Ward 4 Alderman. Former county Chief of Staff at $199,000 a year a political appointment, until the letter. The documents, the headlines, the court docket: all public, all in one place.
Forced Out · Conflict · No ×8 · Forced Out · Conflict · No ×8 · Forced Out · Conflict · No ×8 · Forced Out · Conflict · No ×8 · Forced Out · Conflict · No ×8 · Forced Out · Conflict · No ×8 ·
The Letter · The Record · The Pattern · The Letter · The Record · The Pattern · The Letter · The Record · The Pattern · The Letter · The Record · The Pattern · The Letter · The Record · The Pattern · The Letter · The Record · The Pattern ·
Updated · Oct 6
Subject, official city portrait, raytown.mo.us
Theresa Garza
Alderman, Ward 4
Current term
2023 – 2027
Former role
County Chief of Staff
County salary
$199,000 / yr
2015 KC council race
Disqualified by court order, residency
2016 state income tax
$9,915 lien, garnished, paid mid-term
Oct 6 impeachment vote
No, all eight articles
On File
If you read nothing else
The case, in ten lines.
Every line names the document behind it, and every document is one we hold. Open any line to read the file it comes from.
01
A $9,915 state income tax lien, unpaid for eight years.
Nothing above rests on an unnamed source. The paper is linked.
The file, in five parts
Every line here opens a document.
Her taxes. Her residency. The county job, and how it ended. The County Executive’s own words. And the conflicts that came before all of it. Each one now has its own file, with the documents behind it.
01Her own taxes
A $9,915 state income tax lien, unpaid for eight years.
The Department of Revenue filed it Oct. 21, 2016. When it went unpaid, the state took the money three times in a single year, garnishments served on her bank and on two companies. The satisfaction was filed Apr. 15, 2025. Tax Day. 364 days before she voted to convene a board of impeachment over someone else's unpaid taxes.
Case No. 1616-MC15890, Sixteenth Judicial Circuit, Jackson County
A judge disqualified her as a candidate, and votes for her were not counted.
She left a Kansas City Council race in February 2015 amid a residency suit over the city's two-year requirement. Election records showed she voted in Blue Springs in 2013, and the lease she produced was signed nine days before the filing deadline. A court then ordered that no vote cast for her in that April's primary be counted.
Kansas City Star, Feb. 19, 2015 · Star editorial, Mar. 23, 2015
Both dates are the county's own record. The Executive's letter offered a resignation dated April 17 and gave her until the end of business April 23, adding: “I will then act to terminate your employment.” The county's record ends it the next day, 21 days before the May 15 pay-through that offer named.
Jackson County disclosure R009789-100826 · the letter, Apr. 2026
“I finally lost all confidence in your ability to serve me.”
The County Executive put his case in writing, page by page. “You continually utilized official county, taxpayer resources ... to set up and pursue personal employment opportunities for months. That can equate to stealing county resources.” Every line is tagged to its page.
In 2011 her husband resigned from a nonprofit that took nearly $200,000 a year from the county, after the county attorney flagged the conflict. In 2026 she pursued a job with a company whose multi-million dollar county contract she was a decision maker on. “Anyone could see that is inappropriate and unethical.”
Nothing above rests on an unnamed source or a leaked document. Each entry names the record it comes from, and each link opens the file that holds it. If a line cannot be checked against its own paper, it does not run.
She voted to convene it. She voted to fund it. Then she voted no, eight times.
The roll call further down this page is where the story ends. These are the two votes that started it.
Apr. 14, 2026AYE
Adopt the ordinance convening a Board of Impeachment against Ward 3 Alderman Latrice Thomas.
Adopted 7 to 2, one abstention.
Source: April 14 Board packet, pages 3 to 4.
Vote 1 of 3
Sept. 1, 2026AYE
Resolution R-3838, moving $190,000 from the General Fund to outside counsel for the impeachment proceeding.
Requested by the city administrator.
Source: City video of the September 1 session, roll call at about 42 minutes.
Vote 2 of 3
Oct. 6, 2026NO ×8
Eight articles of impeachment, each voted separately. Six votes were needed to sustain. Each received five.
Voted no on all eight.
Source: The full roll call is below.
Vote 3 of 3
Nothing above is a description of intent. Each entry is the motion and the tally, and each one cites the city record it comes from.
October 6, 2026 · Board of Impeachment
Eight chances to hold the line. She voted no. Eight times.
Each article against Alderman Thomas needed six votes to sustain. Each got five. Alderwoman Garza voted no, every article, every time. Thomas keeps her seat: not on six votes in her favor, but on four votes that made six impossible. And the failure the articles charge, holding office while delinquent on state taxes, is one Garza's own docket shows she committed herself.
Verdict on every article
Found in favor of Thomas
5–4. Needed six. Eight times running.
0
Articles voted down
of 8
0
Votes to sustain
required
0
Votes in favor
every article
0
Garza's noes
all eight
Why last night matters beyond one seat
The rule she made optional
01
The rule
Missouri law, RSMo § 115.306: every candidate for office must sign Form 5120, under penalty of perjury, attesting they are current on state taxes. It is not a courtesy. It is a threshold requirement to hold the seat at all.
02
The test
Every article against Alderman Thomas centered on that requirement. To sustain an article took six votes. Eight times the board voted; eight times it got five. Same five names in favor. Same four names against, Garza among them, every time.
03
The door she opened
If eligibility rules are optional when they’re inconvenient, which requirements survive? Residency? The affidavit itself? And who decides when they get enforced, uniformly, or case by case, for the next applicant who isn’t in the room making the decision?
Read the charge. Then read her docket.
Article I charges Thomas with acting “despite failing to meet the statutory requirements for candidacy”, delinquency in state income taxes, on the strength of Department of Revenue letters dated Apr. 23 and Jun. 10, 2025 (Articles of Impeachment, Feb. 17 packet, pp. 25–30). The same statute, RSMo § 115.306, governed Garza's own Ward 4 filing, with her $9,915.43 lien, six and a half years old by the time she took the seat, already on the books (Case 1616-MC15890). The state had to garnish her three times to collect. She satisfied it Apr. 15, 2025, two years into her term. On Oct. 6, she voted no on all eight articles charging that same failure.
“A rule that bends for one person isn’t a rule. It’s a favor.” And favors get called in selectively.
The questions above are ours; every vote and document on this page is the city’s.
