Governor Tate Reeves vetoed a bill that would allow Jackson to forgive water bills. He announced on Facebook yesterday:
For the last week or so, I've spent countless hours reviewing hundreds of bills from the legislature. It's the last step in the process before a bill becomes a law—the governor has to sign or veto. I wanted to take the time to get it right and study each. We vetoed one bill that would have allowed ballots for voting to be filled out with a pencil that can be erased—potentially allowing voter fraud. Tonight, I had to veto another.Kingfish note: Here is the texd of SB #2856
It's a bill that only applies to the city of Jackson. It allows politicians to say that individuals are not responsible for paying their water bill. It's supposed to be for the impoverished or needy, but there are no safeguards in place to make sure that's the case. It's totally up to them.
For years, Mississippi had a problem with politicians giving taxpayer-funded services away as political gifts. We had to pass a law to stop it. "No free service shall be furnished by any [government] system to any private person, firm, corporation, or association." This goes against that law.
There’s no end date. Even if you trust the politicians in charge there now, do you trust the rest of them forever? This bill would give them that power.
And even if there was no opportunity for corruption, I reject this idea that the government can act like free money is floating around to pay for all these things. It has to get made up somehow. It's usually with higher taxes on you. Others seem to have forgotten that, but I'm very concerned about the "free money" concept that has taken over politics today.
The City of Jackson has serious troubles with their water system. People got overcharged in the past. There might be a way to fix it. There's nothing against the law about creating payment plans right now. There might be another bill that would help. This isn't it. Allowing a few politicians to determine who does and does not have to pay for government services is bad policy. It removes all responsibility for the city from the equation.
Other cities have issues too, why should only Jackson get a carve-out? There are needy Mississippians who would rather not pay their bills all over.
Frankly, I don't think this action will be popular. This passed unanimously in both chambers. They might override me. I just can't sign this bill, and I wanted to be upfront with all of you about my decision.
(1) A municipality having a population of one hundred fifty thousand (150,000) or more may institute a program to address certain disputed or delinquent water and sewer customer accounts. The municipality must adopt rules and procedures to implement the program if instituted. The municipality's authority to compromise doubtful claims is limited to the following cases:
(a) (i) Instances of error on the part of the municipality such as equipment failure or process failure, but only to the extent the customer did not receive the benefit of the water or sewer service;
(ii) Instances of error not on the part of the customer due to unforeseen circumstance such as damage, extreme weather-related event, declared disaster or emergency, or mandatory evacuation, but only to the extent the customer did not receive the benefit of the water or sewer service; and
(b) Instances where the customer is so disproportionately impoverished or needy that the customer's overdue balance for water and sewer service can be reasonably adjudged to be uncollectible, in which case the municipality may utilize an installment payment agreement to allow the customer additional time to pay a prescribed portion of the outstanding balance, and as part of the installment payment plan, to offer the utilization by the municipality of accounting procedures to move the remaining balance as an uncollectible debt to a special municipal accounting category of uncollectible or inactive accounts as outlined in the program rules if the customer fulfills all terms of the installment plan. The program must provide that the accounting adjustments under this paragraph (b) do not result in forgiveness of uncollectible debts.
(2) The municipality may set program parameters to take into account the principle of collateral estoppel as to its own prior service, billing or collection actions.
SECTION 2. Section 31-19-27, Mississippi Code of 1972, is amended as follows:
A doubtful claim of the state, or of the county, city, town, village, or levee board is one for which judgment has been rendered and for the collection of which the ordinary process of law has been ineffectual; debts due by drainage districts or other taxing districts or sinking funds to counties under the Rehabilitation Act of 1928, being Chapter 88 * * *, Laws of 1928, and Chapter 16 of the Acts of the Special Session of 1931; those debts due counties by drainage districts, which the Reconstruction Finance Corporation has heretofore refused to refinance; those debts due a municipal utility system as authorized under Section 1 of this act; debts due for sixteenth section township school fund loans made to churches, where the board of supervisors finds that the value of the security given therefor is insufficient or inadequate to pay or satisfy the principal and interest of said loan, and when the church repays the principal of said loan; and debts due by counties and townships to drainage districts for drainage district assessments or taxes levied and assessed upon sixteenth section lands.
