The Jackson City Council went back to Court Thursday in an attempt to stop Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba from vetoing negative votes of the Council.
This episode of the Jackson garbage drama began on April Fool's Day when the Mayor awarded an emergency one-year garbage collection contract to Richard's Disposal when the Waste Management contract expired on April 1. The Council rejected awarding contracts to the New Orleans company several times.
The two branches of government squared off in Hinds County Chancery Court. Special Guest Star, er make that Chancellor Jess Dickinson ruled on March 31 the Mayor could not award a contract unless it was approved by the Council. He also ruled the Council could not award contracts or pick vendors on its own. However, the Special Guest Star in this garbage drama placed a hand grenade in the form of a footnote into the order:
For clarity, there does exist a possible exception not presented in this case thus far, where the Council rejects an emergency contract presented by the Mayor, the Mayor exercises his veto of the rejection, and the Council overrides the veto. The Mayor then would have the option of engaging the judicial system, claiming the Council was arbitrary and capricious in overriding the veto.
A lawyer himself, the Mayor pulled the pin, and threw the hand grenade at the Council during an emergency meeting on April 1. Council President Virgi Lindsey called a special meeting that day to approve an emergency one-year no-bid contract with Richard's Disposal for garbage collection services. The City Council voted twice 4-3 to reject the contract.
The Mayor took that footnote and ran wild with it as he vetoed the Council's rejection of the contract in accordance with the footnote as Councilmen Ashby Foote, Vernon Hartley, Kenneth Stokes, and Aaron Banks watched in disbelief.
Judge Dickinson tried to put the pin back in the hand grenade as he vacated the order, erased the footnote, and issued a new judgment that night.
Judge Dickinson said "ordinance" includes "ordinances, resolutions, orders, and any other official actions of the council.." He backed up a little bit from including contract rejections as an action that could be vetoed by the Mayor:
While the court is persuaded that a council vote to reject a contract is “an official action of the council” and, therefore, an “ordinance” as defined in Section 21-8-47, the question remains whether a vote to reject a contract submitted by a mayor is an ordinance that has been “adopted” by the council.
The Chancellor realized no one asked him whether contract rejections were subject to a Mayor's veto and decreed "Upon review of the pleadings, the court recognizes that this precise question was not presented to the court and the court should not have addressed it in dicta."
Judge Dickinson vacated the March 31 order and issued a new one that removed the infamous footnote. However, it was too little too late. Mayor Lumumba doubled down on his veto at a press conference April 4. He said the applicable law the judge cited in his footnote was still valid and thus supported his veto of a contract rejection.
The Mayor filed an emergency complaint for declaratory judgement against the City Council on April 4 in Hinds County Circuit Court. The complaint states:
The Mayor hereby requests that the Court enter a judgment and declare the following: ( 1) That a negative vote by the City Council constitutes and official action of the council; (2) That the City Council's vote to reject a contract submitted by the Mayor is an ordinance that has been adopted by the council; and, (3) That the Mayor has authority to veto both affirmative and negative actions of the City Council.
The case was assigned to Circuit Judge Faye Peterson. Attorney Felicia Perkins represents the Mayor. Judge Peterson transferred the case to the not-so-Iron Chancellor on April 5. However, Judge Dickinson stated in a final judgement issued on April 9 refused to rule on the issue of whether the Mayor's veto was valid. He said the issue was not presented in the original complaint and answer filed in his court so there was no need to rule on it. Back to Circuit Court we go.
Hizzoner asked Judge Peterson to reconsider her order transferring the case to Chancery Court on April 14. City Council attorneys Deshun Martin and John Scanlon answered and filed a counterclaim against the Mayor later that day.
The Council argues the Mayor's claim he can "veto a no vote and run the city by minority rule" means every contract rejection must now have a super-majority vote. Allowing the Mayor to veto such votes would "blur the lines" between the separate branches of government and severely diminish the power of the elected City Council.
The counterclaim asks the Court to declare the veto is illegal and renders any contract with Richard's Disposal to be invalid.
