Jackson Jambalaya

What the hell, Virgi? Now I know why you won't reply to that e-mail I sent you two months ago over this debacle.

Why are they so bound and determined to get Richards?
What's in it for them?

Is she getting a free Bentley also?

This deal smells as bad as the garbage.

Maybe the FBI is waiting on a check to pass hands before they come in and drop the hammer.

I can’t wait to vote against that nincompoop

No sane person would run for City Council in Jackson MS... so we get what we get.

Don't bother to run again Virgi.
Even Belhaven liberals can't stand you anymore.

You mean like how Foote, Stokes, Vernon and banks trying to get it done for WM. Do better!

I really hope none of those trucks are involved in property damage - or worse - today. If there's no contract, would the city (or the mayor) be liable in part for allowing a public service to be provided without and guardrails (ie a contract) in place?

YIKES!

Starting on April 1 on the Bravo Network - The Real Trash Wars of Jackistan, MS.

First Episode: "By Any Means Necessary"

Starring Chowke "Greasy Palms" Lumbubbles

Co-starring Alvin "the million dollar man" Richard

Special Guest Star: Rocko "the knee-capper" Bonanno

Director: Rukia Lumbubbles

Produced by: The Free The Land Foundation

The Fat Lady is singing, gloriously. Bye, bye, Waste Management. Take your bullying tactics somewhere else. Good riddance!

Dammit guys! Leave the mayor and the city council alone. They have already fixed the streets, the water and sewer, and the library. Crime is down to almost zero throughout the city, and the schools are highly ranked. The garbage pickup situation is the last item on the list to be streamlined into efficiency. So back off and let the mayor and council work.

So, this will ensure Antar doesn't have to pay for the mess he created. Without a valid contract, the Mayor would have to pay Richards himself but now because of Virgi, The City will be on the hook for the bill instead of the man who moved forward even after the Judge said no. So instead of letting him suffer his own consequences, his new mother Virgi, takes the place of Mother Omari and covers his little butt with our money. Ain't that grand?

10:47
You forgot about the zoo.

RD has been voted Personae Non Grata multiple times by the Council. Further, boy mayor has crudely insulted Council members with very publicly grandstanded accusations of their taking bribes to oppose RD.

Judge Dickinson has said the emergency contract is invalid without Council authorization.

Finally, the Council's Counsel has told RD pointedly and directly by Cease and Desist Order they won't get paid for any unauthorized work in Jackson MS.

If Virgi loses this vote again, will RD finally caravan their trucks back to Louisiana?

@10:46 - you don't view moving forward WITHOUT A CONTRACT, Staging trucks, WITHOUT A CONTRACT, or anything else the Mayor has done to be bully tactics? GTFOH! LOL! Ya'll are truly delusional

Stinky diesel trucks, too. Good bye, clean burning natural gas WM trucks.

Seems both racism and sexism are alive and well on this little hate blog

i live in rankin county, and my garbage has already been picked up by the big green truck.

you folks in jackson shouldn't be complaining about one damn thing going on in your city; because less than 14000 of you voted for this shit-show, and more than 14000 of you couldn't be bothered to vote against it.

11:01 : I heard diesel as well. Is it true ?

@11:01 AM - yep, but Chowke will request some of that "free" federal money from Joe Xiden to replace tRichard's smoking fleet with brand new NG trucks.

Lil Choke will stand again on the City Hall steps to hold his hollow Harvard Oscar up as a shield, perhaps under a lightning riddled thunderstorm that enables God to stop boy mayor's tirade in a final fiery display!

10:35 AM
You mean the only utility actually working as intended in Jackson? Do at all.

City attorney says they have a contract with Richards Disposal. DESPITE WHAT WAS RULED BY THE JUDGE.

Foote, Stokes, Vernon and Banks are actually LISTENING TO THEIR CONSTITUENTS, unlike the mayor and other council members!

NO ONE wants "the mayor's" new contractor! WE WANT TO KEEP WASTE MANAGEMENT. We don't a new provider! We don't want huge carts! We don't want once a week pickup! WE WANT TO KEEP WHAT WE HAD!