SECTION 3. Section 31-19-29, Mississippi Code of 1972, is amended as follows:
31-19-29. The Governor, on the advice of the Attorney General or * * * the Commissioner of Revenue at the State Department of Revenue, may, upon application of the defendant or debtor proposing a compromise, settle and compromise any doubtful claim of the state, or of any county, city, town, or village, or of any levee board against such defendant or debtor, upon such terms as he may deem proper, the board of supervisors in the case of a county, and the municipal authorities in the case of a city, town or village, and the levee board in the case of a claim of a levee board, concurring therein. The Governor, upon application of a drainage district having obligations outstanding to a county under the provisions of Chapter 88, Laws of 1928, and Chapter 16, Laws of the Extraordinary Session of 1931, or obligations which the Reconstruction Finance Corporation has heretofore refused to refinance, may settle and compromise any claim, debt or obligation that said drainage district may owe any county in the State of Mississippi for money loaned said district under the provisions of said Chapter 88, Laws of 1928, or any other claim, debt or obligation that said drainage district may owe the county which the Reconstruction Finance Corporation has heretofore refused to finance, if the board of supervisors of said county concurs in the application of the drainage district. A municipality may compromise a debt owed for water and sewer service only as provided in Section 1 of this act. The Governor, upon application by the board of supervisors for any taxing districts of said county or sinking funds of said county under the control and supervision of said board of supervisors having obligations outstanding and due to said county under the provisions of Chapter 88, Laws of 1928, and Chapter 16, Laws of the Extraordinary Session of 1931, may settle and compromise any claim, debt, or obligation that said taxing districts or sinking funds may owe said county for money loaned said taxing districts or sinking funds under the provisions of said Chapter 88, Laws of 1928; and provided that the Governor, on the advice of the Attorney General, and upon application of a church owing a sixteenth section township school fund loan, may settle and compromise such debt or obligation if the board of supervisors of the said county concurs in the application of the said church. The Governor may, on the advice of the Attorney General, in like manner compromise and settle a claim of a drainage district for unpaid assessments or taxes upon sixteenth section lands upon application of the board of supervisors wherein such sixteenth section is situated, if the commissioners of the drainage district concur therein.
SECTION 4. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage.
Didn't need a lobbyist, remember?
60 comments:
Is anyone really suprised that Govenor Tater Redcheeks showed his true racist colors?
Racist labeling begins in 3,2,1....
Didn’t the city just get a huge check from Siemens? Why don’t they use that money instead of a write off?
What's racist about not paying your water bill?
Governor has to get back into the good graces of Rankin County flag wavers. What better opportunity than to slap Jackson in the face. My understanding is that this allows Jackson some leeway to work with people who clearly have erroneous bills. Bills that cannot ever be figured out and won't ever be paid. Right now, state law does not allow Jackson any wiggle room.
This obviously is a short term bill, because at the rate people are moving out of Jacktown, there won't be 150,000 people living here much longer.
,
@9:38
How is is racist to expect people to pay for services rendered?
Its a shame that people who don't want to have to pay a water bill will label Reeves racist.
If you ask someone to pay their bill you are a racist? How is that? I pay a huge Jackson water Bill for my business each month. Maybe Little Chok can run second term on free water.
If current leadership cant handle it (which they have shown over and over again) They can resign. But we already pay 9% when I buy a wendys Hamburger how much more special tax do they need. why don't they send A bill that the State pays our bills and we just do press junctions. I would love to take the checkbook back from these clowns. I know Jackson has been in better fiscal shape but I guarantee they waste and give away to cronies plenty of money in the budget. Why don't you send us a list of things the current leadership does well
The bill violates the state constitution.
It's insane to suggest this decision to veto is race-based. But, it's predictable that the 'victimized' crowd would holler racism.
