SGF Mayor address concerns about potential conflicts of interest with apparel at city events
Schrag, who founded Mother's Brewing Company, but only owns a small minority share in the company, made many residents raise their eyebrows when, during a controversial meeting on May 27 over the hiring of Springfield's newest city manager, Schrag was sporting a shirt with the Mother's logo on the front.
Schrag sat down with Ozarks First and said it wasn't something he was paying attention to that day.
'[It's] little shock no one to know that I don't spend a great deal of time thinking about what I'm wearing. Why I chose to grab that shirt the morning of the vote, I don't know. I don't have any memory of it. It wasn't necessarily intentional. I wear a lot of logo wear. I'm proud to wear Mother's logo wear. I also have a lot of Missouri State logo wear. So I'll continue to wear things with the Mother's emblem on them at Springfield Official Events,' Schrag said.
Ozarks First did some digging into Schrag's wardrobe at official city events, and aside from an appearance at the Birthplace of Route 66 Festival press conference, Schrag has never worn a shirt with Mother's Brewing Company logos on it- except for that May 27 Special Council Meeting.
'I had a series of shirts made with the city flag on them. I love those shirts. I'm wearing one now to wear at events. I don't mind wearing logo wear, so I don't feel like it's a conflict of interest in any way. The city is not doing any business with Mother's Brewing Company, and that's where the conflict of interest or the ethics requirement comes about from the city charter and I'm a believer in adhering to those things, so no, I don't find a conflict and I'll keep doing what I've been doing,' Schrag continued.
Ozarks First asked Schrag if, for any reason, Mother's Brewing Company entered into an agreement with the city, or sponsored a city event, if that would change Schrag's approach, or if it would have to be a case-by-case basis.
'[It'd be] a case-by-case basis. I don't think it would change my approach,' Schrag said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
‘Absolutely no one pays attention': I could steal from my children's trust fund without them having a clue
I don't believe the young person writing to your column this week is conflating their disappointment in their mother with financial mismanagement. It would be exceptionally easy to do if one were so inclined. My husband died about 18 months ago when our boys were in their early 20s. I handled all of the paperwork and transfers of accounts after he passed, and I could have been taking money out of the boys' trust for myself without them having a clue. Homeowners rush to refinance as mortgage-rate plunge opens window of opportunity I'm a senior who barely survives on $1,300 a month. No way could I live on $1,000. Is the time-honored 15% tip for restaurant service becoming the norm again? What 20-year-old boy knows anything about such things? If I hadn't told them about the trust, they wouldn't even know it existed. I am on the paperwork as the guardian of the trust, and if I filed the IRS paperwork every year, who's to know where the disbursements go? Absolutely no one pays attention, and while our lawyer set it all up for my husband and me, she was not involved at all after his death. To be clear, I am managing all of it for my boys, not touching a penny. Before my husband passed away, our lawyer suggested changing me to the beneficiary of the trust in question, and I said no. I continue to manage it for our boys. I hope you will consider this scenario going forward. Widow & Mother Related: My brother's 'good daughter' siphoned $70,000 from her father's accounts. Should she still get an inheritance? Don't miss: 'Things are getting tougher': I'm struggling with $145,000 in debt. Should I refinance my 3.5% mortgage? The beneficiary of a trust or bank account can become vulnerable to bad actors, and, yes, that bad actor could be the remaining parent who decides to help themselves to the money or pay themselves exorbitant fees. You are correct about that. The daughter in the letter you mentioned was 20 at the time of her father's passing and, in the eyes of the law, was of age to control her own bank account if she was listed as a beneficiary. The financial institution has a fiduciary duty to pass that account along. If there was a will, as the daughter suggested, that will would be made public. She could contact the probate court in the county where her father lived to access a public copy of any will in existence. More likely, from her retelling, her mother inherited most of her husband's estate. But inheritance theft is real — and the pages of this column are rife with sordid tales of missing money and skullduggery. Such malfeasance could include forged amendments to wills or trusts, missing or destroyed documents, emptied safe-deposit boxes, and/or gifts becoming 'loans.' The best way to prevent this is to choose a trustworthy trustee and, even better, choose two trustees who they can keep an eye on each other. As you point out in your letter, transparency and full disclosure of an estate plan would keep everyone in the loop. When beneficiaries and heirs are kept abreast of the contents of an estate and who is named as a beneficiary, it is much harder to fritter away money without the knowledge of those parties. The more you disclose, the harder it is to hide criminal behavior in plain sight. 