St. Louis Public Radio Story on the Nicastro Scandal

Dale Singer has a nice story up at the newly merged St. Louis Public Radio/Beacon site on the Nicastro controversy.  There's a lot in there, so please read the whole thing, but here are a few highlights:

Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal says that Nicastro has not been honest during her time at DESE:

“My total issue,” she said, “has been her not being transparent and telling the truth. She tells school board members one thing and she tells senators and representatives something else. Since I serve in both capacities, I’m hearing both sides.”

Specifically, Chappelle-Nadal complained that when Normandy absorbed the Wellston school district in 2010, she was told that the district would not lose accreditation for at least three years. The district lost accreditation two years later, leading to the student transfers that have resulted in serious financial problems and questions about whether the district can survive.

“When you make a commitment,” Chappelle-Nadal said, “you stick to your commitment. The one thing I will never ever ever ever tolerate is an administrator who misrepresents the truth and makes misstatements and outright lies.

It doesn't look like the controversy is going away any time soon.  The Kansas City School District filed suit to prevent the state's breakup of their school district, stating that Nicastro has been working "covertly to orchestrate a breakup of (the district) into charter schools."

And Tom Schweich has asked for documents to investigate Nicastro's decision to change wording on DESE's cost estimate (or lack thereof).  There are reasons, however, to be skeptical about the chances of Schweich taking any action that would negatively impact Sinqeufield's agenda. Many reasons.

Mike Jones, a senior policy adviser to Charlie Dooley and the vice president of the state board of education, had a jaw-dropping quote:

“But the process of making the sausage is a different issue. I’m big on accountability. I think transparency is fairly overrated. Transparency is a liberal fetish. It’s way overemphasized.”

 His full quote is a little more nuanced and contains some interesting observations:

“On one side you have the education reform establishment. There is a small group of people who want it to work for all children, then there are two other groups: libertarians, who live in a fantasy world and don’t believe in public education, and corporate interests, who see education as a cash cow.

“Then you have the education establishment. They are genuinely concerned about the education of kids, except they collectively seem to lack the will to fundamentally change the way we deliver public education. They have lost the moral high ground.”

It sounds like Jones is thoughtful about this issue, but I have a feeling the transparency quote is not going to go over very well and will lead to future headaches.

Finally, I wanted to make sure to flag this important tidbit:

Sinquefield has declined repeated requests for an interview on his stand on education issues.

Rex spends millions to bend state policy to his will, relying on slick advertising campaigns and predetermined "reports" from stink tanks rather than comprehensive, honest debate.  So it figures that he would not want to answer questions about his true views.  

Auditor’s Office Serving Peter Kinder, Not Taxpayers (Press Release)

Press release from the Missouri Democratic Party:

Jefferson City, Mo.—As details about the State Auditor’s review of Lt. Governor Peter Kinder continue to emerge, more questions arise about the veracity and integrity of a review conducted by Kinder’s political allies. For months, the Missouri Democratic Party has called on Kinder to release his schedules and for an independent, third-party audit to determine how much Kinder used taxpayer funds to finance his extravagant lifestyle.

“It’s clear that the Auditor is more concerned about protecting Peter Kinder’s reputation than truly determining how much taxpayer money Kinder spent over the last seven years while gallivanting around town,” said Caitlin Legacki, Missouri Democratic Party spokeswoman. “Until Kinder releases his schedule and an independent, third-party audit is conducted, Missourians have no way of knowing what Kinder’s really been up to.”

The more we learn about the Auditor’s “review” of Kinder’s misuse of taxpayer funds, the clearer it becomes that a independent audit is needed here. The Auditor’s Office bends over backwards to let Kinder off the hook, offering little clarity on whether Kinder properly reimbursed the taxpayers for financing his political and personal activities.

Auditor Conveniently Redefines Role to Give Kinder A Free Pass

Auditor's Office: Not Our Job to Question Whether Events Are Political Or Official. At a press conference releasing the results of the "review," deputy auditor Harry Otto told reporters that: "It is not within our purview to make a judgment call on what is and what is not state business for a statewide elected official." [Press Conference, 7/6/11]

Reality: Earlier This Year, Schweich Said Rapid Response Team Would Address Precisely This Type of Waste. As reported by the St. Louis Post Dispatch just five months ago, Schweich said he will designate a "rapid response team" to jump in immediately when credible, serious allegations surface about waste or corruption. As an example, he cited the possibility of a state employee doing political work on state time. [St. Louis Post Dispatch, 2/17/11]

Auditor’s Office Turns Blind Eye to Kinder Charging Taxpayers for Expensive Meals While At Personal/Political Activities

Auditor’s Office: "We Do Not Dispute" Kinder's Assumption That Meal Costs Would be Offset By "Excessive Reimbursement" of Lodging Costs. While the audit report admits that the review did not determine whether "the amounts paid for meals were appropriate" and "cannot conclude with certainty" that Kinder has fully reimbursed inappropriate meal costs, Otto closes the report with the following outrageous statement: "However, you have assumed that any possible reimbursement calculation of potentially questionable meals (meals total $10,893.13) would more than be offset by your excessive reimbursement of in-state lodging. The findings of our report do not dispute this assumption." [Audit Report, 7/6/11]

Reality: Taxpayers Have No Way of Knowing Whether Kinder's Payment Was "Excessive" or Would Cover Inappropriate Meal Costs. The fact remains that because of Kinder's office's continued refusal to release his public schedule and the auditor's outrageous willingness to give him the benefit of the doubt, taxpayers still have no way of knowing how much of their hard-earned money Kinder spent wining and dining himself across the state. Otto's acknowledgement that the report "cannot conclude with certainty that you have fully reimbursed the state" stands in direct conflict with the deputy auditor's unwillingness to "dispute [Kinder's] assumption." [Audit Report, 7/6/11]

