Team Tilley damage control in today's News-Leader

Chad Livengood has a follow-up story in today's News-Leader about Steve Tilley's efforts to kill a bill that would end the legal racket of a top campaign donor, adding a little more information to Terry Ganey's great reporting from Sunday. In the story, Tilley predictably plays dumb about his work on behalf of benefactor Tom Burcham, and pretends there's no real conflict with Speaker Ron Richard.

Which leads us to this most important question: which of these two Tilley claims is hardest to believe?

1. Tilley did not block the legislation that would have stopped the self-enriching legal scheme of a top campaign donor
2. Tilley is "not at odds" with Speaker Ron Richard.

Really, is there any reason to believe either claim?

The bill in question (HB169), sponsored by Rep. Tim Jones (R-Eureka) would have updated state law to shut down Burcham's racket, in which Burcham looks for towns with multiple sales taxes, and sues them for his own financial gain. As Speaker Richard describes it, Burcham "is trying to line his pockets."

Moreover, Speaker Richard -- who describes himself as the most powerful man in the state -- was very direct with Ganey about why the bill didn't pass in 2009.

"The majority leader wouldn’t let me put it on the calendar," Richard said. "He said he wasn’t ready to talk about it just yet. I told the Municipal League, 'We need some help to convince the majority leader there are a lot of cities that are in jeopardy.'"

The bill had the support of Richard and Tim Jones, another key House leader. Ron Richard is an ineffective Speaker and may be powerless to stop Tilley, but I can't think of any reason as to why he'd just make up the story about Tilley. 

Tilley's second big claim, that he's "not at odds" with Richard, is laughable. By definition, the men are at odds.

• Richard said Tilley "wouldn’t let me put it on the calendar"
• Tilley said, "I don't control what goes on the calendar."
• Richard asked the Municipal League to "help..convince the majority leader" to stop blocking the bill
• Richard said the following about Burcham, strongly tied to Tilley: "This fellow doing the lawsuits is trying to line his pockets."

Again, how is that not conflict?

Steve Tilley's defense of his financial connection to Burcham is almost as ridiculous, though technically true. "Tom is not writing a $110,000 check," Tilley said. Indeed, Burcham move his $110,000 to Tilley in January 2009 with two checks -- one for $100,000, and one for $10,000.

Unfortunately, one has to read 18 paragraphs into today's story to learn about Tilley's financial connection to Burcham and Tilley's efforts to block the disputed legislation.  The first third of the article is devoted to Burcham's perspective on his scheme for suing local communities, and doesn't get into the political or self-enriching possibilities of his predatory scheme until much later.

Maybe it's also time to ask the allegedly anti-tax Tom Burcham how much tax money has been expended to deal with all of his lawsuits?   A quick search of CaseNet for suits involving his two favorite plaintiffs shows tells quite the story:

• Tonya Sheets V City of Ellington, Filed 09/19/2007 
• Tonya Sheets V City of Mountain View, Filed 08/29/2007 
• Tonya Sheets V City of Mountain View, Filed 09/24/2007 
• Tonya Sheets V City of Potosi & Roger Coleman, Filed 07/23/2007 
• Tonya Sheets V City of Clarence & Cindy Bowen, Filed 09/17/2007 
• Tonya Sheets V City of Reeds Spring Et Al, Filed 11/26/2007 
• Tonya Sheets V City of Reeds Spring Et Al, Filed 01/10/2008 
• Tonya L Sheets V City of Iberia, Filed 11/19/2007 
• Tonya L Sheets V City of Herculaneum, Filed 12/03/2008 
• Tonya L Sheets V City of Iberia, Filed 10/09/2007 
• Tonya L Sheets V City of Greenville Etal, Filed 10/19/2007 
• Tonya Sheets V City of Ellington, Filed 08/03/2007 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Purdy, Filed 09/15/2008 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Mt. Vernon, Filed 09/15/2008 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Branson West, Filed 09/12/2008 
• Andrea D Penberthy V City of Granby, Filed 09/12/2008 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Sikeston, Filed 09/11/2008 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Ste Genevieve, Filed 09/10/2008 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Ste Genevieve, Filed 10/23/2008 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Arcadia, Filed 12/06/2007 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Arcadia, Filed 03/14/2008 
• Andrea Penberthy V City of Ellington, Filed 01/11/2008 

It's not hard to see why Tilley might like his friend to continue "lining his pockets" with these suits.  But when there's an available remedy to save taxpayers and preserve crucial local services (that local taxpayers want, by the way), then shouldn't we expect leaders to act in the public interest?