JEFFERSON CITY 鈥 A former state representative from 狐狸视频 is suing the chief clerk of the Missouri House over wages that were stripped from his paycheck after his colleagues censured him in 2021.
Former state Rep. Wiley Price, a 狐狸视频 Democrat who lost reelection in 2022 after the censure, is seeking a declaration that the garnishment was unlawful and an order forcing the state to pay him more than $22,000 in garnished wages.
Dana Rademan Miller, chief clerk of the House, said in response that as chief clerk, 鈥淚 am unable to comment on pending litigation or legal matters.鈥
She added, in a statement, 鈥淢y role is to adhere to the directives and decisions of the Missouri House of Representatives within the scope of my responsibilities. Any actions taken were in accordance with established procedures and the House鈥檚 official directives.鈥
People are also reading…
Price filed his lawsuit in Cole County Circuit Court. He is being represented by attorney Richard Callahan. Ken Zeller, the commissioner of the Office of Administration, is also named in the lawsuit.
The 2021 censure, the first in Missouri history, followed a dispute involving Price, his former legislative assistant and a Capitol intern who worked for another lawmaker.
The legislative assistant reported Price told her he had sex with the intern; Price and the intern both denied having sex. The report found Price threatened and intimidated the aide after she reported the alleged sexual encounter; relationships with legislative interns are forbidden under House rules.
Though Price and the intern denied ever contacting each other or having each other鈥檚 phone numbers, the then-House speaker subpoenaed phone records from Jan. 22 to Jan. 27, 2020.
The records revealed seven phone calls and 26 text messages between Price and the intern, with both the intern and Price initiating exchanges. The final communication uncovered was a 42-minute phone call by Price during the evening on Jan. 26.
The report found Price committed perjury by denying he had told his legislative assistant he had an 鈥渋nappropriate鈥 relationship with the intern, and by denying that he had contacted the intern by phone.
After the censure, House leaders began withholding $1,000 per month, or $500 per pay period, from Price.
A House spokesman said the chamber hadn鈥檛 done that kind of payroll deduction in the past.
The deductions stemmed from a line in the House Ethics Committee resolution censuring Price; the resolution orders him to pay back $22,492 in costs associated with a yearlong ethics investigation.
A letter to Price from then-House Administration and Accounts Chairman Rep. Jason Chipman, R-Steelville, said the deductions would take place until the fine is 鈥減aid in full.鈥
Chipman cited as a basis for the deductions a resolution the House approved on Feb. 1, 2021, nearly two weeks after the House had censured Price. The last version of the panel鈥檚 operating rules in 2019 didn鈥檛 include wording addressing such fines.
argues that he is constitutionally entitled to his salary and that Miller didn鈥檛 follow state law when she didn鈥檛 notify Price of his right to appeal before the deductions began. It says the constitution doesn鈥檛 鈥渃onfer the authority鈥 to reduce a member鈥檚 salary.
The lawsuit also criticizes the new House rule that was approved after the censure, paving the way for the paycheck deduction. The claimed debt resulted from 鈥渁n unconstitutional and retroactive鈥 application of a new House rule.