The Jackson City Council wasted no time in asking a special judge to speed things up in Lumumba v. Jackson City Council. The City Council filed a motion for an emergency hearing in Hinds County Chancery Court today. The motion also asks the Court to void a one-year emergency garbage contract Jackson Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba awarded to Richard's Disposal of New Orleans.
The City Council argued it never voted to award a garbage contract to Richard's Disposal but twice voted down such a contract. The motion accuses the Mayor of declaring a phony state of emergency so he can award the contract to the Crescent City company. The City Council takes strong issue with remarks made by Deputy City Attorney Terry Williamson:
On March 8, 2022, at a Special City Council meeting, Respondent voted in favor of an Order discontinuing Petitioner’s “emergency”. Furthermore, Respondent voted to oppose the emergency contract with said company twice (2) in that same meeting. Respondent was advised by Public Works Attorney Terry Williamson during the meeting that the administration had given said company Notice to Proceed. Attorney Williamson did not inform Respondent the day the notice was given. On March 9, 2022, Petitioner filed an Emergency Complaint for Declaratory Judgment in the First Judicial District of the Hinds County Chancery Court regarding the emergency contract with said company.
The motion argues the lack of notice is a big deal.
In this matter, Petitioner entered into an alleged “emergency contract” (said contract is attached, incorporated, and included herein as Exhibit “A”) with the subject company. However, Petitioner and the subject company violated the terms of said contract. Section 10.2 of the contract provides, “upon execution of this agreement, the parties agree that should City Council fail to approve the need for continuing the local emergency or fail to authorize compensation for this Agreement and performance under this Agreement is suspended or terminated.” Additionally, Section 2 (Term) of the contract provides, “Within fourteen (14) days of receipt of a fully executed Agreement that has been approved by the City Council or otherwise authorized by a Court of Competent jurisdiction, the City of Jackson shall issue a Notice to Proceed.” NONE of the aforementioned occurred in favor of Petitioner. AGAIN, SAID COMPANY HAS NEVER RECEIVED A MAJORITY VOTE FROM THE CITY COUNCIL OF JACKSON. NEVER. There have been numerous votes by Respondent opposing the contract. Furthermore, Respondent never approved Petitioner’s request to enter into the “emergency contract.”
In accordance with the foregoing, this Court should declare that Respondent has the sole legislative rights, duties, and obligations in the City of Jackson, Mississippi. Moreover, Respondent’s votes and power can neither be usurped nor escheated to anybody, especially when there is no emergency.
Attorney Deshun Martin represents the City Council. The case is assigned to Special Guest Judge Jess Dickinson.
Synopsis of Case
Jackson's garbage contract with Waste Management expired last year.
The company provided garbage collection to Jackson for 30 years. Mayor
Lumumba recommended a
Houston company, FCC, for once-a-week service while providing a
mandatory
96-gallon garbage cart to customers. The City Council twice rejected
the contract.
The two branches of Jackson government went to court but settled as
Waste Management agreed to
provide garbage service for another six months.
The Lumumba administration re-issued an RFP for the garbage contract in October 2021. Waste Management said it scored first for the proposal for twice a week without providing a garbage cart to customers. However, Richard's Disposal of New Orleans offered to provide the same service with 96-gallon garbage carts at a lower price. The Mayor recommended the City Council award the contract to the Crescent City company. The City Council twice rejected the contract after a great deal of contentious debate.
Mayor Lumumba declared a state of emergency and issued a one-year contract to Richard's Disposal that would begin on April 1.
Waste Management sued Jackson and Mayor Lumumba on February 25 in Hinds County Circuit and asked the Court to issue an injunction against the city. Waste Management said the Mayor refused to recommend another company after the City Council rejected Richard's Diposal. The company asked the Court to enforce the RFP and cancel the Mayor's declaration of an emergency. The complaint argued no emergency exists and any claimed emergency exists because the Mayor "slow-walked the process and refused to negotiate" with other vendors. Waste Management petitioned the Court to allow the City Council to act for the city and reach an agreement with the company because of "the Mayor's failure to act." The City Attorney called the petition an "empty lawsuit."
Meanwhile, the Jackson City Council rejected the Mayor's emergency order awarding a contract to Richard's Disposal and instead awarded it to Waste Management. Thus, there are two "competing" emergency awards. The Mayor awarded the emergency contract to Richard's Disposal while the City Council awarded it to Waste Management. Mayor Lumumba sued the Jackson City Council in Hinds County Chancery Court last week to break the logjam. The Mayor argues the City Council can not award contracts unilaterally but can only approve or reject the Mayor's choice of a vendor. Enter Waste Management.
Waste Management filed a motion to intervene yesterday in the Hinds County Chancery Court lawsuit.
31 comments:
Judge Dickinson is an excellent appointee for the role of special chancellor to hear this case. Politics will not matter. The law will be followed.
so…how long do our mayors kneecaps have if WM keeps the contract?
It's a shame there aren't better lawyers on both sides of this.
This might be game, set and match for the Council, based on the "terms" section of the alleged contract. Evidently the Mayor, nor any of his attorneys bother to read the contract that they drafted and signed - or at least follow them if by chance they bothered to read the details.
A Notice to Proceed was evidently issued and extended based on Atty Williamson's proclamation to the Council after his boss left in a hissy-fit. But that NTP was not done following an approval by the Council or authority of a Court of Competent Jurisdiction. (Mayor holding Court in the back room of a joint, toking a joint, is not a place of competent jurisdiction.)
The interesting question will be just who, if anybody, is responsible for the mobilization costs that the alleged contract provides if the contract is voided. Probably the drug boys from Detroit will have to pony those up since the terms that provide the mobilization costs are in a contract that was not properly obtained.
