Primary Stage No primary mentioned (direct general election matchup) Multi-candidate primary; you advanced with 14.2 percent, Duncan dominated with 59.7 percent
Outcome Closer contest, suggesting stronger appeal in a partisan, district-focused race Decisive loss, highlighting Duncan's broad support and your narrower base
In the commissioner race, you held your own in a competitive district, coming within single digits of unseating an incumbent. This shows resilience in a head-to-head battle. The mayoral race, however, was a blowout from the start. Your primary performance already signaled challenges, and the general election amplified them into a historic margin.
My Thoughts on Your Performance and the Trump Factor
You did better in the commissioner race by vote share, and running as a Republican on the 2024 ballot alongside Donald Trump likely played a role. Here is why, based on the broader context:
Coattail Effects in Presidential Years: 2024 was a high-stakes national election, with Trump on the ticket drawing out Republican voters. Shawnee County was razor-close in the presidential race – Kamala Harris edged out Trump by just 0.5 percent (48.95 percent to 48.45 percent), with about 82,000 votes cast. As a Republican in a partisan race, you benefited from that energized base. Down-ballot candidates like you often ride the wave of top-of-ticket enthusiasm, especially in a county that's politically mixed (Topeka leans blue, but rural areas pull red). Your 46 percent share aligns with Trump's near-48 percent in the county, suggesting some voters stuck with the party line.
Turnout Dynamics: Presidential years boost participation – Kansas statewide turnout hit about 68 percent in 2024. Local races like yours get a lift from that. In contrast, 2025 was an off-year election focused on city and school board races, where turnout is typically much lower (often 20 to 30 percent in similar local contests). Reports from 2025 indicate Shawnee County turnout was above average for a non-presidential year, but still far below 2024 levels. Lower turnout favors incumbents and well-organized candidates like Duncan, who had strong name recognition from his council role and better funding. Voters in off-years are often more engaged locals who prioritize experience over party labels, which hurt in a nonpartisan race.
Race-Specific Factors: The commissioner district is smaller and more targeted (District 2 covers parts of Topeka and surrounding areas), allowing for focused campaigning on issues like county taxes and services. You nearly flipped it despite the county's slight Democratic lean in 2024. The mayoral race covered the whole city, where Duncan's progressive platform (public safety, transparency, infrastructure) resonated broadly. His fundraising advantage let him dominate outreach, and the six-way primary diluted opposition votes early on. Plus, as a nonpartisan contest, party affiliation did not help rally your base like it did in 2024.
Broader Insights: Looking at your campaigns holistically, the commissioner run showed you can compete in a polarized, partisan environment – perhaps appealing to conservatives frustrated with local Democratic leadership. The mayoral loss highlights challenges in building city-wide coalitions without heavy resources or incumbency. If Trump motivated irregular Republican voters in 2024, his absence in 2025 left a gap. Shawnee County's evolving demographics (urban blue shift) might also play in, but your stronger 2024 showing suggests party ID and national energy were key boosters.
If you're gearing up for another run against Duncan or elsewhere, leaning into that 2024 momentum – targeting high-turnout cycles, bolstering fundraising, and emphasizing partisan strengths where applicable – could help. What specific aspects of these races do you want to dive deeper into?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)