The Madison County Board of Supervisors approved yet another no-bid contract* at the June 4 meeting. This time it was an annual $72,000 lobbying contract with Butler Snow. Board President John Bell Crosby placed the contract on the agenda for discussion tonight although he voted to award the contract in June. (Page 5 of minutes). Gerald Steen moved to approve the contract and Ronnie Lott seconded the motion. The vote to hire Butler Snow was unanimous. The county announced the "partnership" in an online newsletter:
"Madison County Administrator David Overby announced today a new partnership between the Madison County Economic Development Authority (MCEDA), Butler Snow Law Firm, and Madison County, focusing on creating and retaining jobs in the county. MCEDA and the Madison County Board of Supervisors will each pay half the contract amount.
This collaborative initiative is about jobs, recruiting future companies and assisting current ones in Madison County. With its rapid growth in population, Madison County must use the best resources available to focus on economic development. The increase in population directly correlates to the need to bring businesses to the county. Butler Snow will work with public officials in and outside the Capitol to maximize the process of pointing companies who are interested in locating to Mississippi directly to Madison County.
Butler Snow will bridge the gap between the state's economic development efforts and the partnership of MCEDA and Madison County. This initiative was passed on June 4 at the Madison County Board of Supervisors meeting, and the contract will be effective October 1, 2012."
That was the news, now for the opinion. Once again, the Madison County Board of Supervisors awarded a contract without seeking bids from interested parties. No request for proposals was published or approved by the board. Supervisor Steen simply made a motion to hire Butler Snow and presto, they were hired. However, Section 19-3-69 of the Mississippi Code has a few things to say about so-called "professional services contracts":
"The board of supervisors of each county may, in its discretion, contract with certain professionals when the board determines that such professional services are necessary and in the best interest of the county.
The board of supervisors shall spread upon its minutes its finding that the professional services are necessary and in the best interest of the county. The contract for professional services shall be approved by the attorney for the board of supervisors and made a part of the minutes."
The professional must be either an attorney, doctor, realtor, CPA, architect, surveyor, appraiser,auctioneer, or engineer. The law states " A professional within the meaning of this section shall be limited to.." The board can thus hire these individuals without requesting competitive bids for the service sought. The individual obtaining the no-bid contract must possess a valid state license for one of those professions.
Some will say Butler Snow is a law firm and is this exempt from bidding and it is true the county will pay only half the contract amount while MCEDA pays the other half. However, the board packet for the meeting contains the contract from Butler Snow and it specifically states the contract is not for legal services (See page 20) the services provided to the county:
"are services which may be performed by non-lawyers and that, as appropriate, Firm will provide such services through non-lawyers such as Sidney P. Allen, Jr., Caroline W. Sims, or Charles V. Williams, or through attorneys who are part of the firm's government relations team.....
the company many have the need for legal services which can be performed only by attorneys and legal staff. Such legal services are not contemplated by or covered by this agreement. Rather, the company may choose to have firm provide such legal services or may choose to retain other attorneys for that purposes. The Company agrees that any such services it chooses to ask firm to provide will be covered under a separate engagement agreement between the company and firm..."
In other words, Butler Snow made it clear in its own engagement letter it was not providing legal services to the county and if it were to do so, the county would have to make a separate agreement with the firm. While lobbying contracts are legal, awarding them to non-lawyers without bidding them out is not under Section 19-3-69. Unfortunately for the taxpayers of Madison County, their government is more interested in awarding fat contracts to friends and raising taxes than protecting their wallets. Of course, this is what they voted for last year so perhaps this is indeed what they desire.
*County awards no-bid contract for public relations and marketing services.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Madison Supes award another no-bid contract
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
This is disgusting. The same greasy politics that hired Butler Snow to screw up its job and cause all the harm out in Lost Rabbit. The County needs to disassociate with the BS firm and quick.
I miss D.I. Smith
Assuming they've thought this through at all, they may be relying on a skimpy AG op (Clayton, 7/29/05), which says a county can hire a lobbyist under 19-3-40. Nothing in there about bids, one way or the other.
I'm familiar with that opinion and that is indeed the statute they will use to justify it.
Now, first of all, AG opinions are not valid in court. Second of all, the AG can be manipulated into providing the answer you want. "Is it legal to hire a lobbyist for the county"? The AG will say, yes it is, under Section 40. However, no one bothered to ask "Does a county have to open up for bidding the hiring of a lobbyist under Section 69"? See the difference.