Alderman
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Walters
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Tush
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Aziere
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Hayden
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Emerson
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
GarzaWard 4
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Morales
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Krizek
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Mims
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Result
5–4
5–4
5–4
5–4
5–4
5–4
5–4
5–4
Columns = articles 1–8, voted individually. Before each vote, the chair stated on the record that six votes were required to pass.
One bloc. Eight times.
Eight different articles. Different acts, different evidence, different days of testimony. The vote never changed, and neither did the names. Every article drew the same four “no” votes, in the same order, from the same four members:
Theresa Garza
Ward 4
NO ×8
Josh Morales
Ward 4
NO ×8
Theresa Tush
Ward 1
NO ×8
Greg Walters
Ward 1
NO ×8
Five members voted to sustain every article. The other four voted as a unit, and a unit of four is all it takes when six are needed.
Epilogue · 7:42 – 8:15 PM
And then the board fought over signing the paper.
When the findings of fact, the written record that formalizes the outcome, came up for adoption, the same four who had blocked every article carried the motion, twice. The five who had voted to sustain refused to sign, and the first motion failed 4–5. What followed was twenty-five minutes of the most honest debate of the night: members saying on the record that they knew the taxes had gone unpaid, that conscience would not let them formalize the outcome. Then Thomas's own attorney warned the board he would go to court and the city would pay its outside counsel for the privilege. The findings were adopted on re-vote, 6–3. Three members, Aziere, Emerson, and Mims, never signed.
Source: City of Raytown livestream, 7:42–8:15 PM CT. Events described from the city's own video; official minutes pending.
Count the noes
Garza's “No” lands at these timestamps in the city's official video of the meeting:
A judge struck Garza from the Kansas City council ballot over residency. She has personally stood where eligibility rules decide who holds office.
Kansas City Star, Feb–Mar 2015
2016–2025 · Garnished
The state held a $9,915.43 income-tax lien against her, collected through three garnishments, satisfied April 15, 2025. Mid-term. She says she was “never garnished.” The docket lists three.
Docket 1616-MC15890 · 17-EXEC-360, -8204, -8213
Source: City of Raytown livestream (Swagit), captured Oct 6, 2026, 6:31:46–7:05 PM CT. Roll calls transcribed from the stream; to be cross-checked against the official minutes when posted. This page documents how aldermen voted, it takes no position on the underlying allegations.
The seat, and the margin
5
ballots decided the Ward 3 race that Latrice Thomas won in April 2025.
The Jackson County Election Board ran that race through a manual recount as part of its routine post-election audit, and certified the result that Wednesday.
$190,000
moved from the General Fund to outside counsel for the impeachment proceeding, Sept. 1, 2026
8
separate votes on whether to remove her from that seat, Oct. 6, 2026
Sources: Jackson County Election Board email, Apr. 14, 2025 (the five-ballot margin and the recount); city roll calls, Sept. 1 and Oct. 6, 2026. Each line is a dated record, not a characterisation. (see sources)
Every number on this page links to a document. Scroll for the receipts.
RE: RFC
In her own words · Oct. 5, 2026
We asked for comment. She answered. So does the docket.
Ahead of the Oct. 6 impeachment hearing, we emailed Alderwoman Garza two questions and promised to publish any response verbatim and in full. She replied the same day, copying an attorney. Here is her letter, unedited, and what the public record says to each claim.
Her letter · verbatim
Received Oct. 5, 2026, 2:54 PM, in response to our request for comment
Thank you for reaching out. I will address your questions directly.
The 2016 Missouri Department of revenue lien was related to tax filings that my late husband failed to complete during a period when we were legally separated. I did not have any wages or bank accounts garnished. Once I learned of the issue, I hired a tax resolution firm and entered into a payment plan with the state of Missouri. That plan has been completed. In 2023, the state modified the plan because my ex-husband passed away unexpectedly, and since we were still married during the years, he did not file, I had to absorb his portion of the payment as well. Again that plan has been completed. I was transparent about this during my 2023 campaign and posted publicly about it at the time. I have re-shared my full RDA questionnaire on my Garza for Raytown page, which includes that disclosure in the responses.
Regarding Alderman Thomas, I did not vote to remove her because that vote has not occurred. The board voted to proceed with the required statutory process so the matter could be reviewed according to Missouri law. My vote supported following the proper procedure, not pre-determining any outcome. My tax matter was disclosed years ago, addressed, and resolved through a completed payment plan. It is unrelated to the current proceedings involving Alderman Thomas.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide clarification.
Alderman Garza, Ward 4
Claim by claim, the record answers
“I did not have any wages or bank accounts garnished.”
Garnishment 17-EXEC-360, garnishee UMB Bank NA, served by the sheriff Feb. 2, 2017; the bank answers for $850.26. Garnishments 17-EXEC-8204 (Renovate America, Inc.) and 17-EXEC-8213 (CareFusion Resources LLC), Oct. 2017, both entered “Garnishment Paid to Court.”
Contradicted by the docket
“Resolved through a completed payment plan.”
The docket shows the lien open from Oct. 21, 2016 until a Satisfaction of Judgment filed April 15, 2025, eight and a half years later, two years into her current term. No payment-plan entry appears on the docket.
Docket shows 8½ years open
“I was transparent about this during my 2023 campaign.”
We could not verify this from the public record. The only disclosure she points to is a questionnaire she says is posted on her campaign Facebook page.
Published verbatim per our commitment. Docket entries quoted from the public record of Jackson County Case No. 1616-MC15890. If any document here is in error, tell us, corrections are logged and published.
1616-MC15890
New in the file · Court record
The state had to garnish her wages, three times. Then came a hearing over someone else’s taxes.
This is not an allegation, it's a docket. She didn't fall behind and catch up. She didn't pay until the State of Missouri took it: three garnishment executions in a single year, served on her bank and on two companies holding her money. The Department of Revenue's own paper trail, from lien to garnishment to a satisfaction filed on Tax Day, two years into her term.
In the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit, Jackson County, Missouri
Dept. of Revenue v. Garza, Theresa A. ·Case No. 1616-MC15890
$0
state income-tax lien, Oct. 2016
0
garnishment executions in a single year
0.0 yrs
the lien went unpaid
0
votes won while owing the state
Oct. 21, 2016
The lien
Missouri Department of Revenue files a certificate of tax lien, individual income tax, against Theresa A. Garza: $9,915.43. Judgment entered in Jackson County.