The mayor, Grizzell, and Lee are obviously in the bag together on FORCING in a new contractor. I'm sure they intend to share in the "benefits". The real mystery is what's behind Virgi's motivation? There's got to be a story there. She's not part of the mayor's clique.

When the mayor said "BRIBES!" and pointed his finger at Foote, Stokes, Vernon and Banks, he had 3 fingers pointing right back at himself. Deflection won't work when all the clues are pointing in the other direction. We see what's happening here.

Can anyone point to a statute or some other authority that says that vetoing a rejection transforms it into an acceptance?

Mayor cannot veto a non-action according to MS Code. Council should so state in response to his attempt to do so.

Mayor can only veto ordinances APPROVED by the Council.

Congratulations 11:06 because you just proved a major point. You can't argue the points of a matter, just instantly throw out the words of racism and sexism. Let's not debate the issues. Let's just paint a broad stroke that it is these two expansive terms. Last time I looked the city was majority african-american... sure, racism is in charge here. All I ask is that you bring up one, JUST ONE, justification for the Mayor to ignore state law based on what is a legitimate business factor that makes Richard's a better company than WM without going to tired, worn out platitudes that help "leaders" continue to stifle the community.
I'm old enough to remember Dr King saying a person should be judged on character rather than skin color. Seems, though, too many people refuse to determine the quality of the Mayor only on skin color and not whether is actually doing a good job. So much is possible with Jackson, but no one is willing to actually drop the screen of race and do something that ALL people can embrace.

"Seems both racism and sexism are alive and well on this little hate blog."

This doesn't move the needle anymore, so take it somewhere else. It's been overplayed by you liberals. Ever heard of the little boy who cried wolf?

What's that smoke layer I see hovering over Jackistan? It's the diesel exhaust from Richard's trucks. Oh my, pollution on the ground and now in the air, right?

Where's my mask? Oh wait, Lumbubbles sent them back to China, right?

Did Virgi join Jackistan's very exclusive greasy palms club?

She didn't get an opponent in her primary and got his support on the CID tax increase.

WHEW! Banks called the attorney incompetent!

11:06 and 13,399 of his/her/them/they pals who stay in Jxn is the reason yall are in this mess.

And they are the reason it will NEVER improve.

They see no problem with the hysterics and absolute clown world yall have become.

It simply cannot improve with the current demographics.

Thank God I sold 20 years ago.

Dickinson is wrong on the veto. Just watch.

@11:41 - correct. That 'footnote' will not stand

@11:30 AM
Spoken like a true racist and misogynist whose words belong in a museum as a cautionary tale.

A veto doesn’t bring something back to life. It can only be used to kill a passed motion.

Virgi I am so sad and disappointed at EVERYTHING you have done in this whole fiasco. You have embarrassed our neighborhood. We want you OUT.

I will make it simple for the Mayor.

The Governor (Executive branch) can't veto a bill that doesn't pass the Mississippi Legislature (Legislative branch) and then make it law.


The Mayor is the executive branch. The Council the Legislative branch. The Mayor's bill was introduced by Council woman Lindsey. The bill failed. There is nothing for the Mayor to veto. You can't make a bill pass that failed into law by a veto. Maybe in some South American banana republic but not here.

So, what happened? Are they having another emergency meeting?

I guess none of the incompetent people involved in this mess have a dictionary handy. On the off chance the Mayor actually has the ability to veto the Council's rejection of the contract, that does not mean that it is magically approved. It simply means that the Mayor has wiped away the vote to reject. The law still requires the contract to be approved by the Council, and until a majority vote to approve the contract it doesn't matter how many times the Mayor tries to veto the rejection. It still won't have been approved as is required by the law.

i have never, in all my life, seen a person and group of people work as hard as these ass-hats have, to fuck something up that was working just fine before they decided to "fix" it.

except for the democrats in dc.

With apologies to Roy Scheider, I think they are going to need a bigger court.

Was Banks drunk at this meeting?

It is well settled that a mayor cannot veto a negative action.

From Miss. Att’y Gen. Op to Brown(September 25, 2009)

“In exercising the “veto power”, an executive officer is exercising a limited legislative power that is only a negative, not a positive power. State v. Holder, 76 Miss. 181, 23 So. 643 (1898); Fitzsimmons v. Leon, 141 R .2d 886 (1st Cir. 1944); Mills v. Porter, 222 P. 428 (Mont. 1924. As stated by the Court in Holder at 645: “[T]he executive, in every republican form of government, has only a qualified and destructive legislative function, and never creative legislative power.”