Kingfish note: If the transfer order remains in place, does this mean we go back to Judge Dickinson yet again?
17 comments:
I literally have never seen an organization so committed to anarchy and filth as I am seeing in the mayor and city council. Another thing, why does Councilman Foote put up with this stuff. Why does he not move to Madison county like the rest of us?
Aww foot...who cares about Shelby? The question is why does Lindsey continue to support this autocratic mayor and his perpetual nonsense? Is she 'Smokin Dat Dope' too?
Bugs Bunny would say: "You're ALL maroons!"
What would it take to change the city government to strip the mayor of all his power? That would be a significant step in the right direction for Jackson.
10:05 Whom do you mean "the rest of us"? Who is US? Maybe Foote counts himself among the thousands who are committed to changing Jackson for the better. Eternal optimists. The chosen few. Define "US". Please.
The question remains why would Judge Peterson not recuse like all other members of the Hinds judiciary? Especially now that Dickinson has created a quagmire. Why march through a minefield?
I see your veto and raise you ten vetoes.
@10:05
Foote puts up with it bc he lives in a rich enclave in NE Jackson with families that have had money for generations and belong to JCC and river hills with 3 kids in private schools and a beach house. These people are above all they think. My son goes to JA with a lot of them.
Can a Mayor veto a City Council vote? Anyone? It seems as simple as that.
@1:37 PM Yes, because his highness Mayor for Life Chowke said that he can, right?
KF, good job sorting this out. If Peterson doesn’t revise the transfer order, I think it would mean that the issue has to be re-filed as an independent action in order to get a ruling on it, since the case with Dickinson is closed (at least as of April 20, when the time for Rule 59 motions has expired).
@10:05 ---- NOT ALL of your "us" have moved to Madison. There are several "us-es" here in Jackson besides Councilman Foote. But I assume that to you the "us" defines your stucco-housed neighbors.
" Aww foot...who cares about Shelby?"
Me thinks 11:13 AM has confused a Mississippi writer with a Jackson
Councilman named Ashby.
I listened to a podcast interview with state Sen. John Horhn, who represents most of the city of Jackson in the state Legislature. He talked about how much the vitriol surrounding the garbage collection dispute has cost the city. The Legislature has no trust in city political leadership because of the idiocy of changing garbage collection contractors for no good reason. That's why the state allocated no monies to help fix the city's broken water & sewer system. The mayor may win the battle but he has only given the state many good reasons to doubt his competence, credibility & transparency. The damage can't be repaired.
... state Sen. John Horhn, who represents most of the city of Jackson in the state Legislature.
Incorrect. Nope.
That's why the state allocated no monies to help fix the city's broken water & sewer system.
Also incorrect. City ARPA spend will be matched dollar for dollar by state.
@5:37, nope. Incorrect.
The city can apply for matching funds as can other cities and towns of the state. The applications received will all be ranked and IF Jackson's application for the funds is ranked high enough, AND IF the city is willing to use their $42 million in ARPA dollars for water/sewer rather than funding Chock's sister ($700,000) program, or more money wasted on Farish Street - then they can get money from the program.
But what Hohrn said in his podcast was factual - the legislature, including the Jackson delegation - doesn't trust the leadership of Jackson to properly manage any money. The garbage collection crap on top of the years of no water cutoff, on top of not maintaining the treatment plants, etc etc has given them all the reasons to not trust our bold new city.
Horhn bemoaned not getting extra money, or a higher match rate, above and beyond ARPA 1:1 matching available to the rest of the state. Receiving any such money or higher match rate was NEVER assured especially after Yates' bill was gutted. The allusion that Jackson's application may eventually not get ranked high enough is spin on your part. Of course it will get funded if Junior can find a way to complete the application. (Yes, he has a track record of being unable to complete the basics.) There is no linkage to the Farish or Rukia spends as to whether or not infrastructure spending will be matched at whatever level should an application be received.
You need to do a better job of listening.
Post a Comment