Vin de Set is just one example. In June 2009, Kinder spent two nights at the Chase, charging taxpayers for his hotel stays as well as two lunches at Plaza Frontenac and a $55 dinner at Vin de Set, the rooftop restaurant on Chouteau Avenue that serves southern French cuisine. Kinder's official schedule for those two days in St. Louis lists an appearance on KMOX and a concert and VIP reception for the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. [St. Louis Post Dispatch, 4/3/11]

Kinder Never Repaid Taxpayers for Costs to Take Him To/From Political and Personal Activities:

Auditor’s Office: Because Kinder Recently Stopped Getting Mileage Reimburements, They Don't Need to be Reviewed. According to the audito report, Kinder "subsequently ceased claiming mileage reimbursement and no mileage claims have been paid to you since May 2009. Therefore mileage reimbursements were not addressed for the purposes of this review." [Audit Report, 7/6/11]

Reality: Kinder Has Received More Than $12,000 in Mileage Reimbursements Since 2006. Despite the audit report's evasions, the fact remains that Peter Kinder has received more than $12,000 for in-state mileage reimbursements since 2006, and more than $8,000 in 2008 alone. Just because Kinder no longer seeks mileage reimbursements, Kinder shouldn't be let off the hook -- particularly given his evident disregard for ethics rules and sloppy record-keeping. [Missouri Accountability Portal, Accessed 7/6/11]

No Scrutiny Was Given to Kinder’s Schedule (public records) And It’s Being Kept From The Press and Public: 



Auditor’s Office: Kinder's Sloppy Record-Keeping Means We Don't Have to Perform a Thorough Audit. According to the report, Kinder's "documentation was not always complete or accurate as to the specifics of your scheduled events"... "Therefore we did not attempt to compare in-state lodging costs paid to you with activities or events scheduled on your calendar." [Audit Report, 7/6/11]

Reality: Auditor Has An Obligation to Ensure Taxpayers Are Made Whole -- Period. This audit practically provides a blueprint for any public officeholder seeking to live the high life on the taxpayers dime: just make sure your public schedule is unreliable, sloppy, and "cumbersome" to review, and the state auditor will simply give you the benefit of the doubt. In fact, Kinder himself repeatedly claimed that he kept detailed records delineating political from official events, and told the press in April that he could account for each event he attended. [Audit Report, 7/6/11; Kinder Press Conference, 4/5/11]

Schweich Attends Fundraiser for the Guy He Should Be Investigating

New press release from the Missouri Democratic Party that makes a pretty strong argument about the inappropriateness of Missouri Auditor Tom Schweich attending a fundraiser for Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder while his office is supposed to be investigating Kinder:

Jefferson City, Mo.—State Auditor Tom Schweich attended a fundraiser for Peter Kinder in Chesterfield last night, despite the fact Schweich's office is in the middle of a highly-publicized investigation of Peter Kinder’s inappropriate use of taxpayer dollars.

Schweich’s attendance at the fundraiser further underscores Schweich’s conflict of interest with Peter Kinder and the need for an independent, third party investigation of Kinder’s travel.

“Tom Schweich has made it clear that he’s a politician first, State Auditor second and has compromised any ability for his office to conduct a real investigation as to how much taxpayer money Peter Kinder wasted,” said Caitlin Legacki, Missouri Democratic Party spokeswoman. “Schweich needs to appoint a third-party, independent auditor to conduct an appropriate investigation of how much taxpayer money Peter Kinder wasted to facilitate his lavish lifestyle.”

Three things to look for when Schweich’s office releases their “review” of Peter Kinder’s misuse of tax dollars:

• Since the auditor’s office has said they’d have access to Kinder’s schedules, will those schedules be made public? To date, Kinder has refused to make his schedules available to the press and public.
• Did the auditor’s office examine the costs of the meals of Kinder’s personal and political travels for which he charged taxpayers?
• Did the auditor’s office examine the costs of Kinder's travel to attend personal and political events for which he charged taxpayers?

State Auditor Tom Schweich -- and his staff -- have serious conflicts-of-interest when it comes to Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder.

• Deputy Auditor Harry Otto, a Schweich Appointee, Contributed to Kinder. In 2004, now-Deputy Auditor Harry Otto contributed $200 to Peter Kinder's debt committee. Schweich appointed Otto to the position of Deputy Auditor by in January 2011. Otto has also contributed generously to former Gov. Matt Blunt, State Sen. Brad Lager, and the Missouri GOP. [Missouri Ethics Commission; AP, 1/13/11]
• Kinder Emceed Schweich Fundraiser Before Billing Taxpayers for a Night at the Chase. In 2009, Kinder was the master of ceremonies at a fundraiser for Schweich fundraiser, after which he billed taxpayers for a night at the Chase Park Plaza. [St. Louis Beacon, 10/5/09; Kinder Hotel Receipt]

• Kinder Helped Persuade Schweich Not To Run For Senate & Contributed More Than $200,000 to His Auditor Campaign. The lieutenant governor kicked in a whopping $220,000 for Schweich’s 2010 campaign for state auditor. In fact, according to the Associated Press, “Kinder played a role in persuading Schweich to run for auditor instead of challenging Matt Blunt’s father, U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt, in a Republican primary for U.S. Senate.” Matt Blunt later forgave a $300,000 loan made to Kinder’s 2008 re-election campaign. [AP, 12/30/10; Kansas City Star, 1/9/2011]


As noted previously, Schweich's deputy auditor Harry Otto has already gone out of his way to water down the potential investigation.

Is there any function of government that modern day Republicans don't reduce to partisan politics?