In view of the above, it is clear that a mayor cannot veto a negative vote and then, affirmatively implement what the board of aldermen voted not to do.”

How many times can you veto a veto until you cannot veto it any more? And, at the point where you can no longer veto a veto, can you do what you want to do?

I wish the Mayor would work as hard for Jackson as he works for Richard's Disposal.

I guess Richard's pays him more than Jackson pays.

So, there is no approved contract but Richard's Disposal is working anyway. I presume the Richard's Disposal attorneys are trying to use this work to force an implied contract or some form of detrimental reliance that they can use to "strong arm" this city into engaging in an express contract at a later date through the court system?

Why would they run the legal risk of a truck causing grievous injury to someone while in the line of duty without a contract? Do their insurance carriers cover them without a contract in place? Does the city have a copy of their certificates of insurance, and even if they do, can they make a claim against them without an approved contract?

If the mayor is allowing an entity to operate performing this function when the contract has been vetoed, does he not also bear legal liability if or when the company causes some legally actionable harm to some person or some thing?

I cannot imagine that the City of Jackson would cover his legal costs or liability in this instance.

Last question, if both Richard's and Chokwe are risking their financial existence using this shaky ground, how much money is in it for them, i.e., think about what they are risking in order to hope to get a contract approved?

It’s almost as if all the anonymous comments and rage here was all for nothing, eh?

I think Dickinson tripped over his own bloated ego.

My other take-away is that mediocre lawyers cause more chaos than they sort out.

I'm disappointed, but can't say I'm surprised.

Claims docket will be interesting.

10:46 obviously one of Lumumba's emotionally charged women (sister, "doctor", assistant up all night with a child...).
The very few who defend the mayor must be expecting a kick-back of some kind.

Reported today that BOTH Rchard's AND Waste Mgmt are on the streets.

I'll tell you who I feel sorry for are the guys on the trucks! They don't know whether to show up or not or if they're going to get paid if they do!

Lumumba has solely created this whole damn fiasco, because someone did not explain to him that he is not a dictator! Lump him in the mentality category with Trump and Putin!

Anyone seen any crews filming for the new streaming series?

Working title should be "Garbage Wars! Get Down In The Streets of The 601!"

It’s almost as if all the anonymous comments and rage here was all for nothing, eh?

Hard to say exactly but safe to conclude that your comment was certainly of little to no value.

So, this means baby chok can do whatever he wants by deciding to veto whatever he wants?
Jackson is hopeless.

Can they hire adults to do actual work for Jackson and let the children run around a rename streets and buildings for their constituents feelz?

Only in the third world country can the chief executive veto a veto. Oh wait, Jackistan is a third world city. That counts, right?

1:08 pm...
Has the most applicable reference to relevant law I've seen in comments, next to KF's point about mayor ruling by veto and dicta if council falls short of a super majority.

interesting to me, the city council can only approve payments (right?), so what does Richards assume it will do when they send their bill only too find out the city council will not approve payment, b/c their actions to collect garbage where never approved to begin with.

3:23 - I agree that 1:08's comment is very applicable, but it is an AG opinion which Justice Dickenson has said "is not law". The earlier comment on this and the other post quoting the Mississippi Code Section regarding Mayor-Council governments is very applicable as well.

"21-8-17(2) Ordinances adopted by the council shall be submitted to the mayor and he shall, within ten (10) days (not including Saturdays, Sundays or holidays) after receiving any ordinance, either approve the ordinance by affixing his signature thereto or return it to the council by delivering it to the clerk of the council together with a statement setting forth his objections thereto or to any item or part thereof. No ordinance or any item or part thereof shall take effect without the mayor’s approval, unless the mayor fails to return an ordinance to the council prior to the next council meeting, but no later than fifteen (15) days (not including Saturdays, Sundays or holidays) after it has been presented to him or unless the council upon reconsideration thereof not later than the tenth day (not including Saturdays, Sundays or holidays) following its return by the mayor, shall, by a vote of two-thirds (⅔) of the members present and voting resolve to override the mayor’s veto."