2017
The garnishments
She still didn't pay, so the state took it. Three executions in one year: her UMB Bank account served by the sheriff, then garnishments served on CareFusion Resources and Renovate America. The bank answers for $850.26. Two more garnishments pay out to the court. The lien stands.
Candidate filing
The affidavit
Filing for Ward 4, she attests, as Missouri law requires of every candidate, on Form 5120, that she is current on her state taxes. The $9,915.43 lien is still on the books.
Apr. 4, 2023
The election
Voters hand her the seat, 443–249, never told she owed the state.
Apr. 15, 2025
The payoff
Satisfaction of judgment, filed on Tax Day, eight and a half years after the lien, two years into the term she won while owing it.
Apr. 14, 2026
Aye · 7–2–1
The vote
Garza votes AYE to convene a Board of Impeachment against Ald. Latrice Thomas, a case centered on unpaid taxes. Her own garnished lien had been paid off one day shy of a year earlier. Six months later, she voted no on all eight articles charging that same failure.
Same county. Same statute. Same affidavit. Same seat.
The exhibits, verbatim from the docket
Exhibit AGarnished
“CERTIFICATE OF TAX LIEN, INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX. $9,915.43. On Behalf Of: DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE”
Judgment entered, Oct. 21, 2016
Exhibit B
“Garnishment 17-EXEC-8213 vs. THERESA A GARZA, Garnishee: CAREFUSION RESOURCES LLC, Garnishment Paid to Court”
Execution/garnishment, Oct. 2017
Exhibit C
“SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT.”
Filed Apr. 15, 2025, Tax Day, two years into her term
Missouri's candidate affidavit (RSMo § 115.306, Form 5120) requires attesting to current payment of state income taxes at filing, the same requirement at the heart of the Thomas case.
Three times, the state stopped asking, and started taking
The hypocrisy isn't alleged. It's docketed.
The exhibits above are verbatim from the public docket of Case 1616-MC15890, free to read at courts.mo.gov. Dates, amounts, and garnishees as entered by the court.
Text this to a Ward 4 neighbor
“Raytown's Ward 4 alderman: a $9,915 state income-tax lien, unpaid 8½ years, paid only after the state garnished her three times. A year later, she sat on the board in a colleague’s unpaid-taxes impeachment case. It's all in the public court docket.”
The short version
The conflicts. The money. The pattern.
Before the deep dive, here is the whole file in five tiles. Every one is backed by a public document linked below.
$199,000 a year of taxpayer money. Here's what that actually looks like.
The salary is named in black and white in the letter that ended her county employment. Big numbers are easy to skim past, so we broke it down.
One salary, up close
Per month
$0
Per week
$0
Per workday
$0
Arithmetic on the $199,000 figure in the county's letter. Bars are scaled to each other, not to any household budget.
Six months. That's all it took.
Appointed in the fall, fired by letter before spring was out. In that span, the salary alone paid out roughly:
$0
Half a year of the $199,000 salary, before the county concluded it needed “new leadership.”
The full tab: $0 a year
$199,000 as county Chief of Staff, plus roughly $4,000 a year from Raytown as Ward 4 Alderman, a seat she held while collecting the county salary. Two public offices, two public paychecks: $203,000 a year of taxpayer money, all told.
She was hired at $199,000 a year, a political appointment.
Chief of Staff to the Jackson County Executive, not a merit hire, a political appointee cashing in on politics. The salary is named in the letter itself.
2
Six months later, the county fired her.
The ultimatum is in writing: resign by April 23, "or you will receive a termination letter."
3
The reasons are in writing.
"Stealing county resources." "No loyalty above your self-promotion." "I finally lost all confidence in your ability to serve."
This letter has been making its way around Raytown, passed between neighbors, forwarded in group chats, brought up at the dinner table. No downloads, no links, it's right here. Scroll and read every word.
You continually utilized official county, taxpayer resources, your email, county phone, to set up and pursue personal employment opportunities for months. ... That can equate to stealing county resources.
Jackson County Executive Phil LeVota, the termination letter, Apr. 2026
II
Act II · The Pattern
Sixteen years. One pattern.
She ran as the ethics reformer. Then came the chairmanship, the conflicts of interest, the warnings she waved away. Every stop documented.
04
File 04
The Timeline
Sixteen Years, One Pattern
It didn't start yesterday.
Stops on the public record, each one documented, each one linked. Scroll and watch the line draw itself.
Jan. 2010
Stripped of her committee chairmanship
As a Jackson County legislator, she spends three years chairing the Justice and Law Committee, until the newly elected chairman removes her from the post. A public demotion, one she confirmed herself.
▸Source & context
Source: The Dispatch, Jan. 27, 2010
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
2011
Conflict-of-interest concerns at the county
Her husband resigns from the Guadalupe Center, a nonprofit receiving nearly $200,000 a year from the county, after the county attorney warns the funding would have to stop if she served. Her offer to simply recuse herself wasn't enough. She later called the standoff political retribution, while admitting to the Star she had no proof.
▸Source & context
Source: Associated Press, Feb. 2011; The Pitch candidate roundup
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
2014
Steps aside from the county legislature
Doesn't seek re-election to the Jackson County Legislature, one of three incumbents the Star reports are "stepping aside." Months later she files for the Kansas City council seat that ends in her disqualification.
▸Source & context
Source: Kansas City Star, May 12, 2014
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Feb. 2015
Exits the KC council race
Drops out of the race for Kansas City's 5th District at-large seat amid questions about whether she actually lived where she claimed to live, the charter's two-year residency requirement was the problem.
▸Source & context
Source: Kansas City Star
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Feb. 2015
Disqualified by court order
Days after her withdrawal, a Jackson County Circuit Court order makes it official: she is disqualified over residency, the lease she presented was signed nine days before the two-year deadline, and election records showed her voting in Blue Springs. Her name stays on the ballot, but votes cast for her are not counted.
▸Source & context
Source: Jackson County Circuit Court order, Feb. 2015; Kansas City Star editorial, Mar. 23, 2015
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Oct. 2016
The state puts a $9,915 lien on her
The Missouri Department of Revenue files a certificate of tax lien, individual income tax, $9,915.43 against Theresa A. Garza, and judgment is entered in Jackson County. It will hang over her for eight and a half years.
