Since our column last week – which focused on police lobbyist and Republican-in-practice, county executive candidate Jane Dueker, and her role in the leak of a sex tape that “somehow” Republican State Representative Shamed Dogan obtained – several public (and non-public) events have unfolded.
First, the EYE has learned that the Missouri State Highway Patrol – and NOT St. Louis County Police Department – is investigating the incident after Clayton Municipal Police referred the case to them. To recap what “the incident” is: former County employee Calvin Harris video-recorded himself engaged in a sex act with a woman inside a County office, and that woman did not consent to the recording being made. Harris, through his attorney Travis Noble, has publicly stated that Harris did not share the recording with anyone. The woman, through her attorney Grant Boyd, has publicly stated that she did not know the recording was made, let alone consented to its recording or dissemination.
These two public statements together trigger what’s known as “Greiten’s Law,” sponsored by Dogan himself and passed by the Missouri Legislature in 2018. Revised Missouri Statute §573.110 designates the “nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images” as a Class D felony, punishable by up to seven years of incarceration and up to a $10,000 fine. In other words, because the woman did not consent to the video being shared with outside parties, anyone who has obtained and shared that recording with other people likely has committed a serious crime.
According to a source close to the investigation, [Republican County Councilman] Harder transmitted the video through a private server connected to the far-right Facebook group, “Concerned Parents of the Rockwood School District,” which was founded by Gerard Puleo, a named plaintiff in a 1980 federal lawsuit fighting the desegregation of St. Louis public schools.
Enter Republican County Councilman Mark Harder. According to a source close to the investigation, Harder transmitted the video through a private server connected to the far-right Facebook group, “Concerned Parents of the Rockwood School District,” which was founded by Gerard Puleo, a named plaintiff in a 1980 federal lawsuit fighting the desegregation of St. Louis public schools. Harder, along with fellow Republican Councilman Tim Fitch, received the video via email from Dogan – who has yet to explain how he obtained the private sexual images that were disseminated without consent.
But all signs seem to point back to Dogan, who is currently the Republican front-runner challenging incumbent County Executive Sam Page. But after Harder started sharing the nonconsensual video – “sharing those tapes like popcorn at a movie theater” – Dogan suddenly got quiet. While it is unclear if Dogan has been interviewed by Missouri Highway Patrol or the Federal Bureau of Investigations related to his apparent role in the illegal dissemination of the tape, what does seem to be clear is that Dogan owes St. Louis County voters an explanation.
To the extent that he can do so without criminally implicating himself, that is.
Politics aside: the fact that Dogan, Harder, and Fitch (and Dueker, for that matter) are all trying to exploit a victim of an act of domestic violence – namely, recording an intimate, sexual moment without her consent – for their own political gain tells us what kind of grimy leadership they seek to bring to County politics. Dueker has the audacity to call herself a “victim’s advocate” while, at the same time, helping her Republican friend Dogan disseminate a revealing video of a victim – is this really who we want in charge of St. Louis County?
These four individuals – three of which are currently elected – have a lot of explaining to do to both law enforcement and the public.
—-
Meanwhile, in St. Louis City, aldermanic presidential candidate Jack Coatar has seemingly found himself in a situation not unlike that of his recently-indicted colleagues. Coatar, elected as the 7th Ward Alderman, supposedly serves as the Public Safety Committee’s liaison to the St. Louis City Preservation Board. What is not clear is “who” exactly Coatar really serves.
At the Preservation Board’s June 28 meeting, notorious developer Lux Living presented a plan to demolish the structurally-sound Optimist International Building, a 1962 Modernist-style building at the southeast corner of Lindell Boulevard and Taylor Avenue in the Central West End neighborhood. For the second year in a row, Lux Living’s attempt to destroy this iconic building in the name of shoddily-build, over-priced apartment building was defeated – but not without some performative help from Coatar.
Before we dive in more deeply, let’s start here: Coatar is the recipient of thousands of dollars of campaign donations by the ownership of Lux Living – a fact that, under the newly-passed Proposition D, should have compelled Coatar to recuse himself from voting on an issue that directly benefits a campaign donor. However, Coatar did not file a Conflict of Interest notice with the St. Louis City Counselor’s Office, which is now required by law. And while last week’s Preservation Board meeting certainly isn’t the first time that Coatar has been publicly accused of refusing to refrain from a vote that helps his financial supporters, this vote was curiously timed.
We reference, of course, the three federal indictments against Coatar’s former colleagues, aldermen Jeffrey Boyd and John Collins Muhammad and board president Lewis Reed. These three aldermen engaged in essentially the same practice as Coatar – a “pay-to-play” scheme between elected officials and campaign donors in exchange for political favors like sponsoring tax abatement bills or cutting corners to sell – at a very low price – City-owned LRA properties. Before voters forget – former mayor Francis Slay’s LCRA “sold” 200 LRA lots to untrustworthy developer Paul McKee for around $600,000 while former alderman Steve Conway sponsored the tax incentive bill for McKee’s now-failed NorthSide Regeneration. Slay took tens of thousands of dollars in campaign donations from McKee throughout his time in office.
Frankly, there isn’t much different between what the three former aldermen did for a particular donor – in exchange for campaign donations, cash payments, auto repairs, and a 2008 Chevy Trailbalzer, than other elected officials who wielded their legislative power to sponsor and push for bills that gave unwarranted tax incentives to their financial supporters. After Reed, Coatar is possibly the second-favorite of wealthy developers in St. Louis. His MEC reports are littered with maxed-out donations from real estate developers to lobbyists since his first run for office in 2014. Those donations can generally be matched up to legislation that Coatar later sponsored – like Lux Living (formerly known as Asprient) or Restoration St. Louis (though, that legislation failed) or the Koman Group (also failed).
A major difference is that, the three former, indicted aldermen are Black and Coatar is white.
Now that Coatar has stepped into the arena to battle for the presidency of the Board of Aldermen, the EYE will be watching to see if he recuses himself on any votes – whether on the Preservation Board, the Board of Aldermen, or any subcommittee – that benefits any financial contributors.