Then there is one little matter in Section 40. Here is what it actually says:
(1) The board of supervisors of any county shall have the power to adopt any orders, resolutions or ordinances with respect to county affairs, property and finances, for which no specific provision has been made by general law and which are not inconsistent with the Mississippi Constitution, the Mississippi Code of 1972, or any other statute or law of the State of Mississippi;
Section 69 is directly on point and under Section 40, Section 69 governs these type of contracts. See the Lauderdale decision as well posted in the earlier post.
The problem is, this is like the legislators sitting on the boards and commissions, the supes in many counties have been doing it this way for so long, no one has ever called them out on it.
No one has ever called them out and Auditor Pickering sure as hell ain't gonna start now.
Oh don't worry, no ringing defense of AG ops in general coming from me, you can be sure.
I confess to not quite following the point about section 19-3-69, which doesn't refer to bids, does it? But as you note, lobbyists aren't "professionals" under that statute. So where does it come in?
You know much more about this section of the MCA than I do, so I'm just seeking enlightenment here.
I suppose since Phil Bryant's daughter works at BS, and Haley Barbour also, at least the good Republican taxpayers in Madison can pay for her downtown parking and Haley's cigars and Makers.
Germantown, TN wannabes, that's all madison county is and will ever be!!!
well to quote Chuck Berry;
My litle ding-a-ling, Gerald Steen
Would you goofballs rather the contract be bid out to Blackmon and Blackmon?
Amazing how many armchair supervisors materialize to chase the roaches.
It is said that Butler Snow lobbied to get MS Statute changed this last session to add "contribution agreement" to 19-31-7 to cover their rear ends for bad advice they had given Madison County Supervisors back in 2004 timeframe regarding Parkway EAST PID agreement... what do you think?
§ 19-31-7. Establishment procedure
(6) The governing body of any governmental agency, county and/or municipality may enter into contribution agreements with the district.
19-31-23. Indebtedness
(2) Except as may otherwise be provided by the district, all obligations issued by the district shall be negotiable instruments and payable solely from the levy of any special assessment by the district or from any other sources whatsoever that may be available to the district but shall not be secured by the full faith and credit of the state or the county or municipality that created the district.
§ 19-31-29. Bonds; obligation; content; effect of issuance
Bonds issued under the provisions of this chapter shall be limited obligations of the district payable solely from the sources pledged for the payment thereof. All such bonds shall contain a statement on their face substantially to the effect that neither the full faith and credit of the state nor the full faith and credit of any governmental unit of the state are pledged to the payment of the principal of or the interest on such bonds. The issuance of bonds under the provisions of this chapter shall not directly, indirectly or contingently obligate the state or any governmental unit of the state to levy any taxes or to make any appropriation for their payment arising out of contracts authorized under this chapter.
Hmmm... I wonder how much BS contributed to Steen's campaign for supervisor?
Gosh WE DO miss D.I.--Run D.I. Run!!!
KF, Anderson - my reading of 69 spells out where the BOS can 'avoid' taking bids - specific areas and that the AG opinion that Madison (Hinds, and others? - including Pickering?) try to hide behind says they can hire a lobbyist, but that because of 69 not including lobbyist as one that qualifies as a "professional service", then this at least had to be bid. Just as the hiring of Steen's campaign manager, Mr. Hall. But our wonderful Republican auditor, following in the footsteps of his predecessor, is not going to question any Supervisor - you know, too busy chasing those deputy municipal clerks for their $3,000 errors. So, Madison Sups (Steen, Lott, et.al.) can continue in the steps of their predecessors. And Lt. Graham can keep on padding his pockets and those of the NAACP and "Airways, LLC" without question.
Thank you Mr. Pickering. Keep on watching out for us.
9:10, you won't find most of the contributions of BS actually reported on the SOS files. But, evidence is clear and has been said by those involved, the hiring of BS for this contract was payback - just like the hiring of Hall as a PR person for the county.
I would rather the supervisors do their own lobbying. What exactly are they being paid to do other than show up for public meetings to decide on information spoon fed to them? What is keeping elected officials so busy these days that they have to contract out so many things that used to be their responsibility? And, worse, to me, the Internet and computers makes what used to be time consuming, not time consuming at all and STILL , once upon a time, elected officials did actual WORK.
no bid contracts happen all the time, there is a nice shiny new medical clinical in the heart of dear Madison that was not only a no bid contract but also an outstanding case of nepotism.
6:29 As a Madison taxpayer I am concerned about this, of course. I didn't realize the city of Madison was using taxpayer dollars to open a medical clinic. Where is it? How much of my taxes were used in this no-bid contract?
Of course, if a private organization uses their own money in no-bid contracts (nepotistic or not), it's really none of my business. Is it yours?
Post a Comment