Fiscal Irresponsibility in Missouri: The Million Dollar Office Furnishing Scandal

The Facts: A Questionable Request Amid Budget Warnings

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway has submitted a supplemental budget request for nearly $1 million to furnish new offices for her solicitor general’s staff in Chesterfield. This request comes at a particularly troubling time - Governor Mike Kehoe has recently warned that Missouri’s surplus of general revenue will run dry in the coming fiscal year. The $989,000 request includes $17,000 for space rental and $972,000 for furnishings in a 5,000 square foot space within a state office building that Missouri purchased for $16.25 million in January 2025.

The space is intended for Solicitor General Louis Capozzi and his team, who handle complex appeals and trial cases including redistricting and abortion litigation. Notably, Capozzi and his two chief deputies - William Seidleck and Kathleen Hunker - are among 22 employees in the attorney general’s office who earn more than Hanaway’s approximately $126,000 salary. All three were recently hired from prestigious law firms and other government positions, with Capozzi coming from Jones Day in Washington D.C.

The Context: Building Out New State Facilities

The new Chesterfield office building replaces the Wainwright State Office Building in downtown St. Louis, which was sold in September 2024. While other state officials including Governor Kehoe, State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick, and State Treasurer Vivek Malek moved their St. Louis operations to the Old Post Office building, the attorney general’s office sought this separate space. According to Office of Administration spokesperson Shayne Martin, the cost breaks down to $750,000 to prepare the space and $222,000 to furnish it, amounting to approximately $150 per square foot.

Stephanie Whitaker, spokeswoman for Hanaway, defended the request by stating that this represents “standard, modular furniture” and that the costs are based on “standard amounts for building out new space.” She emphasized that this is the first time furniture is being installed in this space and that Hanaway hasn’t even seen what the furniture will look like. Whitaker also argued that the St. Louis location serves as a recruitment tool for top attorneys needed for the complex cases handled by the solicitor general’s office.

Legislative Scrutiny and Bipartisan Concern

Both Republican and Democratic legislators have expressed serious concerns about this expenditure. Senate President Pro Tem Cindy O’Laughlin remarked, “Well, that’s a lot. I think I’d want to look that plan over.” Republican Representative John Voss, a member of the House Budget Committee, stated he’s “anxious to hear the attorney general’s request in detail about why investing there is an important part of their strategy.” Legislative committees in both chambers will be briefed on this and other supplemental appropriation requests in hearings this week.

Opinion: A Disturbing Pattern of Fiscal Recklessness

This million-dollar furniture request represents everything that is wrong with government spending culture. At a time when Missouri’s governor is warning about revenue shortfalls and potential budget constraints, the attorney general’s office is requesting nearly a million dollars for office furnishings. This is not just tone-deaf; it’s fiscally irresponsible and demonstrates a profound lack of judgment regarding the proper use of taxpayer funds.

The Principle of Stewardship in Public Service

Public officials have a sacred duty to be stewards of taxpayer money. Every dollar spent on lavish office furnishings is a dollar that cannot be used for education, healthcare, infrastructure, or other essential services. The argument that these are “standard costs” misses the fundamental point: standards must be reevaluated when facing fiscal constraints. True leadership requires making difficult choices and prioritizing essential services over luxurious accommodations.

What makes this request particularly galling is the timing. With warnings of revenue shortfalls, responsible governance would dictate austerity measures, not extravagant office build-outs. The citizens of Missouri deserve public officials who approach budgeting with the same seriousness and restraint that families and businesses must exercise during tough economic times.

The Recruitment Argument: A Flawed Justification

The justification that premium office space is necessary for recruiting top legal talent is deeply troubling. Should public service be about attracting professionals who require lavish accommodations, or should it be about attracting those committed to serving the public regardless of office furnishings? This argument suggests that the attorney general’s office values style over substance and luxury over dedication to public service.

Furthermore, the fact that the solicitor general and his deputies earn more than the elected attorney general raises additional questions about compensation priorities within the office. While attracting qualified legal professionals is important, it should not come at the expense of fiscal responsibility or create appearance issues regarding compensation equity within government agencies.

The Broader Implications for Public Trust

Incidents like this erode public trust in government institutions. When citizens see their tax dollars being spent on million-dollar office furnishings while being warned about budget shortfalls, it creates cynicism and distrust. This damages the very foundation of our democratic system, which relies on public confidence in government’s ability to manage resources responsibly.

Public officials must understand that their spending decisions send powerful messages about their values and priorities. A decision to spend nearly a million dollars on office furnishings while warning about revenue shortages communicates that comfort and appearance take precedence over fiscal responsibility and public service.

The Path Forward: Accountability and Reform

Missouri legislators must exercise rigorous oversight of this request and similar expenditures. The bipartisan concern expressed by both Republican and Democratic lawmakers is encouraging and demonstrates that fiscal responsibility can transcend party lines. Public officials should be held to the highest standards of accountability when spending taxpayer funds.

This incident should prompt a broader conversation about government spending standards and priorities. We need clear guidelines that ensure public funds are used efficiently and effectively, with transparency about how spending decisions are made. The people of Missouri deserve to know that their tax dollars are being used to serve the public interest, not to create luxurious working environments for government officials.

Conclusion: A Call for Responsible Leadership

This million-dollar furniture request represents a failure of leadership and judgment. Public officials must remember that they serve the people, not themselves. Fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability should be the guiding principles of every spending decision. As Missouri faces potential budget challenges, its leaders should demonstrate the restraint and wisdom that difficult times demand.

The citizens of Missouri deserve better than extravagant office furnishings while being warned about revenue shortfalls. They deserve public officials who prioritize essential services over luxury, who practice what they preach about fiscal responsibility, and who understand that public service is about serving, not about being served with lavish accommodations. This moment calls for reflection, accountability, and a renewed commitment to responsible stewardship of public funds.