In reading the cases cited in the AG Opinion (one of which is a Mississippi case - from the 1880s) they make it plain that the veto cannot create legislation, it can only be used to stop an action. Very good case law and the MS AG Opinion is on point even if the Honorable Justice doesn't give any (or much) weight to AG Opinions, he should at least read the case law cited.

Putting 1:08's post together with the one pointing to statute should make it clear - Honorable Justice should quickly reconsider and remove the footnote about a question that none of the parties raised during hearings anyway.

All stokes can accuse anyone of is racism. The man is not intelligent, cannot hold an intelligent conversation, and provides unsubstantiated claims. His constituents are constantly fooled. This is what you get. A man who can't remember what his name is unless he wears it on his head.

The city council represents the citizens of Jackson.
A majority of the council represents the majority of the citizens.
So the lord king can override the will of the majority of the citizens?

so much for Justice Dickenson saying he was only going to rule on what was in front of him. JFC

thanks, 1:08. I don't see how any executive can veto a legislature's not passing something. I thought, in a real world, that Lumumba's only avenue was to go to court and arguing the legislature acted arbitrarily and capriciously.

But an emergency contract for a YEAR? LOL Imo the way this is supposed to work is the mayor negotiates a contract. If the counsel refused to ratify, then there's no contract. As the Justice said, who knows how long trash has to pile up before there's an emergency. But, at least in theory, Lumumba could sign a short term contract for Richards to pick it. Then, the counsel would have to vote to ratify or not. IF not, then Richards could sue for damages from picking up the trash.

Meanwhile, if there's just logger heads with Lumumba and the counsel, then it's either a rinse or repeat or people would get so po'ed someone would have to give in. I don't think it'd be Lumumba because Richards is going to pay his buds off, who will then share the sugha with him .... before he makes our days by moving to Chi or Boston.

Sorta makes on miss Dale Danks, who managed to make a decent living.

@ 1:08


You are the winner for today!

Clean and short explanation even a Niknar member can understand.

3:49. If Dickinson did actually state that a mayor has the authority to veto an action by city counsel that votes down an ordinance, or votes down any other matter brought to it for approval, Dickinson is simply wrong. He doesn't understand that if a mayor had that authority then a negative vote by a council would be meaningless. Such a view would make a council an ornament at best in city government, with a mayor holding complete power. Dickinson was correct to say that an AG opinion does not have the force of law in the sense that an appellate opinion or a statute does. But Dickinson was wrong in failing to note that those opinions to have a persuasive value, and they are usually correct statements of law. Dickinson might have at least read the precedents cited in the AG opinion and relied on those, if he felt an AG opinion was beneath his dignity. I was not thrilled when I heard that Dickinson was appointed special chancellor. Dickinson was not that great of a supreme court justice, too often allowing his own ideas or prejudices to color his opinions. And at least in one instance he was not simply wrong but badly wrong about a basic legal matter. He took the position that the principal purpose of an indictment is not to give notice to an accused of what he is accused of. That position flew in the face of many years of law to the contrary, contrary to decisions of the federal supreme court on the point. Dickinson is no heavyweight in the law.

First there was "cancel culture," and now the great one Chowke has invented the "Un-cancel culture."

For those of you living in Belhaven, that is analogous to vetoing a veto.

Multiple comments on Nextdoor/Belhaven indicate that WM trucks are on the street indication to Richard's.

4:02 PM
So you're saying he represents his constituents well?

This mayor thinks the City of Jackson has already converted to New Africa. He just sits around and reads to learn big words to fool those poor people. Fortunately for his constituents, he isn’t nearly as qualified as he thinks he is. And, he’s fixin to learn that New Africa is simply a dreamt up idea that will never come true. His attempt at being a tyrant is nearly over.

"The very few who defend the mayor must be expecting a kick-back of some kind."

Who knows?, but that's beside the point. To be clear, 'they' realize they can stumble and mumble through this whole thing without regard-to or fear-of personal liability consequences. For those of you in Bolton and Niknar, that means 'it ain't their checkbook!'

So if the mayor can veto and install his own company for a RFP then what’s the point of the city council?

