Dean Plocher accused of trying to ‘mislead this court’ in whistleblower lawsuit

House Speaker Dean Plocher during the 2023 veto session (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications).

Missouri House Speaker Dean Plocher’s arguments to dismiss a whistleblower lawsuit filed against him earlier this year don’t withstand scrutiny and are an effort to “mislead this court,” attorneys for Chief Clerk Dana Miller wrote in a motion filed this week.

Miller’s lawsuit, filed in May, accuses Plocher and his chief of staff, Rod Jetton, of retaliating against her after she raised concerns about his alleged mistreatment of women and misuse of state funds.

Plocher sought to get himself dismissed from the case last month, arguing that any allegations of wrongdoing amount to “little more than internal political disputes.”

He also argued Miller was not a whistleblower and that any alleged threats against her job were relayed to her by a third party and are therefore hearsay. And he cited a provision in Missouri’s constitution saying members of the General Assembly “shall not be questioned for any speech or debate in either house.”

Miller’s attorney, Sylvia Hernandez, wrote in opposing Plocher’s motion that alleged actions taken by the speaker fit the definition of retaliation.

Missouri House chief clerk sues Dean Plocher, Rod Jetton alleging whistleblower retaliation

He allegedly moved to change hiring and discipline policies for the House in order to sideline Miller, all of which “can be seen as a reprimand, a reassignment of duties, withholding of work, and as a possible demotion,” Hernandez wrote.

Plocher also targeted other nonpartisan staff for dismissal, Hernandez wrote, in retaliation against the clerk and circulated a memo containing allegations against Miller aimed at convincing the House to remove her.

All of this came, Hernandez wrote, after Miller disclosed violations of House policy, “gross waste of funds or abuse of authority, waste of public resources, mismanagement, and danger to public safety.”

By justifying his behavior as simply “political disagreements,” Hernandez wrote, Plocher is trying to “mislead this court” by applying the constitution protections for speech during House debate to conversations that took place behind closed doors.

Plocher, who last week finished fourth in the GOP primary for secretary of state, became embroiled in controversy last September when he was accused of engaging in “unethical and perhaps unlawful conduct” as part of his months-long push to get the House to award an $800,000 contract to a private company to manage constituent information.

A month later, The Independent reported Plocher had on numerous occasions over the last five years illegally sought taxpayer reimbursement from the Legislature for airfare, hotels and other travel costs already paid for by his campaign.

A complaint against Plocher was filed with the Missouri House Ethics Committee in November, kicking off a four-month investigation that ended with no formal reprimand. However, the Republican and Democratic lawmakers who led the inquiry said Plocher obstructed the committee’s work through pressure on potential witnesses and refusing to issue subpoenas.

Plocher has denied any wrongdoing.

Miller claims in her lawsuit that problems with Plocher began before he was speaker, when she confronted him in May 2022 over several complaints about his treatment of female Republican lawmakers, including a woman who said she considered filing an ethics complaint against him.

When she raised those concerns with Plocher, Miller said he responded by saying: “stupid Republican women…they are an invasive species.”

Tensions escalated, Miller said, during Plocher’s efforts to replace the House’s constituent management contract in 2023. When Miller pushed back, she said another lawmaker working with Plocher told her the speaker had repeatedly threatened to fire her.

Miller alleges Plocher pushed to privatize constituent management because it would mean large donations for his statewide campaign and access to communications to the House for campaign use.

In retaliation for her resistance Hernandez wrote, Plocher threatened MIller that he “would take it to a vote” to remove her as chief clerk,  “a warning of possible dismissal.”

The chief clerk is a nonpartisan officer elected by the House.

Plocher also fired his first chief of staff, Miller says in her lawsuit, because he “didn’t stop Danagate,” and allegedly sent Jetton to tell her to “back off” if she wanted him to “let it go.”