Jackson Ward 6 Councilman Aaron Banks authored and submitted this column. Guest columns on the Jackson garbage controversy are welcome.
Over the past two years, the Mayor and City Council have sparred over the garbage collection contract. Each time, the Council has spoken by a majority vote over who would have the capacity to collect garbage within the 113.2 square miles of the City of Jackson. Our procedural process is that after a winner of a bid within the RFP is presented, it is then presented to council for approval. If the council votes it up, the mayor’s office proceeds with contract negotiations; if it is voted down, then the mayor’s office begins negotiations with the 2nd place winner of the bid within that RFP. After the council, having voted down the proposal (bid) presented by FCC twice, the mayor’s office asked the City attorney’s office to see if he (the mayor) could declare an emergency to execute a contract. However, this was done; one week before any negotiations began with Waste Management. Those negotiations failed, the council went to court to ensure that garbage collections would still happen. In court, we reached a settlement agreement signed by both parties and entered into a six-month agreement with Waste Management that was approved at the next council meeting. That agreement allowed WM to service the City of Jackson for 6 months, while the administration proceeded with another RFP process.
During the most recent RFP, there were four bids in one RFP 1) Once a week with a cart, 2) Once a week without a cart, 3) Twice a week with a cart 4) Twice a week without a cart. The winners are as follows:
Once a week with a cart bid – FCC
Once a week without a cart bid – FCC
Twice a week with a cart bid – Richards
Twice a week without a cart bid – Waste Management
The mayor’s office presented the above as an order with all 4 winners, I was clear that the majority of the citizens in Ward 6 wanted twice a week pick up, without a cart. During that meeting the council eliminated the once a week bids, and asked the mayor to present to us the best bid for approval.
The mayor’s office presented Richards, and the company was voted down several times.
Here is why I voted Richards down:
- The concern of accepting a bid based on the tonnage of garbage vs the number of households.
- The cost of gas to run the trucks to cover all 113.2 sq miles within a reasonable amount of time to ensure citizens are serviced properly.
Please note the aforementioned items, brings concern about underbidding and capacity. It appears someone was just trying to get a contract.
- The principal that cheaper is not always better
- And if there is going to be an increased price from what the city charges the rate payers then as a council person I must do my research to ensure quality service.
- With all that we have going on this is not the time for trial and error and the manifestation of that is showing now, with Richards.
After Richards was voted down, the mayor abandoned the procedural agreement that existed between the council and mayors for years and refused to negotiate with the winner of the twice a week bid without a cart, and began declaring an emergency weeks before the deadline agreed upon between the council and the courts. When the council stated that there was no emergency and the majority of the council asked the mayor’s office to complete the RFP process by negotiating with the next winner. The City Council was taken to court. Here is what we know.
The judge stated that in order to have a legal and binding contract it must be approved by a majority of the council. (which has not happened)
Due to the footnote placed by the Judge, the mayor’s office including the city attorney interpreted that to mean that they can veto all actions and not just the affirmative. If the mayor in any municipality can veto a "nay" vote that fails 3 to 4 then the mayor can rule by Minority Fiat and there is no reason to have 7 council members because the majority of the council doesn't matter.
The Mississippi Office of the Attorney General has issued several opinions making it clear that a mayor has limited veto power and cannot veto a negative action; in an opinion issued to the attorney for the City of Hollandale, the Attorney General opined that, “Without any action taken by the board of aldermen, a mayor has nothing to veto. Inaction on a proposal is not subject to the mayor’s veto.” Cordell, Miss. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 1983 WL 43027, 1987 Miss. AG LEXIS 1418 (Oct. 13, 1987) (see also 1987 Miss. AG LEXIS 1444 and 1987 Miss. AG LEXIS 112). In that opinion, the Attorney General went on to opine that, “In exercising the ‘veto power’, an executive officer is exercising a limited legislative power that is only a negative, not a positive power.” Id.; (citing State ex rel. Teachers & Officers of Indus. Inst. & Coll. v. Holder, 76 Miss. 158, 23 So. 643 (1898); (Fitzsimmons v. Leon, 141 F.2d 886 (1st Cir. 1944); Mills v. Porter, 222 P. 428 (Mont. 1924)). Additionally, in an opinion issued to the city attorney for Booneville, the Attorney General opined that, “A negative action, i.e., a failed motion, is not subject to veto by the mayor.” Tucker, Miss. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 2007-00538, 2007 Miss. AG LEXIS 343 (October 26, 2007).
Currently the Mayor is attempting to veto the following:
- The agreed settlement, from the courts back in September.
