蜜芽传媒

Take the case of Sharon Carpenter. In 2014, after more than 30 years in office, the former Recorder of Deeds for the city of 蜜芽传媒 abruptly resigned her office. It was because of nepotism. Carpenter had hired a great-nephew for temporary employment a couple of years earlier. When that information made its way to then-蜜芽传媒 Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, the prosecutor let Carpenter know she had a choice: resign or be forced from office.

The nepotism clause in Missouri鈥檚 constitution is unforgiving, and there is only one remedy. A public official who commits nepotism 鈥渟hall thereby forfeit his office or employment.鈥�

Although she resigned, Carpenter then pulled a fast one. She ran for office again. She won, and it wasn鈥檛 close.

There鈥檚 a lesson in there for 蜜芽传媒 County Council member Dennis Hancock.

Last week, for the second time, 蜜芽传媒 County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell filed a quo warranto petition seeking to remove Hancock from office. Last year, Hancock hired his stepdaughter to be an assistant in his office. Like Carpenter before him, Hancock said he was unaware he was violating the law. Unlike the former city official, Hancock didn鈥檛 do the right thing. He dug in. He hired an attorney. He blamed politics.

In a phone call with 蜜芽传媒 County Counselor Dana Redwing 鈥� a recording of which Bell made public last week 鈥� Hancock was given the same option Carpenter had been a decade ago. He didn鈥檛 take it.

Now, in addition to Hancock鈥檚 forced ouster, 蜜芽传媒 County Clerk Diann Valenti has been indicted on a charge that she helped Hancock change documents to make it look like the stepdaughter had never been hired. In defending himself in public, Hancock tried to suggest his stepdaughter was never paid, or that she merely volunteered. Documents filed by Bell shoot holes in that narrative.

A little time on Google might have saved Hancock, and the others he鈥檚 dragging into this mess, from the trouble headed their way. There鈥檚 a long history in Missouri of court cases and legal opinions on nepotism cases, and the 鈥渧olunteer鈥� excuse doesn鈥檛 work.

In 1994, for instance, former Attorney General Jay Nixon pushed to remove Clay County Commissioner Peggy Shull from office because she voted to appoint her sister-in-law to a county board. Shull argued it shouldn鈥檛 be a violation because the position was unpaid. The courts sided with Nixon.

As far back as 1933, the Missouri Attorney General鈥檚 office has been issuing opinions regarding nepotism, making it clear that a violation can鈥檛 be resolved if the relative resigns or isn鈥檛 paid. In one such opinion, the attorney general even wrote that a county recorder whose wife did volunteer work for the office without being hired was in violation of the constitution.

When Carpenter won re-election to an office she had resigned from, I was shocked city voters would turn a blind eye to nepotism. A decade later, I sort of get it. Who among us hasn鈥檛 made a phone call on our child鈥檚 behalf, hoping a little nudge from Mom or Dad can help the kid get a job? Yes, it鈥檚 different when public service and taxpayer dollars are involved. But it鈥檚 also easy in some circumstances to wonder whether nepotism is such a big deal.

That was my reaction last year when former Ballwin Alderman Kevin Roach told me about nepotism in his city. A fellow alderman, Mike Utt, had voted to appoint his daughter to a parks board. Then, in a follow-up vote, the alderman voted to give the parks board members free access to the city鈥檚 pool and golf course, a benefit potentially worth hundreds of dollars.

My reaction to Roach鈥檚 pitch was initially a shrug of the shoulders. Would Ballwin voters care? Maybe not. But Roach did, and when I did the research, I realized he was right. It was a clear case of nepotism, with case law addressing nearly identical circumstances. Roach tried to get Attorney General Andrew Bailey to do something about it but nothing happened.

Months later, Bell filed the case against Hancock. Which makes me wonder: why hasn鈥檛 he filed one against Utt? That鈥檚 a story for another day.

In Hancock鈥檚 case, I suspect voters wouldn鈥檛 have cared much if, when presented with his violation last August, he resigned, said he was sorry and ran for office again. The new quo warranto petition, though, goes far beyond nepotism and now alleges 鈥渙fficial misconduct.鈥� Here, another political truism comes to mind.

The cover-up is always worse than the crime.