Taxpayers charged $1.5 million to reimburse DCP but no payment was due and no records shows payment was made form 2020 to 2025
EARL WATT
• Leader & Times
After a recent request to use state-designated funds for the Seward County Treasurer’s office for pay raises was approved by the Seward County Commission and then rescinded two weeks later, Treasurer Mary Rose filed a suit against the Seward County Board of County Commissioners.
On Oct. 8, Rose’s attorney, Chris McGowne, filed an amendment to the complaint. In that refiling, a timeframe of when Seward County administration and some commissioners started to become hostile to the treasurer’s office was part of the complaint.
According to the complaint, “On or about October 15, 2025, a Kansas Open Records Act request was received concerning matters related to a prior DCP settlement or repayment involving Seward County.” That filing was made by the Leader & Times in response to the statement that had been made by Administrator April Warden during budget discussions that the DCP settlement had just been paid off. Records indicated that the DCP settlement was completed four years prior.
In providing the information, Rose found information about the settlement that raised concerns.
According to the complaint, Rose, “reviewed records responsive to or implicated by that request in the course of performing her official responsibilities. This review brought to light substantial discrepancies concerning amounts that had been budgeted or certified in connection with DCP-related matters.”
According to Rose, this affected a total $100,000 for rural fire between 2020 and 2023 and $1.5 million for the Seward County budget between the years of 2020 to 2025.
According to Rose, while the taxpayers were charged for these additional taxes, no payments were due to DCP, and Rose could not determine where those collected funds were spent.
“These matters concerned public funds, certified budgets, accounting practices, and information directly affecting Seward County taxpayers,” the complaint alleged.
Rose disclosed her concerns to county leadership out of what she believed was “her obligation as County Treasurer.”
Rose also discovered additional funds surrounding Blue Cross and Blue Shield.
“On or about Jan. 29, 2026, (Rose) was contacted concerning an unusually large amount appearing in an employee-benefits account,” according to the complaint. “(Rose) immediately reviewed the matter and concluded that the amount appeared to involve an accounts-payable or liability issue associated with Blue Cross Blue Shield. Auditor came to Plaintiff’s office and participated in reviewing the matter. That review identified approximately $6,212,790.13 associated with the Blue Cross Blue Shield accounting issue. Records reviewed by (Rose) reflected journal-entry amounts of approximately $3,579,711.62 attributable to 2024 and approximately $2,633,078.51 attributable to 2025. Those amounts totaled approximately $6,212,790.13. The matter thereafter involved collaboration among the Treasurer’s Office, Clerk’s Office, payroll personnel, and others responsible for the County’s financial records. (Rose) alleges that this constituted another instance in which she identified or assisted in identifying a substantial financial or accounting discrepancy requiring correction or further examination.”
After discovering these financial disparities, Rose said the relationship with administration and certain members of the Seward County Commission became adversarial.
“This adversarial relationship included increasing hostility and attempts at intimidation, as well as threats directed toward (Rose) and/or members of her staff,” the complaint alleges. “The situation became sufficiently serious that (Rose) developed concerns for her personal safety, as well as the safety and security of employees working within the Treasurer’s Office. In fact, because of those safety concerns, (Rose) began carrying a firearm for personal protection while performing her official responsibilities.”
The complaint alleged that Commissioner Steve Helm then started to make multiple requests for information the Treasurer’s office, and those requests continued through June 2026 when Helm wanted the records of anyone who opposed the 17-mill tax increase and filed a complaint with the Kansas Board of Tax Appeals.
Because Rose was not sure what she could legally provide, she sought legal counsel, but the complaint alleged, “The Board of County Commissioners had demanded that the Treasurer only speak to county counsel, who was simultaneously representing the BOCC, including Commissioner Helm — the very person who was seeking the information — a clear conflict of interest. Plaintiff’s independent counsel subsequently advised County personnel that Commissioner Helm appeared to have submitted that request in his personal capacity, that counsel had reviewed the legality of the request, and that the responsive information could be released after the appropriate processing costs were determined and paid.”
Helm never paid the fees, and the information was never released to him.
Because of these concerns, Rose alleges that her Treasurer Fund then came into question. The Treasurer’s office receives reimbursement from the state for handling transactions including car tag registrations, titles, etc. Those funds are in the control of the Treasurers in each county in Kansas.
Those were the funds Rose was directing toward salary adjustments, and according to the complaint, Rose followed the county’s pay scale charts and schedules in making the adjustments.
According to the complaint, “The County’s position schedule specifically places Treasurer’s Office positions within those established grades and pay ranges. The schedule identifies the Treasurer Bookkeeper as Grade 15, the Deputy County Treasurer as Grade 15, the Tax Clerk as Grade 13, the Vehicle Tag Clerk as Grade 13, and the Vehicle Tag Supervisor as Grade 15. The Treasurer’s proposed wage realignment was developed with reference to those same County-established pay scales and quartiles. The proposed employee wages remained within the compensation ranges already established by Seward County for the applicable positions and grades, rather than creating a separate or extraordinary wage scale for employees of the Treasurer’s Office.”
However, in the budget process, Rose claimed that county administration budgeted $80,000 of her Treasurer fund to be transferred to the 2027 general fund.
The commission originally approved the use of the Treasurer Fund for the raises July 20, but the commission rescinded that decision on Aug. 3, the very day the raises took effect. Employees received one day of pay at the new level before being returned to the previous pay level.
According to the complaint, the actions taken by the commission were not based on county policy but retaliatory for Rose using the Treasurer Fund for the Treasurer’s office and the action “impaired her ability to manage, retain, recruit, and compensate the employees necessary to perform the statutory responsibilities of the Seward County Treasurer’s Office.”
Rose is seeking to have the raises reinstated, her legal fees paid and recognize the treasurer’s ability to obtain independent legal counsel.
