.

Shaun Missey Remains Disqualified From April Election

The Arnold Election Authority has determined that the Ward 1 candidate has engaged in purposeful tax avoidance since having moved to the city.

In January we learned that Shaun Missey, a Ward 1 Arnold City Council candidate, was disqualified from the April election for not paying his 2012 personal property tax by the candidate filing date.

It was confusing because two city council candidates who paid their property taxes after the candidate filing date were allowed to run in 2011. 

At the time, City Attorney Bob Sweeney explained that while a municipal candidate can't be disqualified for being delinquent on personal property taxes, they can have their name removed from the ballot for not paying city taxes or fees.

He told Patch Missey was disqualified because he was in arrears on city taxes that are generated from personal property taxes, specifically a road and bridge line item. 

When Patch checked with the city's finance director, she said Arnold does not receive any direct payment from those taxes.

After determining that the road and bridge line item did not generate any direct revenue to the city, Sweeney drafted a memo to City Clerk Diane Waller and Police Chief/Acting City Administrator Robert Shockey explaining his opinion on the disqualification.

"It is clear that Diane, as the election authority, is disinclined to certify Mr. Shaun Missey," Sweeney said in the memo (see attached). "The primary basis for this position is Mr. Missey's purposeful tax avoidance."

Missey moved to Arnold in 2007.

Sweeney said in the memo, "In short, Mr. Missey is apparently engaged in a marginally complex scheme to purposefully defraud the taxing authorities by rotating his vehicles and getting multi-year licenses; therefore, never declaring ownership of a vehicle."

Sweeney said there is no case law specifically regarding disqualification for purposeful tax avoidance, but added Missey can take the matter to court.

Missey referred Patch to his attorney, Chet Pleban. We were not able to reach Pleban by our publishing deadline.

See previous articles:

  • Will Shaun Missey's Name Be Placed Back on the April Ballot?
  • Missey: "How Am I Supposed to Pay a Bill I Didn't Receive?"
  • Two Arnold Council Candidates Disqualified From April Election
JC Penknife February 15, 2013 at 01:24 PM
Sweeney admits here he has no legal basis whatsoever to DQ Missey. Despite this, he is forcing Missey to spend thousands in legal fees to overturn this egregious abuse of power.
Matt Hay February 15, 2013 at 02:39 PM
Sweeney on Monday told you he had sent a memo to the City, yet the memo is dated the 13th, which was Wednesday, 2 days after he made the statement to the Patch. So did he lie on Monday, as I am sure he did not speak to them on a Sunday. As for the "tax avoidance" Sweeney's position in 2011 as outlined in his memo at the time was that the City Clerk did not have the authority, and that it rested with DoR. Also very interesting that the APD is being used to investigate candidates for something which they have no jurisdiction. What a terrific use of resources, and the crowning on new revenue agents. So, Diane and Sweeney now have the power and discretion to determine what is "purposeful" and ascribe motive to a supposed arrears? I guess this is purposefully unlike purposefully not paying your tax bill which you have received. Note the strategy though, it is such that they are going to smear Mr. Missey publicly by referring to a "scheme", "Investigation" and "purposeful" so that when the court issues a writ, they have already completed their smear campaign against the man. This is a new low. Perhaps Mr. Sweeney could enlighten everyone on the jurisdiction APD has to investigate tax issues........or are they just being used as a personal stasi-police force? Sweeney opened up more worms with this one.
JC Penknife February 15, 2013 at 10:35 PM
Sweeney's legal reasoning was rejected today by a judge in a very similar case: http://myleaderpaper.com/pages/?p=19109
Stacey February 16, 2013 at 12:52 AM
UGH!!! How soon can we get rid of Sweeney?
Bill Moritz February 16, 2013 at 07:23 AM
Well not too soon, I hope. Mr. Woehrle's case was just reveresed by the appellate court. That news will be I am pretty sure the No. Jeff. County District will just let it go forward as the have that much money in it by now. Good luck to him and I hope he wins but the process survives.
Matt Hay February 16, 2013 at 11:25 PM
The writ was issued by Stewart Friday afternoon. How could an Appellate panel hear an Appeal before the Attorneys receive the mailed writ? Plus no mention on Case net. Thinking you were dreaming or misheard.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something