Is there any property in Jackson for sale? Everything I have read leads me to believe it is a wonderful,wholesome place to live and raise a family.

I am not sure the mayor is not in fear of his life. When you negotiate with south Louisiana mafia, you had better produce the results you were paid to produce.

@6:20 PM - yes, at fire sale prices. I saw one home in NE Jackistan with a $100,000 price reduction.

4:02 - I think you under estimate Councilman Stokes. He is a master politician that is constantly working to get re-elected. Every street renaming and recognition during council meetings is another vote. Bet you (and no one else in Jackson) could beat Mr. Stokes in an election. He is much more calculated than most give him credit for.

Who still wants to live in a city where you can’t trick or treat with your children, you have no potable water, you can’t flush your toilet, your tires get blown out by potholes. You can’t be on the city streets after sunset and it doesn’t subside until 4 A.M. after the ambulances pick up “last nights shooting victims” which, on the positive side provide excellent training for medical students. Belhaven residents apparently believe that you need to pay additional “taxes” to be a member of that elite subdivision. I moved north (Madison city) 30 years ago and have not regretted it. Please reply with reasons that you think prove me wrong.

Looks like a pissing contest with those who can't pour piss out of a boot. Jackson is butthole of Mississippi.

Excuse my ignorance about this, but exactly WHO is Rocko "the knee-capper" Bonanno? And WHAT exactly is a "knee-capper"? Is Richard's Disposal truly connected with organized crime in Louisiana? If so, is Chokwe Antar Lumumba now actually involved with organized crime? IF he is, will the U.S. Justice Department (including the FBI and the U.S Attorney General's office) bother to investigate and prosecute him?

I had actually sold mine to the third person that looked at mine.
Then went to Flowood and found out a house half the size of mine was a LOT more money, but property taxes were a lot less.
Another problem, 3 to 4 people would be on the same house, so there was no way.

I feel we're trapped here, because who wants to pay good money to learn the difference between what automatics and shotguns sound like?

Frankly, Scarlett, those of us that are not citizens of Jackson, don't give a damn if and who picks up Jackson's garbage.

Dickinson drew the mayor into his trap with that footnote. He was playing the long game. Of course the boy mayor immediately took the bait. Hide and watch.

Not sure why you cuckstadt residents are so concerned about our real estate market here but it’s fine, held up by those of us who can afford private schools, aren’t afraid of other races, and don’t want to drive an hour round trip to go to a grocery store or restaurant.

For those above stating the veto power does not exist in this instance I disagree wholeheartedly, in fact, the veto power and override procedure is meant to avoid exactly what is going on here. The Council entered an order or resolution refusing to approve Mayor presented contract (leaving out the emergency proclamation issue for the moment), the Mayor vetoed that action, the city council should now vote to override the veto or not. If they do get the required 2/3 vote then contract stands approved (absent appeal). You are voting on "negative" you are approving a contract bec you didn't have 2/3 votes to override. That is way it has to be, to bring some finality to the actions of the Mayor and council, otherwise you are stuck in the situation they are in.

6:19 So the requirement of city council approval is really not a requirement at all. The actual approval can be the inability to override the mayor's veto? Unless I misunderstand that seems to be the judge's statement. At least that is the mayor's interpretation. If that process goes beyond an "emergency" it would change executive-legislative procedure completely. Is that right?

6:19 - Give me an example of when the president ever vetoed a bill Congress did not pass.

9:59 may be right. The judge filed an amended judgment last night REMOVING THE FOOTNOTE stating that the mayor can veto something that the council rejected. (Read more on wlbt's website).

Basically, the judge is acknowledging that the mayor can't "veto a veto", which is common sense. How can you veto an ordinance that was never adopted in the first place? You can't!

I agree that this may have been a trap. Events make VERY clear that the mayor's SOLE motivation is to find ANY loophole available to install his preferred contractor in defiance of the council's and citizen's wishes.

6:19
Then why didn’t the Mair veto the no votes when they happened months ago. Don’t say he was waiting on the minutes, because he didn’t wait on the minutes this time. The veto was immediate. I feel sure Catoria Martin had previously told him he could not veto a No vote. Even she probably knows that. Judge Dickinson messed up and gave the Mair an out with his footnote that is dicta and is not legally binding on anybody. He was trying to hurry and get the Order out, added something that had not been argued by any of the parties, had not been researched, and is incorrect. If you live in any city except Jackson, call your city attorney or mayor and ask them if the mayor can veto a No vote. Judge Dickinson can and should amend his Order, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he did. No judge likes to be reversed on appeal.