- The 6 month agreement with WM, that was already performed and the city has already paid for.
- Ordinance allowing the City council to approve its minutes before each council meeting, as required by state law.
- Richards contract that failed
- Order to continue declared state of emergency which was voted up.
The sad reality is that if the judge rules in favor of the mayor, we will set a precedent that would have long term implications as it relates to the governance of every municipality within the state; where the mayor can run any city without a legislative body.
These questions will be answered by the Judge and my prayer is that we can get to proper governance, so that we can all do the job you elected us to do.
55 comments:
This will fire up the little boy
Proud of this man for using the term "votes it up."
Onward Jackson.
And it's the same statement from the get go. Bottom line is that the Mayor doesn't recognize the city council and hasn't since his first term. The council in its own bafoonery put themselves in this situation. THEY created the little Dictator. Jackson City Government DOES NOT FUNCTION and ALL should be re-called. Including ALL of their aides.
Happy Earth Day everyone!
Reminder: Mayor Antard Chuckles likes to proclaim he is a green environmental justice warrior, while the City of Jackson pollutes worse than the surrounding industrial parks, according to the EPA.
But hey, don’t you all feel dignified and included by his empowering speeches in other cities and states?
He should’ve been a Motivational Speaker instead of a do-nothing mayor!
That's the best summary to date of this BS that I've read.
Refreshing to have this drama presented in a way that can be followed. WELL SAID
At least he recognizes the essence of the mayor's plan, "Someone was just trying to get a contract". Change orders and "unforeseen expenses" would ultimately follow Richard's engagement, so that in the long run their cost would be more than Waste Management's bid price. There would be no real savings just a change in the extent and quality of the service. But the "right people" would have the job. Just get the contract, that's the main thing.
I have lived in Jackson more than 50 years and we have always had twice weekly garbage pickup without some special cart or can. I never heard anyone complain. WM was the best bid to continue that service. What am I missing?
"Clarity of vision is the key to achieving your objectives." -- Tom Steyer
If the Mayor presented the 4 winning bids in the form of an Order, with WM being the winning bidder for 2x week without cart, and the other three bids were rejected, couldn't the council have voted to accept the 4th option from WM at that point? It appears that all three entities had an opportunity to bid on each of the 4 options. When the 4th option (no cart) was the one that was accepted by the council at that point, it seems like the council could have just voted for WM as the winning bidder at that time.
As George Costanza once said.........."This thing is like an onion. The more layers you peel, the more it stinks." We can only hope and pray that the courts restore order to the City of Jackson governance and little Chucky gets put in his place.
Ironically you all bash Jackson’s Mayor for doing what he wants and not working with the Board. Clinton’s Mayor does the exact same thing. Yet we hear crickets…
Moderator hides comments and posts what’s in his “friends” best interest. IE only critiquing the Mayor of Jackson and not the council. Or the other bafoonery that occurs in other municipalities.
To: The Honorable Aaron Banks
THANK YOU for the summary. Well done.
Are you going to run for Mayor next time around?
How about a recall election for the current Mayor?
>>>>> DON'T FALL FOR LUMUMBA'S BULLSHIT <<<<<
$7.2M delta (for JFP and MT readers, meaning difference) of RD vs WM (initial 6 year term).
45,000 homes per the RFP (more likely 53,000+)
6 year initial contract term. Twice weekly pickup. (Regardless of can mode.)
Average of 8 collections per month for a total of 96 total collections annually.
$7,200,000/45000 = $160 per home TOTAL over initial 6 year term to keep WM.
160/6 years = $26.66 per home per year to keep WM.
$26.66/96 annual collections = $.28 CENTS PER COLLECTON TO RETAIN WM.
$7,200,000/53000 = $135.85 per home TOTAL over initial 6 year term to keep WM.
135.85/6 years = $22.64 per home per year to keep WM.
$22.64/96 annual collections = $.24 CENTS PER COLLECTON TO RETAIN WM.
>>>>> DON'T FALL FOR LUMUMBA'S BULLSHIT <<<<<
Question. Anyone heard of a black market for trash cans in Jackson? We have seen a upward tick in garbage can thefts in the Canton area. This is a no shitter.
Has anyone thought to just ask "theoretically" how much hiz honor the Mayer is getting rom Richards for his "help" to push this through? At some point Jackson has to ask itself what the cost of prolonging this poop show is and if there's a way to cut our losses.
"...and little Chucky gets put in his place."
That's what made him(and his daddy) who he is in the first place. People telling them to 'Get back in your place!'
He don't acknowledge NO referee's whistle!
9:33 am is exactly correct- anyone that allows raw sewer to freely flow like Chockwa has, should be put under the jail- where in the hell is the EPA????