Imagine the city of Jackson having its own electric utility.
Next up would be free power to the houses of those determined to be 'impoverished'. Then lawn service and grocery delivery, cable TV, termite service and air conditioners.
Descending into total socialism in a gimme-society is a goal - just not a laudable one. This veto will never see an over-ride, much to the displeasure of Jackson's mayor.
I demand free ___________________
When many of us were growing up, our small towns depended on volunteer fire departments. Way back when, those tireless, volunteer heroes got free water, no bill. The bills were $7-$12 bucks a month. That was later ruled a violation of law and has not been allowed for several decades now. Free water for volunteer firemen made a lot of sense. This bill made none.
Not a Tate fan, but the state code does not allow municipalities to give water away.
The State needs to go ahead and take over Jackson.
“Even if you trust the politicians in charge there now, do you trust the rest of them forever?”
Sort of like how your supporters trusted you to keep your word and let the voters decide if we want to keep the state flag?
Lying Tate.
Tate was right to veto this one. It is completely open ended. You would quickly see this turn into a water subsidy program as the same people who needed forgiveness now would need it again every month hereafter.
Not a huge Tate Fan, but must say Good Job on this one... Allowing any city to forgive utility bills is destined to be abused at some point, thus the need for the existing law preventing it.
Given all the issues with Jackson's infrastructure, I would think they are among the least able to even consider writing off what is owed to it. I imagine the City Leaders would love to have this pass, as it would allow them to quickly and easily clean up a huge accounting mess, not to mention virtually guarantee their upcoming re-election.
What I doubt they have considered, or certainly not publicized, is the long term effect this would have on the City. Citizens who currently are paying their bills would naturally want to have free water like their neighbors, so they will stop paying and work the system to get it. This leads to even less money coming in to try and turn around a system already in a dire situation. In addition, moves such as this would draw even more "impoverished or needy" folks to Jackson, putting more financial strains on every segment of the city, and offsetting/derailing any real attempts to turn things around.
If you want to do the right thing... work within the existing laws, setup payment plans as already allowed to help those truly in need, stop trying to use taxpayer money to subsidize and encourage bad habits/behavior, and focus on fixing your problems instead of writing them off or passing the buck. Do this and you won't have to worry about getting re-elected, or what kind of legacy you will leave.
It's a poorly written bill, but it does require that the municipality set program parameters. Most bills grant regulatory authority in areas where specific details, dollar amounts, thresholds, etc., are all written in more detail in regulations/ordinances.
But this line, "I'm very concerned about the "free money" concept that has taken over politics today."
Didn't Tate just finish sparring with the legislature over Federal Covid relief funds? When is it free money, but not "free money?"
I'm sure an unnecessary free handout to Jackson would unanimously pass both houses at the legislature. Tate just stirring you mouth breathers up because he knows Jackson's an easy target for the rednecks in the state because it's mostly black.
Take a moment and read the bill.
/s Madison resident.
Access to clean drinking water is a basic human right.
Since when is green a racist color?
News flash...the reason Mississippi is last in so many categories is because we have the highest percentage of people who are multi-generational wards of the state. Pay your damn water bills.
Back when it was being deferred many people just didn't pay as you said that it was wrong. Had you paid at least $80 per month you would have not had such a big bill by now. Trouble is many didn't pay at all and after 10 months that is $800. Hell, my deer camp water is $28 per month minimum and we are not there but 4 months out of the year. When you give the people the option to pay or wait guess what, they won't pay.
"People just want to be re-elected" Lol I hate y'all. I commend anyone who wants to put up with you idiots.
"Why can't they just wipe the slate clean" Trying to with this bill but yanno. I wish the State would take care of all the damn property they own in this city.
Boy I cannot wait until y'all have to move back to Jackson. You can't go any farther North because you'll hit Canton and I know y'all don't want to go back to these hick towns y'all came from. It's going to be glorious.
Want free water? The Pearl River and its tributaries are full of it. Cheers.