'Trustees are responsible for managing a trust in a way that avoids conflicts of interest and ensures it is administered in the best interest of the beneficiaries,' according to J.P. Morgan Wealth Management. Otherwise, they could face civil and criminal penalties. 'The trustee should not use the trust assets for the trustees' own profit and must avoid any adverse interests that conflict with those of the beneficiaries,' it adds. In some cases, it's wiser to appoint a professional rather than a family member who may be tempted to self-deal. 'Consider a scenario where a family business is owned by the trusts and a key executive who runs the business is also a potential trustee,' J.P. Morgan says. 'If that person is selected as a trustee while also running the business, it could lead to a conflict of interest.' Unfortunately, even if a couple has an agreement to pass assets down to the next generation, the surviving spouse can renege on that deal if the estate plan is not airtight. This can be particularly painful and common in blended families with second spouses. Managing a trust requires balance: Trustees can also be held liable if they act recklessly. Most states have adopted the 'Prudent Investor Act' where a trustee is required to invest trust assets under a program of diversification to provide income and/or growth of principal. The prior historical rule, known as the 'Prudent Man Rule,' focused more on the need to preserve assets, leading to conservative investments that may have provided income and did not allow for growth of the trust principal. 'No one can perfectly predict the outcome of every investment decision, but a trustee must apply the prudent investor rule when making investment decisions based on the information available at the time,' according to a guide from Fidelity. 'Whether the outcome is good or bad is not a factor if the trustee followed the principles of the prudent investor rule,' it adds. 'The nature and level of the investment risk should be compatible with the aims of the trust and its beneficiaries.' Not every trust will have the same goals, which should be set out by the grantor. 'Trustees are expected to analyze and make sound decisions that are compatible with portfolio distribution requirements, the level of risk tolerance and other factors,' Fidelity adds. A beneficiary who suspects dodgy dealings can take action. In most jurisdictions, the legal right exists to compel a trustee to provide a report of their activities, including financial information; if they refuse, they can compel the trustee to do so via a court petition. Under Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. rules: 'A trustee must keep and render accurate accounts. The accountings should reflect receipts and disbursements, gains and losses on investments, and other transactions affecting the account.' 'Such records are also necessary for completion of tax returns. Usually, the state law requirements apply to testamentary trusts or court-appointments and call for accountings to the court at specific intervals.' It's difficult to steal money from a trust outright, which is why we hear the phrases 'embezzlement' or 'misappropriation of funds' where a trustee diverts funds for their own use. That could involve something as simple as paying themselves extortionate fees. Your boys are fortunate to have a mother who is looking out for their interests. We may never know for sure whether the daughter in the previous letter was right to suspect her mother of mismanaging funds from the family trust. The good news: When beneficiaries do suspect foul play, there's a lot they can do. Don't miss: My late husband's employer is forcing me to take 10% 401(k) distributions. Help! Previous columns by Quentin Fottrell: 'I have a great mortgage rate': I need $80K to buy my husband out of our home. Do I raid my $180K Roth IRA? 'I'm tired of corporate America': My wife and I have $1.65 million. I'm 61. Can I retire already? 'This scam stuff is going to get worse': A man approached me in my car — he had a crazy story An economic reset is underway which will drive the S&P 500 to 7,500 next spring, one strategist says These Eli Lilly executives have been scooping up stock after its big drop Why a jumbo Fed rate cut in September would 'come across as panicky' Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Do Roth IRA conversions still make sense with the passage of the GOP tax law?