▸Source & context
Source: 16th Judicial Circuit, Case No. 1616-MC15890, read the docket
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
2017
Garnished
To collect, the state goes after her money directly: garnishments served on her UMB Bank account (by the sheriff), then on CareFusion Resources and Renovate America, three executions in one year. The bank answers for $850.26. The lien stood.
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Apr. 2023
Elected in Raytown, while owing the state
Elected to the Raytown Board of Aldermen, Ward 4, defeating Mary Jane Van Buskirk 443 to 249. To file, Missouri law required her to attest she was current on state income taxes. The $9,915.43 lien was still on the books, unpaid.
▸Source & context
Source: City certified results, Apr. 18, 2023 · RSMo § 115.306 · Case 1616-MC15890
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Apr. 15, 2025
Pays up, on Tax Day, two years into her term
A satisfaction of judgment is finally filed: the 2016 income-tax lien is paid off on April 15, 2025, eight and a half years after it was entered, and two years after Ward 4 voters handed her the gavel.
▸Source & context
Source: Case No. 1616-MC15890, satisfaction of judgment, Apr. 15, 2025
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Oct. 2025
Named County Chief of Staff, $199,000/yr
Accepts the Chief of Staff job under Jackson County Executive Phil LeVota, a political appointment, not a merit hire, while still serving as Alderman and drawing a second public paycheck.
▸Source & context
Source: LeVota letter; press reports
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Apr. 2026
Fired as Chief of Staff
LeVota's letter fires her from county employment, citing taxpayer resources used for personal job hunting, a contract conflict of interest, and hidden activity.
▸Source & context
Source: The letter; KSHB
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Apr. 14, 2026
Votes AYE to convene the impeachment board
Votes AYE on Amended Bill 6707-26, the ordinance serving eight articles of impeachment on fellow Alderman Latrice Thomas and convening a Board of Impeachment, adopted 7–2 over the objections of her own ward-mate Josh Morales. The case against Thomas centered on unpaid taxes. Garza cast that vote with her own $9,915 income-tax lien, garnished by the state, unpaid for eight years, barely a year behind her.
▸Source & context
Source: City minutes, Apr. 14, 2026 (Apr. 21 packet)
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Jul. 7, 2026
Abstains on the Dobbs remand
When the board votes 7–0 to send the Dobbs Tire permit back to Planning & Zoning for one more look, Garza doesn't vote at all, she abstains, one of only two. The same night, a fast-track of the city's conflict-of-interest ordinance fails 5–3 for want of a two-thirds vote.
▸Source & context
Source: City minutes, Jul. 7, 2026 (Aug. 11 packet)
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Aug. 11, 2026
Kills the Dobbs Tire project in her own ward
Planning & Zoning now recommends approval 7–1. The mayor backs it. Staff backs it. The motion to adopt fails 5–3, Garza votes NAY. An 8-bay, 8,000 sq ft reinvestment on a long-vacant 350 Highway lot dies at the hands of its own ward's alderman. Watch the meeting. It's public.
▸Source & context
Source: City minutes, Aug. 11, 2026 (Aug. 18 packet); city video portal
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Aug. 25, 2026
The impeachment trial begins
The board convenes as a Board of Impeachment, a full trial-style public hearing on the eight articles against Ald. Thomas, the process Garza voted to set in motion in April. The hearing continues to a later session, where the board, Garza included, will cast the deciding votes on removal.
▸Source & context
Source: Board of Impeachment agenda, Aug. 25, 2026
Full citations and document links are listed in the sources section at the bottom of this page.
Promise vs. Record
She promised ethics. The record answered.
Read down the spine: every promise on one side, every documented answer on the other. The gap between them is the whole story.
The promise · Aug. 2010
She runs as the ethics reformer
Campaigning for the county legislature, she makes ethics her brand: "It was very rarely heard that you heard the words 'ethics' and 'county government' in the same sentence. And if you did it was kind of a joke."
Source: KCUR, Aug. 1, 2010
The record · Feb. 2011
Her first conflict-of-interest warning
Weeks into the job, the county attorney warns that her husband's employer, a nonprofit taking nearly $200,000 a year from the county, creates a conflict. Her offer to simply recuse herself: rejected. She calls the fallout political retribution, then admits to the Star she has no proof.
Source: Associated Press, Feb. 2011 · The Pitch
The promise · Aug. 2025
She collects another title
A glowing press release welcomes her to the LINC Commission, listing board seat after board seat, award after award. What it never lists: a single thing any of those seats delivered for the public.
Source: LINC Commission announcement, Aug. 2025
The promise · Oct. 2025
Trusted with the county's top staff job
Appointed Chief of Staff to the County Executive at $199,000 a year, the salary of someone expected to guard the public's money, not shop for their own next job.
Source: The LeVota letter, Apr. 2026
The record · Apr. 2026
Fired for the exact conduct she campaigned against
She pursues a job with CBIZ while serving as "a decision maker" on its multi-million dollar county contract, hidden in private calendar entries and a second Facebook page. The termination letter's verdict: "Anyone could see that is inappropriate and unethical."
Source: The LeVota letter, Apr. 2026, read it on this site
The promise · 2026
Raytown's Ward 4 representative
Trusted with the ward's future, its investment, its growth, its voice at City Hall.
Source: City of Raytown
The record · Aug. 2026
She counts the votes to kill her own ward's project
Staff recommends approval. Planning & Zoning votes 7–1 to approve. She tallies the votes needed to bury the Dobbs Tire permit anyway, and supplies one of the three no's herself.
Source: City staff report · Board of Aldermen, Aug. 11, 2026
The record · Sept. 2026
Forced out, she reaches for the 2011 playbook
She answered her dismissal with an official complaint accusing the county executive of discrimination and a hostile work environment. The Star also reports he had told her of an anonymous email accusing her of illegal activity and recommending her firing. Back in 2011 it was a retribution claim she admitted she couldn't prove. Deflect, never own it.
Source: Kansas City Star, Sept. 2, 2026
The ethics reformer of 2010 would recognize the record of 2026 instantly. It's the kind of joke she warned us about.
While Raytown budgets got tighter
$0
a year, her taxpayer-funded Chief of Staff salary
$0/hr
roughly what that salary costs taxpayers per working hour
0.0×
the median Raytown household income ($68,840, Census ACS)
0 mos
from appointment to the letter that ended it
“I will not be bullied by someone I overpaid and gave an amazing opportunity who just wanted to have more of the limelight than she got.”[1]
05
File 05
The Record
Entered Into Evidence
The record speaks for itself.
