InfoKwik Kansas City Area News

I am the attorney who represents the Clay County employees in these lawsuits and I represent the fourth case to go to trial – which contrary to the county’s stated position has substantial merit. It involves Rinehart discriminating. All four of the cases have tremendous merit. Had the commissioners attempted to resolve the lawsuits years ago, there would not have been so much money incurred by the county for attorneys fees. Someone needs to ask why the commissioners and the Clay county counselor kept the lawsuits going on and how much money did the county pay their own county counselor's attorney’s law firm, not to mention the county’s outside attorneys who represent the insurance company. Where is the real accountability? When the fourth lawsuit actually goes to trial, this will also cost the county, no matter what the result is. The county needs to be held accountable to the taxpayers for continuing to expend taxpayer monies on their county counselor (Kevin Graham) and on their outside defense firm (Fisher, Patterson, et al). And, by the way, these are not all the discrimination claims being asserted against the county. There are claims at the administrative process (EEOC). The county should make an effort to look at those claims also and ask themselves why there are discrimination claims coming out of the county? Elected officials should not be given carte blanche to make decisions as to employees. Clay County has given elected officials a "license to discriminate." Maybe the county commissioners should take a hard look and ask themselves and the authority given to their elected officials.