Make up your mind, Kingfish! It's either a 'Houston' firm or a 'Crescent City' company. Can't be both. The judge would kick your ass to curb for representing it as both.
Reading comprehension and understanding the chronological background of the case is a problem for some readers.
I vote for both Houston and Crescent City firms being involved and recommended by Lumumba. Just not at the same time in the chronology KF laid out.
Did I win?
@5:55PM. Yup... Pretty much...
15 days to slow the spread of the beginning of Kenny's Super Sonic Raw Boo-Bonic plague that kicks off on April Fools Day. Who gonna be da foo?
ugh just want Waste Management to pick up trash !!!! Leave it alone!!! It works!
Time really is of the essence in obtaining judicial review of this mess. However, I think the court is going to have to rule soon and very soon on WM's motion to intervene before it can address the city council's motion. With basically two weeks left in the month, it is going to be important for the city and Richards for the court to issue a temporary ruling concerning the "emergency contract" or to resolve the case "on the merits". Important because the city could be on the hook if Lumumba's hail mary pass fails and Richards has relied upon it. This case should not require the production of testimony--the minutes of the city council's meetings and Lumumba's orders probably should be sufficient to present the facts of the case. And, no, this is not a jury case. But it is going to be important that a full and complete record of what transpired in city government be provided to the court, both for its decision and the very real possibility that an appeal will follow. I figure that things are going to start moving pretty quick now, given how little time is left before the April 1st start date for Richards. But will Lumumba's attorneys try to slow this all down? If they do, that will be some indication that they may not feel so good about their legal (as opposed to theatrical) position. If they do, I'd be surprised if this specially appointed judge will have much patience with that.
IF IT AIN'T BROKE THEY CAN FIX IT!
I’m not sure there is a judicial remedy available.
The mayors actions are reprehensible and not in conformity with regular governing principles…but that doesn’t make him amendable to suit.
The council voted the contracts down. They did their job.
Imo What we have is a failure of governance which will leave Richards with claims (invalid imo) and the citizens of jackson as victims when trash stops being collected.
"I vote for both Houston and Crescent City firms being involved and recommended by Lumumba. Just not at the same time in the chronology KF laid out."
Sorry, Chum, can't be both, chronology notwithstanding. One thread on one day refers to a 'Houston Company' in the present court filing, another thread same or next day refers to a New Orleans or Crescent City Company' (Richards) being the preference of the Mair.
Some say "if it's not broken, don't fix it," in regards to WM having a solid history of good service. But, WM wasn't going to grease some mayoral palms, and that is the big issue, in addition to not being a set-aside vendor.
Seems to me that this judge could end this rather quickly and WM can get to work doing the only thing in Jackson that works.
RD appears to be an active participant to Lumumba's gambit. They surely know, not must know, that he's playing fast and loose. Difficult to see any RD claims upheld.
Lumumba appears to be trying to create a real emergency come April 1st. Who doesn't believe he is that reckless?
Discovery may expose boy mayor's secret dealings to circumvent Council. Facing exposure, mayor may crumple like a wad of trash and settle.
@5:56am And your opinion is why lawyers should not run anything....you have no solution, and only victims in your outcome - with zero accountability from ANYONE in the equation. Judges are the referees, and they should decide matters of law, procedure, etc. The Mayor steered way off course and Jess should kick this back to the council to decide, and they can override any of Choke's Vetos to keep WM.
The shredders and Bleachbit in the boy mayor's office are working overtime.
Let's just all get prepared to take our trash to City Hall and dump it there. The Admimistration can ensure someone cleans it up and voila' we are done!
WM joins Mayor in suit against city counsel according to the Ledger. Is this true ?
The Mayor can veto the Council voting down a contract? Don't think so.
Can any of the legal experts on here give their thoughts on who's going to win this suit?
Betting odds?
Has anyone actually seen a Richards Trash Truck or Supervisor type vehicle up here yet? Figure that since the new Dictator for life has pronounced there taking over the garbage collection, they'd be here getting familiar with streets/alleys along with short/low bridges. Figured knowing that was important to a business. The Bus Drivers get out a few weeks prior to school running their routes.
I’m 100% with the council on this, but if I had to play the other side I’d say now would been the time to call an emergency. They mayor should have played the played the politics out longer and water till a week or so prior to do the emergency deal. And if the council sued it would have been upheld on the basis of timing.
10:23 : The grease for the mayors pocket will come from the coming lawsuit filed by Richards to re-coup whatever money has been spent on a contract that was never going to be filled. Actually it's pretty genius. Dirty crooked but genius. WM will continue and the people will never know the scam.
10:44 am
Not saying you are wrong as these guys want to steal a buck where they can.
However, no reasonable company should be relying to their detriment and expending Monies to start a contract that was never approved. Richard’s would have to convince a judge / jury that there was a valid contract (there’s not) and that they spent $$$ in anticipation of having the work.
Tough sell imho but….you never know do you?
@10:03
Read more, know more. WM is asking to intervene in the suit of mayor v. council, in their own behalf after they sought and received dismissal of their suit against the city (the mayor). This consolidates suits between three parties into one suit.
Fortunately the former chief justice of MS supreme court is appointed to untie this mess knotted by boy mayor.
Scam is clear now. Richards get paid a settlement for never doing anything. Lumumba pays off on the quid-pro-quo promise. WM continues service. Lumumba plays the victim for the media.
11:24 : This Mayor seems to be gifted in these matters and as many suggest is tied to "knee breakers". All you would need is the right judge.
11:53 might be on to something, though I doubt any of these players have the capacity to concoct such a scheme beforehand and keep it together all the way through to completion. I think maybe he gives the mayor too much credit.
Post a Comment