In their own words, her former boss, and the Kansas City Star.
A
Exhibit A
The Conflict of Interest
“You actually pursued a position with CBIZ when the county is currently negotiating a multi-million dollar contract when you were a decision maker on the awarding of that contract. Anyone could see that is inappropriate and unethical.”
Jackson County Executive Phil LeVota's letter to Garza
“I chose you to fill the Chief of Staff position at a salary of $199,000 a year and to receive a letter like this is appalling and a great piece of evidence to show your true character.”
“You purposely hid all of this activity from me even going as far as having two Facebook pages of one I was blocked from and also by having these employment pursuing meetings labeled as 'private' on your county calendar.”
“Theresa Garza Ruiz's name is on the ballot, but a judge disqualified her as a candidate because of residency questions, and any votes for her will not be counted.”
Once is a mistake. Twice is a method. Three times is a career. Lay the conflicts side by side and the playbook writes itself, get close to public money, get warned, cry persecution.
vs.
2011 · Jackson County Legislature
The Guadalupe Center conflict
Her husband works for the Guadalupe Center, a nonprofit taking nearly $200,000 a year from the county she helps govern.
The county attorney warns: the funding would have to stop if she serves.
Her fix? She'll just recuse herself. The county attorney: not enough.
Her husband resigns. She calls it political retribution, then admits to the Star she has no proof.
Source: Associated Press, Feb. 2011 · The Pitch
2026 · County Chief of Staff
The CBIZ conflict
She actively pursues a job with CBIZ, while CBIZ negotiates a multi-million dollar contract with the county.
Her own boss's letter: she was "a decision maker on the awarding of that contract."
The letter's verdict: "Anyone could see that is inappropriate and unethical."
She hides the pursuit, private calendar entries, a second Facebook page her boss was blocked from.
Source: The LeVota letter, Apr. 2026, read it on this site
Today · Raytown Board of Aldermen
Ongoing
The Spire conflict, the play that never ended
She sits on the Raytown Board of Aldermen for Ward 4, and collected a paycheck as Regional Manager of Governmental Affairs for Spire, Raytown's natural gas utility, while serving. She no longer works for Spire. Both roles were listed side by side on her own LinkedIn.
Governmental affairs is the lobbying desk. Her employer's interests run directly through the city she was elected to govern, the same collision of public office and private paycheck that got her warned in 2011 and fired in 2026.
Source: her own LinkedIn profile · City of Raytown utilities page (Spire is Raytown's gas provider) · LINC Commission announcement, Aug. 2025
2025–26 · Chief of Staff + Raytown Alderman
Two offices, two paychecks, one built-in conflict
She takes the $199,000 Chief of Staff job, a political appointment, while still serving as Raytown Alderman for Ward 4. Two public offices, Chief of Staff and Raytown Alderman, two public paychecks, at the same time.
The conflict was raised directly, in writing: when the county's interests and the city's interests collide, who does she serve? She held both offices anyway, until the county fired her.
Source: correspondence on file, full letter to be published
The signature, the same moves, every time
↻ Public money within reach
2011: $200K/yr in county funds to her husband's employer. 2026: a multi-million dollar county contract for her would-be employer.
↻ Warned about the conflict
2011: the county attorney spells it out. 2026: her own boss puts it in a termination letter.
↻ Deflect, never own it
2011: cries political retribution, then admits she has no proof. 2026: private calendar entries, a hidden second Facebook page, then a discrimination complaint the county executive called “trying to build a case for a lawsuit.”
0documented conflicts of interest
0official warnings
0years, and it never stopped
Warned in 2011. Fired in 2026. And the same conflict has sat on the Raytown Board of Aldermen, until her Spire employment ended, on the payroll of the utility it regulates.
06
File 06
In the News
Don't Take Our Word For It
It's all out there.
The headlines, the history, the court docket, it's been public for years. Here's where to find it.
Three tests every public servant faces. Three documented failures.
Character isn't what you campaign on. It's what you do when the money is on the table, the truth is inconvenient, and your neighbors are counting on you.
01Failed
When public money is within reach
She reached for it.
2011: her husband's employer draws nearly $200,000 a year from the county she helps govern, and she resists the county attorney's warning until her husband resigns.
2026: she pursues a job with CBIZ while serving as "a decision maker" on CBIZ's multi-million dollar county contract.
Source: Associated Press, 2011 · The LeVota letter, 2026
02Failed
When the truth is inconvenient
She chose the convenient story.
2011: she calls her husband's forced resignation political retribution, then admits to the Kansas City Star she has no proof.
2026: the job pursuit is kept off the books, private calendar entries and a second Facebook page her own boss was blocked from seeing.
Source: The Pitch, 2015 · The LeVota letter, 2026
03Failed
When her own neighbors need her
She wasn't there.
She missed the meetings and skipped recorded votes, the absences are in the city's own minutes.
When a reinvestment project came to her own ward, backed by staff, backed 7–1 by Planning & Zoning, she counted the votes to kill it and supplied one of the three no's.
Source: City minutes & staff report · Board of Aldermen, Aug. 11, 2026
Sixteen years. Three tests. The record answers every one.
III
Act III · The Record in Office
Then Raytown gave her a gavel.
The votes she skipped, the meetings she missed, and the investment she killed in her own ward, straight from the city's own minutes.
08
File 08
Case Study
Case File No. 6713-26 · Ward 4, Garza's ward
Case Study: Economic Development
In her own ward, a business was ready to invest. Garza called it “just filling empty buildings.”
For about five years, the former IHOP at 10000 E. 350 Highway sat empty, an obsolete building on one of Raytown's main commercial corridors, in Alderman Garza's own Ward 4. Then Dobbs Tire & Auto came forward with a plan: tear into the site, build a modern 8-bay auto shop, and bring an active business back to the lot.
City staff reviewed it and recommended approval with conditions, writing that the project would “help to uphold and increase existing property values”. The Planning & Zoning Commission agreed, voting 7–1 to recommend approval.
And it wasn't some borderline project. Vehicle repair is an allowed use in that zoning district, and staff's own report said the project would “help to uphold and increase existing property values”, jobs on the corridor, sales-tax revenue for the city, and life back in a dead lot.