There should be severe penalties to the individuals that are in charge and allow this to happen- STOP THE BOO BOO !!
Someone please explain the Mayor's willingness to push for Richards. What is his argument if any?
@9:45, The influence of Organized Crime.
Mayor LuDUMBA claims racism is at hand for Jackson not receiving the funds from the state legislature for water repairs. He reminds me of my son when he was 6 years old and did it get his way
Like everyone knows luDUMBA is incompetent and a spoiled brat little boy. Only a fool would make such stupid statements publicly with a track record that his administration and city of Jackson leadership currently has
It would be irresponsible for the state to just give him a blank check. Stop with the BS claims and get your sorry a$$ to work and be the public servant that your are supposed to be. You work for the tax payers. I live in NE Jackson and I think your total crap.
The only comment I didn't approve was slanderous. Not getting sued just so you can get your jollies.
Well written and now one can understand the whole mess. I think the city wants Twice a week pickup without a cart bid and WM won this bid. What is the mayor really trying to do??? It appears to not follow the voter's wishes.
Clinton’s Mayor does the exact same thing.
Proof? Links? Put up.
What's wrong with having a bin? Where I live now we have once weekly pickup, with large bins. The truck is operated by one guy, and it's fast and efficient.
I've never come close to filling my bin, even at once per week pickup.
Who is complaining, and why?
Why should I be forced to buy one? Also, I spent $100 on a toter from Home Depot. Many people bought two of them. Why should we be forced to waste that money?
Lumumba
February 17, 2022
Fact: The contract would include twice a week pick up and with a cart to make the City more sanitary and remove the eyesore of multi-colored garbage bags in our neighborhoods. The cart option was selected by the City Council after discussion with their residents.
If this is a fact, then Lumumba should be able to offer proof of the fact. He can't. His statement is a falsehood, a fabrication, an outright lie.
PittPanther, name the locality in which you reside.
Hey Kingfish, when your boy mayor get his way...let me know if you or your neighbors want to see those trashcans.
Mine are getting old and I could take one off yall's hands for a reasonable price.
11:28. I don't know where PP lives but Nashville does this, both for trash and recycles.
AG opinions are not law. Why can't he comprehend that inconvenient fact?
12:08
But the cases cited in the AG opinions ARE law. Why can’t you comprehend that inconvenient fact?
"Put Lil Choke in a can, put Banks in the Mayor's office"
says the ideal judgment.
10:22, Phil has never steered a contract or done the unethical things that Chockwe has. He’s just an ass, but he’s legal. And I support him.
"The cart option was selected by the City Council after discussion with their residents." He's referring to those poor people roundtables or whatever he calls them where he gathers uneducated people in a room and tells them what they want. Apparently these b.s. productions staged by his courtiers are why the national media love him so. Too stupid to see through them.
Finally a discussion that lays it out and makes sense. Very well stated and written.
1:35 on Friday afternoon and the Thursday trash is still on the curb. No excuse for what the mayor is doing to Jackson. Obviously this stems from personal greed!
The first mistake I see in this timeline was assuming the mayor would act in good faith once the six-month contract extension for Waste Management was in place.
Now he wants to cry foul when they don't make that mistake again. At this point, it's just stupid to assume he's not lying and acting with dirty motives. He's done it too many times to be given the benefit of the doubt.
This is the most coherent explanation of this goat rodeo that I have seen to date.
@ 10:22: maybe because Clinton has functioning water,good garbage pick up and doesn't have murders most every day.
What do you think?
Thank you, Councilman Banks, for that benchmark summary. I agree with your conclusions.
Common sense will tell you that you can't veto a "no" vote. If a court has not addressed the issue, it's because the idea is so ignorant that we don't need a court ruling. Judge Dickinson fouled himself by his musings in a footnote, which makes one wonder whether he still has his legal faculties about him, let along any measure of common sense.
WM has done a good job. I wish someone would poll the sanitation workers. I'm betting that they have a grapevine running to other area cities. Beyond that, as always we need to "follow the money." The Mayor says that there are Council members who have been bribed, but there's been no follow-up. Was that a diversion?
Lumumba is done.
So wild.
He staked all of his political capital on a garbage contract.
It appears that no one is picking up on the REAL issue here. ‘ Due to the footnote placed by the Judge, the mayor’s office including the city attorney interpreted that to mean that they can veto all actions and not just the affirmative. If the mayor in any municipality can veto a "nay" vote that fails 3 to 4 then the mayor can rule by Minority Fiat and there is no reason to have 7 council members because the majority of the council doesn't matter.’