If I understand correctly, Roth conversions are good when you expect tax rates to rise. With the new GOP tax law just passed, taxes aren't going up. Does this mean conversions make less sense now? Confused About Conversions My father was worth millions. I suspect my mother is stealing my inheritance. What can I do? Why Wall Street's biggest bear is expecting a 14% stock-market pullback before the end of 2025 Social Security will speed disability-benefit decisions for more conditions For most taxpayers, if a Roth conversion was a good idea before the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act bill was passed, it is probably still a good idea. You have the strategic value of a conversion correct. You pay tax now to avoid tax later. If the rate you would pay today is lower than the rate you would pay in the future, converting pays off. The amount of that payoff depends on the difference between the present and future tax rates. The bigger the difference, the bigger the payoff. Read: How the passage of Trump's megabill could benefit you at tax time For instance, if you convert $10,000 from an IRA to a Roth IRA, and that $10,000 is subject to a 12% rate, the federal tax bill is $1,200. If in the future you were expecting a 22% rate on a $10,000 withdrawal from the IRA, you would have thus expected to pay $2,200 in tax. By having the funds in the Roth IRA, you paid $1,200 in tax the year of the conversion but avoided $2,200 in tax on the future distribution so you are better off by $1,000. That $1,000 difference corresponds exactly to the difference in tax rates. 22%-12% = 10% and 10% of $10,000 is $1,000. Now, if the future tax rate were to be lower, say you are leaving the IRA to your church, a Roth conversion will cost you, not save you tax dollars. Using the same $10,000 example, you would pay $1,200 in tax to avoid the church paying tax, but churches are tax exempt and would pay no taxes on the bequest anyway. A conversion in that case makes no sense. If the current and future rates are the same, 12% now and 12% later, the tax bill is $1,200 either way so there is no tax benefit to convert. There is also no tax negative to the conversion. Before the tax bill was passed in July, tax rates were scheduled to revert to what they were for tax year 2017. Generally, this meant the 12% bracket would have been 15% and the 22% bracket would have been 25% starting in 2026. However, the new tax law removed the expiration of the 2017 bracket structure. Some taxpayers converted at 12% anticipating a 25% future tax rate. That won't happen now but they are still looking at getting the benefit of converting at 12% and avoiding tax at 22%. Moreover, the scheduled rate increases that the new tax law avoids was just one of the reasons a taxpayer may anticipate higher future rates. For instance, surviving spouses often see higher rates due to the 'widow's penalty' and over time IRA and retirement account balances can grow such that Required Minimum Distributions can increase income enough to reach higher brackets. Also, let's not forget that even though the brackets are described as 'permanent,' Congress can always change the tax laws causing future rates to be higher. While the strategy of paying now to not pay later is simple, assessing how much to convert is not, and the new tax law has added some wrinkles to consider. For clients, we create what is essentially a mock tax return that projects out the cost of the conversion. This is the best way to properly quantify the cost of a conversion because the tax brackets are only part of the calculation. As your gross income increases, you may lose deductions, increase taxes on capital gains, incur additional taxes on investment income, or trigger an IRMAA surcharge (higher Medicare premiums) raising the cost of the conversion. It is not uncommon to see a taxpayer who appears to be on a 12% bracket, actually face a rate on a conversion of 27% or more. If you have a question for Dan, please email him with 'MarketWatch Q&A' the subject line. Trump's tax law is even better for rich people than originally thought. Here's how much more the top 10% stand to gain. stock is sinking. Here's the biggest problem from earnings. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Yahoo
My father was worth millions. I suspect my mother is stealing my inheritance. What can I do?