On August 11, 2026, the Board of Aldermen killed the permit anyway. The motion to adopt failed 5–3, and Garza was one of the three no votes. Moments before the roll call, on camera, she confirmed exactly how many votes it would take to kill the permit, then supplied one of those no votes herself, and publicly defended the outcome, dismissing the whole idea as “just filling empty buildings.”
Jobs. Tax revenue. Higher property values. A 7–1 recommendation. All of it traded for one empty lot that's still empty. That's economic development, Garza-style.
So why would they do this?
The mayor backed it. City staff recommended it. Planning & Zoning approved it 7–1. The only thing standing between Ward 4 and a new business was politics, a game of one-upmanship at City Hall, where denying the mayor a win mattered more than delivering for the citizens they were elected to represent. When scoring political points beats serving the public, the public loses. And the lot stays empty.
0 yrs
Lot vacant in her ward
0
Bays turned away
0
Businesses gained
$0K
Est. tax revenue turned away
Revenue figure is an estimate of the project's value to the city. What isn't an estimate: staff warned in writing that denial meant the lot would “remain vacant and underutilized”, and it has.
Live in Ward 4?
This wasn't an abstract vote, it was your ward's storefront, your tax base, your jobs. Your representative didn't just vote against it; she worked the floor to make sure it died.
The roll call
6 votes needed to pass
Tap a seat to see how they voted.
5 Aye 3 No 2 Absent
One vote short. The permit died on the three no votes: Morales, Walters, and Garza. Tush and Thomas were absent. Roll call from the city's published minutes.
A modern 8-bay auto shop on a lot vacant ~5 years
City staff: recommended approval with conditions
Planning & Zoning recommendation: 7–1 for approval
An allowed use under the site's existing zoning
Jobs, sales-tax revenue, and, per staff, higher property values
Sources: city staff report, P&Z vote, and Board of Aldermen minutes, linked in the sources section.
Bill No. 6713-26, second reading, August 11, 2026. Motion to adopt failed 5–3 (Ayes: Mims, Emerson, Hayden, Aziere, Krizek; Nays: Morales, Walters, Garza; Tush and Thomas absent). In the published minutes, read them in the city's own packet (p. 3 of 87).
“Staff recommends Approval with Conditions”, and: “New construction will help to uphold and increase existing property values.”
City of Raytown staff report, CUP application PZ-2026-07
Garza's response, on her own page
“Economic development is about shaping Raytown's future, not just filling empty buildings.”
Alderman Theresa Garza, Raytown Ward 4 public post, August 2026
The lot (outlined), from the city's own staff report, 1.2 acres on the 350 corridor. Still empty.
From the floor, doing the math
“When it initially came to us and it had been declined, then it required seven votes. And now it went Planning and Zoning and that changed, so now it requires six votes, correct? Thank you.”
Garza, moments before casting one of the three no votes (city broadcast)
The board in session, Aug. 11, 2026, city broadcast; Garza seated at her nameplate
Denied
~2021
The IHOP at 10000 E. 350 Hwy goes dark
5 yrs
The lot sits empty, in Garza's Ward 4
2026
Dobbs Tire proposes a modern 8-bay shop
Jun 16
City staff recommend approval
Jul 23
Sent back for reconsideration, P&Z flips to 7–1 for approval
Aug 11
The permit dies 5–3, Garza votes no
The decision-makers
The names behind an empty lot.
It took six votes to bring a business back to the 350 corridor. These are the people who made sure it never got them.
Chair, Planning & Zoning Commission
Started it
Steve Meyers
Chaired the initial hearing and voted for the 5–2 denial, then cast the sole nay when his own commission reversed 7–1.
“Certain uses are more productive than others… a tire shop may not be the highest and best use.”
Alderman, Ward 4, the project's own ward
Worked the floor
Theresa Garza
Questioned the legitimacy of the reconsideration process from the floor, told colleagues the ward 'does not want it,' then voted no, against staff, the owners, and a 7–1 recommendation, in her own ward.
“Economic development is about shaping Raytown's future, not just filling empty buildings.”
Alderman, Board of Aldermen
Cast the third no
Josh Morales
One of the three no votes, Morales, Walters, Garza, that left the motion at five when six were needed. With his vote, the permit died and the lot stayed empty.
Alderman, Ward 1
Ran the letter campaign
Theresa Tush
Circulated a letter to Raytown's tire and repair shops urging them to pack the July 7 meeting and oppose the Dobbs permit, even proposing a cap on new business licenses to shut out competitors. When the deciding vote came, she didn't show.
“Our city is already saturated with these types of businesses.”
The smoking gun
The letter that packed the room.
Before the Dobbs permit reached a final vote, Alderman Theresa Tush circulated this letter to Raytown's tire and repair shops, urging the established competition to turn out against it, and floating a government cap on business licenses to shut new shops out. Picking winners and losers isn't economic policy, it's protectionism in writing.
The letter (full transcript alongside). The recipient's handwritten note: “Dobb's tires, where IHop is.” Original photo on file.
Transcript
“I want to make sure you're aware that another company is looking to open a new tire and repair shop here in Raytown.”
“Many of us are concerned that our city is already saturated with these types of businesses. When too many similar shops open, it puts unnecessary pressure on long-standing local businesses like yours…”
“If Raytown were to set a cap on the number of tire/repair business licenses, one that's lower than the number we already have; it would help protect established shops…”
“…I encourage you to attend the July 7th Board of Aldermen meeting and make your voice heard.”
Signed: Theresa Tush, Alderman Ward 1, copy photographed and on file
Read that again: an elected alderman asking the government to cap how many businesses can compete, an incumbent-protection racket, in her own words. And when the final roll was called, Tush was absent. The letter packed the room; she didn't even cast a vote.
“
Just filling empty buildings.
Garza, dismissing the reinvestment project she helped kill in her own ward
Roll call · Bill No. 6713-26, second reading
The vote, August 11, 2026
Ordinances need six votes to pass. It got five. The motion failed, and Ward 4's own alderman helped kill it.
Ayes, for the project
Mims, Emerson, Hayden, Aziere, Krizek
Nays, against the project
Morales, Walters, Garza
Absent
Tush, Thomas
From the floor, August 11
Transcribed from the city's own broadcast of the meeting.