First, 9:52, in today's world, the left - who is SO incredibly effective in getting their side to follow along lock-step - has made everyone believe that the worst thing you can possibly be in the whole world (worse than the devil, worse than a serial killer, worse than a baby burner) is a "racist." Therefore, its a hyperbolic pejorative they use, quite effectively, to shut down debate and dissent. So, now: racist = you don't agree with what I thin
11:09 Did you read what you wrote? Access is clearly there, it's just not free. Also, if it's a "human right,' from whom should that right be given? Should the "government" provide water free to all (humankind) because they're alive? Is that like "free" healthcare is a "right?"
Everybody on this board knows good and well that there are lots of Jackson water bills that are massively incorrect and will never be reconciled. This bill would allow the customers and the City to work toward a reasonable solution as opposed to each account owner having to go to court to get relief. Remember all of those folks posting on here about their incorrect water bills? It had to be true since so many people were posting about it on JJ.
No one living outside of Jackson owes anyone living inside Jackson a damn thing. Eat sewage you Jackson freeloaders.
The constant agenda against the only city in the entire state is so tiresome.
You have to have a population center with amenities to attract corporate investment other than factory jobs. You need to focus on education and stop brain drain out of state, and give people a reason to stay (or move to) Mississippi.
Jackson should be the number one item on the State's agenda. I don't care if the State takes it over, or if it just starts paying property tax, but at some point people need to realize that you can't be a state of towns under 50k people.
While Mississippi was never in the running for Amazon's HQ2, they published the requirements, and number one was for a metropolitan area of 1 million people or more.
@10:33
"The State needs to go ahead and take over Jackson."
NO! The State has enough problems as it is. Trying to solve Jackson's problems is a task the State does not need to try to tackle.
I hate to say it about my hometown, but it is time to bury it and put it out of its misery, just as has been done with the State flag. Even with drastic changes in administration I'm afraid it is too far gone to every recover.
I must say I'm surprised at the reactions of just about everyone, including the governor.
First of all, do you really think if someone didn't not receive water from the city or was overcharged, they should have to pay for it still?
So, you all think that turning off the water rather than allowing someone a payment plan they can meet ( or should have a chance to meet)?
NO WHERE in this bill does it say water services can continue if the customer fails to meet their obligation to whatever plan is agreed upon.
So, yes, the assumption of " deadbeat" with no consequences does look either racists or redneck or catering to the racists or rednecks.
If a utility bill is incorrect, the law does not prevent it from being corrected. The law prevents unpaid (accurate) bills for services received from being written off.
I own a business in Jackson and let me tell you folks the honest truth: they have been billing incorrectly for years. If you knew what my water bill "stated" I owed, you would fall on the floor. Yes I have been paying what I "consider" to be fair.... but if they ever come saying I owe what they say... it will be over for me. On 75% of the payments I have made, I haven't gotten any credit reflected in the bill. I've always just figured it would come down to a day in court. And believe me, I have suffered serious economic damage due to these incorrect water bills. I could have sold the business 3 times except for them. Also, I have been unable to expand because of the liability banks attribute to this "bill". I don't know what they plan to do about it, but I do hope my private property rights are upheld.
If anyone wants to know what "free" utilities look like over the long term, take a look at Puerto Rico:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/02/business/dealbook/puerto-rico-power-authoritys-debt-is-rooted-in-free-electricity.html
@12:03 please stop taking points of fact as an "agenda against the only city in the entire state". Jackson has problems and denial & defending it isn't going to do anything to make it any better.
As for the "can't be a state of towns under 50k people" remark... We will likely never be home to a major metropolitan area like NYC, LA, etc. and I think most Mississippians are fine with that. By the way, Delaware, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming seem to be hanging in there and each of their largest cities are around 100k or less.
So, did any of the legislators even read this joke of a bill? Think about it people. Your legislator voted "yes."
12:38....that is exactly what this bill was supposed to address.