I have a parent who passed many years ago when I was still in college. I grew up in what I would call an upper-middle class household. But as I've gotten older, I've realized I did in fact grow up in a very nice home: private schools, wonderful education, vacation homes etc. However, when my dad passed, everything stopped. Mind you, this was in early 2000, before the Internet and such. My mother said there was nothing left for us, and I was on my own, so I took it at face value and created my life from the ground up. stock is sinking. Here's the biggest problem from earnings. 'I'm tired of corporate America': My wife and I have $1.65 million. I'm 61. Can I retire already? I have created a pretty good life for my family. I'm a GS-14 with the Department of Defense and have a rewarding career. As I've gotten older, I discovered my father did have quite a large estate ($3 million to $4 million). Shop Top Mortgage Rates A quicker path to financial freedom Personalized rates in minutes Your Path to Homeownership My brother was not mentioned in my father's will since it was written and registered before he was born. It seems there are still accounts out there in my name, and my mother is drawing money from them, hence the occasional need for her to confirm security questions. We are not close. After my father passed, she kicked us to the curb — not only financially but also emotionally and as a parent. Even though I was 20 when he died, I grew up in a family where we were very close, so it was quite jarring. I had to quit school for many years to even figure out how to live and survive. The Daughter Don't miss: 'Things are getting tougher': I'm struggling with $145,000 in debt. Should I refinance my 3.5% mortgage? You did survive. You're looking in the rearview mirror and, as the old saying goes, some objects appear closer. They include your father's wealth, your mother's access to his assets, and the estrangement that has taken hold of your family in the wake of his death. There's a lot of pain in your letter, and it may be manifesting itself through this financial lens. You have three problems: a will that should have gone through probate (assuming such a will even existed); suspicions, but no proof, that you have been a named beneficiary on some of your father's accounts; and the statute of limitations on any ability to have to contest the settling of your father's estate. In New Jersey, for instance, the statute of limitations for will contests is just four months. 'For those who reside outside of New Jersey at the time of the will's probate, a little extra time is added,' says the Knee Law Firm. 'People outside of New Jersey have six months to issue a formal contest of the will.' 'After this period, you usually cannot challenge the will or try to claim any portion of the deceased's assets,' it adds. 'Four months might seem like a very short amount of time, but the good news is that you do have a little extra time in special circumstances. A judge may rule to allow a will challenge after the statute of limitations has passed.' An executor who does not send out a notice that the will has been probated to all the deceased's next of kin and beneficiaries is one such reason, the law firm says. 'Any sort of fraud, neglect or improper conduct during the probate period may lead to an extension on the time limit for will contests.' The bottom line: You are a survivor and you created a financially independent life for yourself in the years since your father's death. If you truly believe your father's wishes have been ignored, you can contact the probate court in the county where your father lived to access a public copy of any will in existence. Related: 'I have never been asked for money before': My friend wants to borrow $1,600 to pay her rent. Do I say yes? Banks don't necessarily have an obligation to seek out beneficiaries. If a bank had reason to believe someone is unaware they are a beneficiary, if the beneficiary is a minor or otherwise has no knowledge of the account, the bank could choose to take steps to ensure that the beneficiary is aware of their rights, although this is not a statutory requirement. It seems improbable that your mother would have control over an account — and have online access — if the account was in your father's name alone, and you were listed as a beneficiary. The executor/administrator of your father's will would have notified the financial institution of your father's passing and presented a death certificate. You could hire a lawyer and contact your father's bank and/or contact his then-lawyer, if they are still practising. If there is an account that has been lying dormant for that time, they should be able to locate it. Upon contacting the bank, it has a duty to transfer funds to a named beneficiary after the account holder's death. My suspicion is that you are conflating the breakdown of your relationship with your mother since your father's death with financial skulduggery. Keep in mind that many states have rules that make it difficult and/or impossible to completely disinherit a spouse. It's highly unlikely an attorney would have suppressed your father's will. Depending on where she lives, your mother would have been able to claim an 'elective share' of his estate, the amount of which depends on how long they were married. This applies even if your father had explicitly disinherited his wife (which seems unlikely). The elective share is still valid even if your father simply omitted your mother from his will. If you believe your mother — or anyone — has used your personal information or Social Security number to open an account or borrow money or in any way impersonate you, log onto all three major credit bureaus — Experian EXPGY , TransUnion TRU and Equifax EFX— and lock your credit so no one can take out loans or open accounts in your name. Talk to your mother. Talk to the bank. Talk to your probate court. And then let it go. Don't miss: My late husband's employer is forcing me to take 10% 401(k) distributions. Help! Previous columns by Quentin Fottrell: 'I have a great mortgage rate': I need $80K to buy my husband out of our home. Do I raid my $180K Roth IRA? 'I'm tired of corporate America': My wife and I have $1.65 million. I'm 61. Can I retire already? 'This scam stuff is going to get worse': A man approached me in my car — he had a crazy story 'I have a great mortgage rate': I need $80K to buy my husband out of our home. Do I raid my $180K Roth IRA? Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