“
So I know that the Planning and Zoning Commission initially voted it down. Then we returned it to the Planning and Zoning and now they've returned it back to us. So does the city have an actual ordinance that kind of helps guide the process for reconsideration, or is that just by administrative discretion?
“
“Alderman Garza.”, “No.”
Her case against it, in her own words
Transcribed from the city's broadcast of the June 16, 2026 first reading.
“
We have received several calls from our constituents, because this is in our ward, and they do not want it.
“
We do economic development like the unpopular kid at a middle school dance, we take whatever comes along.
City staff recommended approval with conditions. The applicant called it “a significant reinvestment.” Her own Ward 4 page called it “just filling empty buildings.”
Said vs. did · The interview
She campaigned on exactly this.
June 9, 2025, sitting for a WhatsUpKansasCity interview, Alderman Garza described her own brand. Fourteen months later, a small business asked to reinvest in her own ward, with staff and a 7–1 Planning & Zoning vote behind it. Watch what she said, then remember what she did.
“I ran kind of on being strategic and intentional on the development that we have coming into Raytown.”
Garza, WhatsUpKansasCity interview · June 9, 2025
“How are we helping those small businesses? And are we setting them up to succeed in our community?”
Garza, same interview · June 9, 2025
Then came Bill No. 6713-26: a family business reinvesting in a lot vacant for five years, staff-recommended, P&Z-approved 7–1, in her ward. She voted no, and it died one vote short. Strategic. Intentional. Setting them up to succeed.
The record behind the denial · Case No. PZ-2026-07
The chairman who voted it down, twice.
The first denial wasn't the board's idea. It started here: Steve Meyers, elected Planning & Zoning chairman in July 2025, presiding over the Dobbs case from introduction to the vote that stopped it.
May 21, 2026 · initial hearing
5–2
to recommend denial
Meyers chaired the hearing and voted to deny. His reasoning, as recorded in the minutes:
Chairman Meyers commented that while it would be beneficial to have active use of the land, certain uses are more productive than others, expressing concern that a tire shop on the subject site may not be the highest and best use for the subject site.
P&Z Commission minutes, May 21, 2026
July 23, 2026 · reconsideration
7–1
to reverse and recommend approval
The Commission flipped. Eight commissioners voted; seven said yes. The minutes name the holdout by name:
Sole nay: Mr. Meyers
P&Z Commission minutes, July 23, 2026
Then it was over. Three weeks after the commission reversed itself, the Board of Aldermen killed the project anyway, 5–3, with Garza among the no votes.
Sources: P&Z packets of May 21 and July 23, 2026, and the Aug. 11, 2026 Board of Aldermen packet, all linked below.
In their words
Direct quotes are transcribed verbatim; items marked “reported speech” are quoted from the city's official minutes.
“
If denied, the property is likely to remain vacant and underutilized, continuing a pattern of disinvestment over the past five years.
“
Obviously, they get a new revenue stream… It will enhance everybody's real estate values. It's a win-win deal as far as I'm concerned. I don't know really how to address anything negative because I don't see that it'll hurt anybody.
“
She expressed discontent with being unable to sell the property in the past, which she partially attributed to City action, and urged the Commission to recommend approval.
“
She expressed discontent about the claim made by the applicants that the property would continue to remain vacant should the conditional use permit be denied.
“
He opposed the permit based on the concentration of similar businesses in proximity to the subject property.
“
Economic development is about shaping Raytown's future, not just filling empty buildings.
The Anti-Business Record
Everyone said yes. She said no.
This is what “anti-business” looks like in practice, not a slogan, a vote. Hold her own words against the process she overruled.
What the process said
✓City staff: recommended approval with conditions
✓Planning & Zoning: 7–1 to approve
✓An allowed use under the site's existing zoning
✓Staff: it would "help to uphold and increase existing property values"
What Garza did
✕Counted the votes needed to kill it, from the floor, on the record
✕Worked to convince fellow board members to vote no
✕Cast one of the three votes that buried it
✕Dismissed the whole project: "not just filling empty buildings"
The result? Five years vacant, and still vacant today.
An empty lot on Raytown's main corridor is her economic legacy in Ward 4. Jobs, sales-tax revenue, and a 7–1 recommendation, traded for nothing. Read the full Dobbs file →
Get the next document drop.
One vote, one quote, one document, straight to your inbox.
09
File 09
The Meetings
On the Record, On Camera
The meetings they hope you never watch.
Quotes below are transcribed from the city's own broadcast of the August 11, 2026 Board of Aldermen meeting. Watch it yourself, it's public.
“When it initially came to us and it had been declined, then it required seven votes. And now it went Planning and Zoning and that changed, so now it requires six votes, correct? Thank you.”
Garza, confirming exactly how many votes it would take to kill the Dobbs permit — moments before supplying one of the three no votes herself.
The roll is called on the Dobbs Tire permit. “Alderman Garza.” — “No.” The motion fails 5–3. (City broadcast, Aug. 11, 2026, 21:09–21:38)Download clipA Raytown resident urges the board, in public comment, to refer an unnamed alderman to the city attorney over conflicts of interest. (City broadcast, Aug. 11, 2026, 10:20–11:46)Download clip
Excerpts from the City of Raytown's own public broadcast of the Aug. 11, 2026 meeting. Full meeting linked below.
No interpretation needed. Her own statements, next to what the public record shows, both sourced, both checkable.
In her words
“It was very rarely heard that you heard the words 'ethics' and 'county government' in the same sentence. And if you did it was kind of a joke.”
Garza, campaigning as the county's ethics reformer, KCUR, Aug. 1, 2010
On the record
Sixteen years later, her own termination letter from that same county government reads: "Anyone could see that is inappropriate and unethical." The self-styled ethics reformer became the cautionary tale.
The LeVota letter, Apr. 2026, read it on this site
In her words
“When it initially came to us and it had been declined, then it required seven votes. And now it went Planning and Zoning and that changed, so now it requires six votes, correct? Thank you.”
Garza, moments before the Dobbs vote, city broadcast, Aug. 11, 2026
On the record
She knew exactly how many votes it would take to kill the permit, then supplied one of the three no votes herself. The motion failed 5–3.
Roll call, Board of Aldermen, Aug. 11, 2026
In her words
“Just filling empty buildings.”
Garza, publicly defending the outcome of the Dobbs vote
On the record
The project she dismissed meant jobs, tax revenue, and new investment, in her own ward. The ward's own representative supplied one of the three no votes that killed it.