12:30....the problem is, nobody can go back and figure out what people actually owed because of the faulty meters (or faulty installation). Yes, the city can adjust the bills if they know what the correct amount is. But nobody can say what that is. This bill allowed the city and the customer to work through a reasonable estimate/settlement of the past due amounts based on prior usage before the new meters were installed.
"Not a Tate fan, but the state code does not allow municipalities to give water away.
June 30, 2020 at 10:32 AM"
Well the bill would have changed the state code so that would've probably fixed that. However it's still unconstitutional under the state constitution.
Also FWIW, 20+ years ago I received a 2-month, water/sewer/garbage bill from Jackson for a house that was unoccupied at the time. The bill was somewhat in excess of $131,000. That is not a misprint. If you do the math, you will find that one cannot flow that much water through a household service line or meter in 2 months time, period. Anyway, I'm tired of hearing about people's measly $800 water bills.
As a taxpayer, I don’t want to pay twice for my water. Once for me, and again for Jackson residents. Anyone who wants to make this extra payment can just mail a check to the Jackson water dept.
12:03...You just stepped off the Trailways last week and haven't even unpacked your grip yet, right? You're Pitt Panther's cousin from South-Philly, come to stay awhile, right? Or you're Otis Campbell's brother-in-law who's come for a visit and don't yet know your way around, right?
There might more cities wanting to be a part of this legislation and water forgiveness concept...and that's why the governor vetoed. Next up...Moss Point, Gautier, Cleveland....it's your turn.
https://www.sunherald.com/news/local/counties/jackson-county/article242326201.html
https://bolivarcommercial.com/2020/01/08/city-wades-through-water-meter-issues/
Can we see a list of who voted for this? I can't believe anyone would pass a bill like this.
11:55, nice try, but come back again with a better argument next time.
Those with incorrect water bills do not have to "go to court" - the city created an administrative officer (of course it was required to be a lawyer, who else can use common sense) that is getting paid several hundred dollars an hour, to listen to complaints about incorrect bills and make a recommendation to the city council.
This legislation wasn't about those folks - this was about the people who didn't pay their bill for months, nay years, and continued to use not just the water, but also the sewer and the garbage collection fee that went along with that water. Some of these folks didn't pay their bills because they were giving kickbacks to employees within the water department, particularly those that were supposed to be reading the meters. Some were those that were straight-piping their water, with tools installed by rouge water department employees. Some were those that had their water cut off due to non-payment, but had it cut back on by rouge employees.
The city's problem is that if they cut off these 'citizens' entitlement to water (and sewer and garbage, I assume) they will just transfer the service to son, daughter, grandson, etc and get new service and the old bill never gets paid.
If someone has a truly screwed up bill, the city is already adjusting their bills - this is a way to let the 'poofolks' not have to pay for all that garbage collection (at $25/month) they have been given for years while stealing their water.
Thankfully, the Governor say through this sham and cut out the continuation of this crime.
And to KF - its not because they didn't have their wonderful lobbyist on board, he wouldn't know how to get to the Governor's office, much less talk about the issue. Maybe what the city should do is take that 130,000 dollars they were paying to him, split of course with all the appropriate cronies, and put it on a few of their favored water customer's bills
According to the Governor's statement it was unanimous... so every one of them voted for it.
2:20, there is a problem with using prior usage of water before the new water meters were put in.
Most people did not pay a water bill. Many straight piped their water.
Haven't you see the people who have been charged with water theft?
There might be a few more that they haven't caught.
"The bill is unconstitutional". "The bill is a giveaway for the city of Jackson". Before the normal disgust with anything having to do with Jackson, I've got to wonder what was persuasive enough about this measure to get such overwhelming passage in the Mississippi legislature where Jackson enjoys no
advantages whatsoever. Were they bribed? Jackson has no money. Were they threatened? Must have been at gunpoint. Can they read? Good question.
If it's so bad, and such favoritism for Jackson, how did it happen?
@1149
What do you think the state should "DO" for the city of Jackson? You reference all the state owned buildings in the city - you do realize of course that they are full of employees that spend money every day in the city, supporting the restaurants, gas stations, etc that still are here.
