Ordinance No. 110056 popped up at the last minute Thursday, too late, as the clerk said, to be included in the printed docket.
It didn’t involve a lot of money, relatively speaking — $125,000 — and it generated virtually no discussion.
But it sure packed a political wallop.
Yes, it did. It could hardly have come at a worse time for Mayor Mark Funkhouser, who has spent the last year or so trying to put “the Gloria thing” behind him. The Gloria thing, of course, was the long-running flap over wife Gloria Squitiro’s presence at City Hall, when she worked there as a full-time volunteer in his office.
Worked, as in scorched the walls of the old Art Deco building with a blowtorch and breathed fire down the throats of many regular, salary-earning employees.
A little background:
You’ll recall that Squitiro refused to leave City Hall and that her husband — uh, the mayor — didn’t have the good sense, or maybe the courage, to tell her to do so. The council had to pass an ordinance, later thrown out by a judge, forcing her to do so.
Of course, it goes a lot deeper than a domineering wife getting her way and a deferring husband nodding to the status quo.
The city had to pay out $550,000 to a former mayoral aide, Ruth Bates, who sued Funkhouser, Squitiro and the city for Squitiro’s alleged harassment of her and discrimination against her. The city paid the money after settling with Bates, while Squitiro’s insurance company paid Bates an additional $45,000.
Let’s think about that again, as we approach the Feb. 22 primary election, in which Funkhouser is one of seven announced candidates...Five hundred fifty thousand dollars of taxpayer money was lost to the city because of Mrs. Funk’s tart tongue and poor judgment.
And she wasn’t even a full-fledged city employee. She was a squatter!
That brings us to Thursday and Ordinance No. 110056.
Bates’ lawsuit wasn’t the only one filed as a result of the Squitiro rodeo at City Hall. Shawn Pierce, a former aide to Funkhouser, filed a suit last January alleging that Funkhouser fired him because he had sided with Bates in that fracas.
There must have been something to Pierce’s claim because last month the city agreed to pay Pierce $125,000. “We have an agreement in principle,” Pierce’s attorney said at the time.
On Thursday, it was time for the council to approve the settlement.
And who introduced the ordinance? None other than Deb Hermann, a second-term council member who appears, on the basis of endorsements and momentum, to be the leading contender in the Feb. 22 primary.
Hermann, chairwoman of the council’s Finance and Audit Committee, was in a difficult position Thursday. I would think that, to some degree, she relished the prospect of sticking it to the mayor at this time, when the public is starting to pay attention to the mayor’s race.
On the other hand, Funkhouser, Mrs. Funk and all the bad stew that has been served up at City Hall the past few years have undoubtedly turned some members of the public against the council as a whole. As a result, Hermann — the only current council member running for mayor, besides Funkhouser — could suffer from association.
Earlier Thursday, I asked Hermann if she would vote “yes” for the Pierce payout through gritted teeth.
“I’m certainly not happy about this, but I would be much less happy if we had to pay more,” she said.
And, so, when it came time for a vote on Thursday, there was very little discussion: Just one question, directed to city staff, to confirm that the $125,000 would come specifically from money budgeted for the mayor’s office.
After the city attorney confirmed that was the case, the clerk proceeded with a roll-call vote. There were 11 “ayes,” one person absent (Councilman Bill Skaggs) and one abstention — the mayor.
Now, let’s do the math. Five hundred fifty thousand plus one hundred twenty-five thousand equals six hundred seventy-five thousand.
That’s $675,000 in taxpayer funds that has been paid out as a result of Mrs. Funk’s wonderful foray at City Hall.
Think about that when you go to the polls five weeks from Tuesday.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
Excellent points, Jim. I wonder if people need to be reminded about the disastrous consequences of this mayor and (co-mayor) wife.
I would think Funkhouser would come in 2nd to last (Clay Chastain deserves a special last-place finish) in the primary race. Just imagine the disastrous timing of having Funkhouser succeed in the primary election, then asking the city voters to reauthorize the earnings tax a month later. That couldn’t be good for the city.
Willie — Chastain is seeking to bypass the primary (he’s such a regal figure, you know, that he shouldn’t have to subject himself to a bothersome primary election), so you won’t get your wish there.
You bring up an interesting point on Funkhouser and the earnings tax. When eastern Missourian Rex Sinquefield first broached the idea of eliminating the E-tax, Funkhouser said he was open to the idea. That’s how little clue he had of the ramifications of a possible repeal. (It is a beautiful tax — as beautiful as any tax can be — in many ways, particularly in that it forces job-holding residents of surrounding cities who work in KC to help pay for the amenities that KC finances, such as Union Station, the P&L District, the zoo, Liberty Memorial, etc.)
Funkhouser soon came around to the notion that eliminating the E-tax was a bad idea, but the fact he was willing to consider it tells me he was out of touch and listening to bad advisers (i.e. conservative consultant Jeff Roe).
Jim
Great job, Jim!
Thanks, Laura. Good to hear from one of my “charter” subscribers.