Case study: the Dobbs Tire vote (see above)
10
File 10
Paper Trail
Follow the Paper
How she voted. Who funds her. What she files.
Date
Item
Her Vote
Outcome
Feb. 18, 2025
Board of Aldermen meeting
Absent
—
Apr. 1, 2025
R-3698-25, Rescinding approval of the Enterprise Fleet Management agreement
Nay
Passed 5–4
May 19, 2026
R-3808-26, Amending the Verizon cell-tower lease (city revenue)
Nay
Failed 3–6
Jun. 2, 2026
Bill No. 6710-26, Accessory residential use ordinance (rules suspension)
Nay
Failed 3–5
Jun. 2, 2026
R-3810-26, Appointment to the Special Sales Tax Review Committee
Nay
Failed 3–5
Aug. 11, 2026
Bill No. 6713-26, Conditional use permit: Dobbs Tire & Auto, 10000 E. 350 Hwy (Ward 4)
Nay
Failed 5–3
Compiled from official Board of Aldermen minutes, published by the City Clerk on the city's public meeting portal. Every vote is on the record, check them yourself.
16
Board meetings in 2026 through Sept. 15
9
Verified present in published minutes
2
Abstentions with no reason recorded
Compiled from the roll calls in the city's own published meeting packets, January – September 2026, the abstentions: the July 7 Dobbs remand and the July 21 street-paving contract.
The issues, the standard Raytown deserves, and the record that should guide what comes next.
Where Raytown stands, and where she doesn't.
01
Public Safety
Raytown families want to feel safe walking to their cars at night. That takes an Alderman who shows up, to the meetings, the votes, and the ward. The attendance record above shows what Ward 4 has gotten instead.
02
Streets & Infrastructure
Drive down any street in town and you can feel the priorities, literally. Fixing them starts with leadership that treats city business as a full-time commitment, not a side gig between other jobs.
03
Growth & Development
This one isn't abstract: when a redevelopment permit for a long-vacant lot in her own ward came to a vote, she helped kill it, 5–3, and dismissed the project as "just filling empty buildings." Neighboring towns say yes to investment; Ward 4's vote said no.
04
Transparency
City Hall works for you. Every claim on this site links to a document you can read yourself, because that's how representation should work too: on the record, in the open, checkable by anyone.
The Bar Isn't High
What Raytown deserves, at a minimum.
01
Live by the rules you run under
Residency requirements, ethics rules, and the city charter aren't suggestions, they're the job description.
02
One boss: the public
No moonlighting conflicts, no outside employers with business before the government you serve.
03
Taxpayer resources are sacred
Public email, phones, and staff time are for the public's work. Full stop.
04
Show up and do the work
Prepared at meetings, honest in the minutes, present in the ward, not just at the events with cameras.
Judge every candidate, this one included, against this list.
The other side of this story
Picture Ward 4 with representation that shows up.
An Alderman who votes for new investment instead of against it. Who treats taxpayer resources as sacred. Who answers to one boss: the public. Raytown isn't asking for the extraordinary, it's asking for the standard. And the standard is winnable.
Accountability starts with knowing how the machine works.
Board of Aldermen
Raytown's city council, ten members, two per ward, elected to four-year terms. They pass ordinances, approve the budget, and set city policy.
Ordinance
A city law. Every vote an Alderman casts on an ordinance is recorded in the meeting minutes, permanently.
Conflict of interest
When an official's personal interests, a job, a family member's employer, a contract, intersect with their public decisions. Missouri law and city ethics codes restrict what officials can do in those situations.
Asked at the door.
The questions we hear knocking on doors around Raytown, answered straight.
Isn't this just negative campaigning?
Fair question. Everything on this site links to something you can check yourself: news reports, court dockets, city records. If the record looks bad, that's the record talking, not us.
Where does all this information come from?
Public sources: local news coverage, Missouri CaseNet court records, and Raytown Board of Aldermen meeting minutes. Follow the links; we want you to read the originals.
Who is behind this site?
A small-dollar, grassroots effort by Raytown voters who believe the public record should be public. No committee, no candidate coordination, just documents, linked so you can check every one.
What can I actually do about it?
Three things: read the letter, share it with a neighbor, and show up at Board of Aldermen meetings. They are public, and sitting in the room changes how every name on that dais behaves.
Did she resign from the county, or was she fired?
The County Executive's letter gave her a deadline: resign by April 23, 2026, "or you will receive a termination letter." Either way, the letter ended her county career, she is no longer Chief of Staff. It's linked on this site so you can read every word yourself.
Why does an old county job matter for a city race?
Because it's the most detailed performance review any Raytown candidate has on file. The letter documents how she handled a $199,000 taxpayer salary, public resources, and public trust, written by the people who worked with her every day. Character in one office is a preview of the next.
Sixteen years · Three tests · One record
You've read the file. The documents don't blink.
Case Closed
The verdict is yours
Every quote on this site is from a public document. Every vote is in the city's minutes. All that's left is Election Day.
[16]Theresa Garza's own LinkedIn profile, Lists 'Alderman, Ward 4 at City of Raytown' and 'Regional Manager, Government Affairs at Spire' simultaneously. Note: her Spire employment has since ended.
[17]City of Raytown, utilities page, Natural gas service for Raytown is provided by Spire Energy (formerly Missouri Gas Energy).
[21]Kansas City Star, discrimination complaint report, September 2026. Garza's official complaint against LeVota; the Star reports he had told her of an anonymous email accusing her of illegal activity.
Pre-written, source-backed messages. One tap copies the text and the link, paste it anywhere.
💬 Text message
Did you know Raytown's Ward 4 alderman was FIRED as Jackson County Chief of Staff after just 6 months? The termination letter is public, it says "anyone could see that is inappropriate and unethical." Read it yourself: [site link]
🏘️ Nextdoor / Facebook
Before you vote in Ward 4, read the public record: fired from a $199,000 county job over a conflict of interest, then counted the votes to kill a reinvestment project in OUR ward, against staff and a 7–1 Planning & Zoning recommendation. All documents here: [site link]
✉️ Email
I just read through the documented public record on Alderman Theresa Garza, the county termination letter, the 2011 conflict-of-interest story, the Dobbs Tire vote. Every claim links to the source document. Worth five minutes of your time: [site link]
First time here?
Start with the letter, it's two minutes and it explains everything else on this page.