But more than that, the state is giving $12 Million a year to the city for infrastructure improvements - in the Capitol City Complex bill - something that the state is not giving to any other town or city in the state.
This $12 million (that's with a "M") is going to water, sewer, and streets in the city and the argument for it was that there are many state owned buildings that are not subject to property taxes.
What else is not subject to property taxes that own a great deal of property in downtown Jackson?
Churches
Hospitals, and their owned property for medical clinics
Non-profits that 'lobby' the state government
Last time I checked, only the state was paying extra for the benefit of driving on the city's streets, doing without water during the many 'outages', and having to provide their own security services due to the inadequacies of JPD.
You think their 12 mil isn't enough? What would you suggest would be an appropriate payment?
Water bills matter.
Pot holes and raw sewage do not.
The only thing holding Jackson together is the government offices and the people who work in them. Imagine what Jackson would be like if the people picked another city to be our capital city.
Chuck and his new world order. Let someone else pay while you brag on your next plan to make Jackson great. Next bill will be for Mississippi to pay to feed the animals at the zoo. Where will it end. We all know the answer to that question.
If the leaders of Jackson really give a damn about the people, they will work tirelessly and come up with a different, more passable, version of this bill. If they cry foul and scream racism, this Bill was never about the people of Jackson to begin with.
In most cases, they’re not getting paid because the bills are wrong! When attempts to get reconciled go unresolved because of inadequate personnel, you get unpaid water bills. No one is going to pay a $3,000 water bill that they know is incorrect! Fix the system!
A court of competent jurisdiction could appoint a special master to oversee the administration of the past-due water bill settlement program. The SP could appoint a steering committee to represent the water utility and one to represent the people/businesses who owe back bills. The SP would already have all of the judicial powers that this bill attempted to give to a yet-to-be-created administrative system.
What about a reasonable flat rate per house and per business for arrearages? It could be based on location, squarefootage, number of bathrooms, etc. Prorate the past due amount over a period of months or years and add it each bill going forward, with a cap on the amount the can be added per month. If someone truly qualified for complete debt forgiveness, through need or some affirmative defense, the SP would already be qualified and empowered to do that on a case-by-case basis.
Surely it wouldn't be too hard for people with this kind of experience to hammer out a workable settlement grid. Mass tort lawyers do this all the time. As far as the expense, I suspect it would be justified compared to the amount in controversy, which is currently not collectible.
Of course, all this would be useless/until the water billing system is actually fixed. I just seems to me that this belongs in the courts, rather than legislating a new administrative system to be created and managed by the same party that created the problem, i.e, the City of Jackson.
Above comments by Mrs. Mullen are absolutely correct! I did not receive a water bill for over 14 months (yes, I called about it) and then I received a bill for over $3,000. Called again and people in Detroit were of no help. Get the bill right and we will pay. Lumumba Sr. doubled these bill amounts well before the recent issues. He also had processing moved to Detroit. Why? Who knows.
Also, Mrs. Mullen is a great cupcake maker!
You'd have to be a real loose lug nut to think Jackson's mayoral administration simply wanted 'to work out a payment plan with the impoverished citizens of Jackson'.
The Governor is right. Forgiveness was proposed as the solution because it is easier than developing and implementing a real solution. And it was a ploy to garner political support for the Mayor.
@5:15 I can tell you that there were thousands who straight-piped illegally. When found, Jackson would work with the folks to get them compliant and legal. The ones being prosecuted are the ones who insisted on doing it the hard way. They are the ones that refused to become compliant. But there were thousands who straight-piped.
June 30 @ 11:15 p.m. here. I meant "SM" instead of "SP," which was supposed to stand for Special Master.
The only reason I can figure that this bill passed unanimously is that a lot of politicians thought a give-away to Jackson would score them points/votes with black folks. If that's true, it's extremely cynical and confirms they really don't think very highly of most black people.
Post a Comment