749 am that example is not what is occurring here. The Mayor by law must present the contract to the council for approval, the council (it must either approve or disapprove) entered an order denying approval (that is an action of the council period), its not a no action like Congress not passing a bill. It is an action required by law and the council must act. The Mayor can veto their Order not approving the contract, then its up to the council to override the veto if it has the votes to do so. A failure override would be vote to approve the contract.

If veto/override does apply you would be forever in a stalemate situation with no way to break impasse.

How else could it possibly work?

6:19am
The judge actually said the mayor had this one codicil to try: if his veto was successfully counter-vetoed, then he could go to court to sue the Council for being arbitrary and capricious.

Judge did not say a negative vote by the Council could be vetoed by the mayor resulting in implementing an unauthorized contract. There could follow a trial, if mayor sued, where mayor could win or lose, but all it could do is cancel Council's veto override, not give RD an unauthorized contract by default or otherwise.

Judge's codicilled condition did not occur, Council did not override mayor's veto, so mayor cannot sue Council for being arbitrary and capricious.

BTW, How does Richard's merit mayor's Notice To Proceed with an unauthorized contract? Because boy mayor was arbitrary and capricious?

6:19, 9:51

if wishes were logic or law

there is no logic or law that suggests vetoes can be applied to inaction

the council, in no way, shape or form, "entered an order"

Jackson should dump all its garbage in the Pearl River.

It dumps everything else in it without consequences.

How big is the pile of garbage in front of Chowke's security gate?

619 & 951 - nice try at selling what you see as logic, but in this country we first operate off of laws. Statutes that spell out how things can and can't happen.

It appears that you like the idea of q dictatorship, which is what the Mayor is trying to establish.

But that will not work here. And now probably not for the next three years with this Council.

Try reading what the applicable statute says (something Dickinson should have done before he pontificate as he is want to do).

Statute is clear - the Mayor can veto an action APPROVED by the Council. There is no provision to veto an action NOT APPROVED.
But thanks for your wonderful, albeit worthless, thoughts on the matter.

12:35 used the term ass-hats. Kingfish earlier rejected a post of mine and told me it was because I referred to others as ass-hats.

Yup. There is a difference between calling the person whose comment you are responding to a curse word and saying all politicians are a curse word. If you can't see the difference, can't help you.

9:35 pm. You have not cited the first law or statute supporting what you said above.

As I said before Mayor negotiates a contract presents to council for approval, the council refuses to approve and enters its order disapproving the contract. The mayor has the authority to veto that order not to approve and then council must override the veto, if they override the mayor may appeal such to the circuit court and if they failed to override in my opinion the contract is approved subject to appeal by council.

Someone argued mayor can only veto ordinances under the statute and the council disapproval is not an ordinance. Contrary thereto the code defines “ordinance’ broadly. Section 21-3-15 defines the term “ordinance” to include ordinances, resolutions, and orders.

For those of you that want to criticize Justice Dickinson, he was presented the issues by both sides, he got to the issues, very quickly and correctly. You can try to criticize a “footnote” which was clearly nothing more than dicta to be begin with, but in my opinion even his footnote was correct. Yall seem to always want to attack someone, Justice Dickinson did not create the fiasco, his footnote did not make it worse, in fact, it should be followed to resolve the impasse, then let either Mayor or Council appeal to circuit for a quick decision. That’s the proper legal process.

This should happened months ago without all the back and forth. Those that advocate Mayor cannot veto the council’s refusal to approve the contract, offer absolute no other logical legal process to deal with the stalemate.

@10:20 AM, you'll be proven incorrect.

10:20
21-8-17(2)

Sitting at 99 comments, can I get # 100?
Who would have thought that garbage was so interesting and would generate 99 comments?
Oh yeah - it impacts every property owner in Jackson.
Can’t wait to see how this conflict ends.
Maybe Socrates and Marcus Wallace will fix the garbage issues for Jackson.