What this means folks, is that the mayor wants total control, wants to eliminate the checks and balances system between the mayor and the council. If he is successful, the council will no longer have any say on anything, rendering the council useless and no longer needed. Then the mayor will answer to NO ONE. And that means we no longer have any representation and will be subject th whatever whim comes across his mind.
Let THAT sink in.
It appears that no one is picking up on the REAL issue here. ‘ Due to the footnote placed by the Judge, the mayor’s office including the city attorney interpreted that to mean that they can veto all actions and not just the affirmative. If the mayor in any municipality can veto a "nay" vote that fails 3 to 4 then the mayor can rule by Minority Fiat and there is no reason to have 7 council members because the majority of the council doesn't matter.’
What this means folks, is that the mayor wants total control, wants to eliminate the checks and balances system between the mayor and the council. If he is successful, the council will no longer have any say on anything, rendering the council useless and no longer needed. Then the mayor will answer to NO ONE. And that means we no longer have any representation and will be subject th whatever whim comes across his mind.
Let THAT sink in.
This was a bad move by the mayor for so many reasons. Waste management has a facility in Jackson and has been located there for several years they’ve been paying taxes and now they no longer have an incentive to stay here and contribute to the tax base. Richard’s is an outsider. Also The city of Jackson was probably one of the largest customers in this area. surrounding cities should be protesting the mayors move as well as waste management will now either how to make some really big cuts or increase the prices for surrounding municipalities. I don’t know why anyone on the council has not talked about these issues in addition to the legal violations but I think they are important as well.
On April 1, WM raised prices in the Brandon area by 50%.
3:04 Lumumba is not done.
You are naïve if you think his constituents vote based on logic.
He will leave Jackson in worse shape (I didn't think that was possible) and continue his career in DC.
And Jackson will in turn, name many streets and buildings in his honor and romanticize his tenure by re-writing the facts and lauding him as a saint.
Wait and see.
Banks can ride Lil Choke's attempt at dictatorship into the Mayor's office. Who here would not vote Banks for mayor?
Good thought 3:31, but Waste Management is a big enough company that can easily grow or shrink dependent on the needs of the places they serve. There will always been trash. As for the price increasing for other cities, what hasn't increased in the last year-and-a-half for everything? Even if WM trucks don't run on diesel, natural gas is also more expensive. In the long run you have to ask if the service is worth the price (and I am not just talking about monetary).
1038, I agree with you that nobody should fall for Lumumba's bullshit, but your math needs a little work. Granted, Lumumba's math needs a lot of work, especially considering that his first proposed contract to Richards was based on 45,000 households but when he did their emergency contract he is paying them based on 53,000 households. (Banks questioned at length how they figured the 45,000 carts would be adequate and the Mayors ---- I mean, the city's ---- counselor answered that they knew that there were not 53,000 active households). Yes, paying Richards for 53,000 is only a way to say that this 'emergency' contract is not more expensive than what the city has been paying WM - which is pure Lumumba BS.
But - for you to say that twice weekly equals 96 pickups - it doesn't work that way. If every month had 4 weeks, yes your math would be correct. But, only one month has four weeks, the other 11 have more. There are 52 weeks in a year - twice weekly means 104 pickups. Now, after that basic math (or would it be science) lesson, go back and do your calculations again.
5:01 --- Me.
I wouldn't vote for Lumumba either, but that doesn't make Banks the only other option.
Surely we can do better. (and yes, I apologize for calling you shirley.)
Thank you, Councilman Banks. You had my vote in the last election. I'll be a campaign donor in the next one if you run. You'd have my vote as mayor for sure.
My trash should've been picked up this morning, but there it sits... YET AGAIN. Hope the mayor's contractor gets around to it before the raccoons and strays.
Right now we're "paying" for twice weekly pickup, but we're only "getting" pickup every 1 1/2 - 2 weeks... if that.
Overcharge and (vastly) under-deliver... guess that's how Dick's, I mean Richard's, disposal was able to compete with Waste Mgmt's bid.
Lived here for nearly 25 years and NEVER had these problems with Waste Mgmt. With WM, we always got what we paid for! Thanks for standing up for what's right.
I'm still wondering why Jacksonians simply aren't dropping their garbage off at Virgi's and Chokwe's houses.
I agree 7:15. If I lived there I would have a news film crew follow me while I dropped it off at the Mayuh's house, or City Hall.
He created this problem. Let him be forced to deal with the consequences for ONCE in his god awful tenure.
There should be groups of residents organizing to do this, but it wont happen.
Glad I moved twenty years ago.
Post a Comment