What about Angelique?
Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch ruled all county and municipal candidates must meet residency requirements for at least two years. However, the opinion did not mention a statute in direct conflict with the opinion.
The Oktibbeha Board of Supervisors asked if Section 23-15-500 of the Mississippi Code required candidates to live in the district they seek to represent or "just in the county or municipality generally."
Special Assistant Attorney General said the candidate must be a resident of the ward or district for at least two years. He quoted Section 23-15-500 in the opinion:
(2) A candidate shall prove in his or her qualifying information that he or she meets the applicable residency requirement or provide absolute proof, subject to no contingencies, that he or she will meet the residency requirement on or before the date of the election at which the candidate could be elected to office. The appropriate election official or executive committee, whichever is applicable, with whom a candidate files qualifying information shall review and determine whether the candidate meets the applicable residency requirement according to the procedures in Section 23-15-299. The appropriate election commission shall review and determine whether a candidate required to file qualifying information with it meets the applicable residency requirement according to the procedures in Section 23-15-359.
(3) If the qualifications for an elected office include a specific residency requirement, the residency requirement in this section shall not apply.(4) This section shall apply to elections held from and after January 1, 2020.
Two years. Case closed.
Kingfish note: Well, not exactly. I realize I'm not an attorney so perhaps some of our learned legal minds can explain something to me. The dirty little secret of Attorney General opinions is that the answer can be manipulated by asking the right question. The requestor asked if Section 23-15-500 specified a residency requirement. The question limited the answer to that section of the Mississippi Code.
However, there is another section that is directly on point and it is the one Jackson Ward 2 Councilwoman Angelique Lee claims in holding her position since she voted in Ridgeland several months before the Jackson election last year.
Section 21-8-7 of the Mississippi Code states:
(4)(a) ...... Council members elected to represent wards must be residents of their wards at the time of qualification for election, and any council member who removes the member's residence from the municipality or from the ward from which elected shall vacate that office. However, any candidate for council member who is properly qualified as a candidate under applicable law shall be deemed to be qualified as a candidate in whatever ward the member resides if the ward has changed after the council has redistricted the municipality as provided in paragraph (c)(ii) of this subsection (4), and if the wards have been so changed, any person may qualify as a candidate for council member, using the person's existing residence or by changing the person's residence, not less than fifteen (15) days before the first party primary or special party primary, as the case may be, notwithstanding any other residency or qualification requirements to the contrary.
The Attorney General opinion made no mention of this statute nor did the opinion request.
Please help me out. Which statute applies.
19 comments:
This is what happens when an unqualified Barbie doll and her friends take over the AG’s office. Useless.
Both statutes are binding law. The precedents affecting legislative intent require the assumption that the legislature did not intend to enact contradictory statutes, so one has to strive to find a way for both to be applicable. If a court finds that the contradiction cannot be explained away, the problem gets kicked back to the legislature. At the same time, the court may apply equitable principles to reach a fair resolution for the parties involved during the time it takes for the legislature to act.
Sounds reasonable? Then something is probably wrong with my analysis. One thing: you are correct about AG's Opinions. They are often unreliable for the reasons you spell out.
Mr Groundhog has been there for a long time.
I would argue that a plain reading of 23-15-500 doesn't contradict it at all:
"(3) If the qualifications for an elected office include a specific residency requirement, the residency requirement in this section shall not apply."
21-8-7 (4)(a) carves out a specific residency requirement, rendering 23-15-500 moot for that specific position council members.
@2:05 PM- Are you the same misogynist who was spewing toxic venom at the Executive Director of MDOT?
I have bad news for you... The future is Female!
“Any candidate for any municipal, county or county district office shall be a resident of the municipality, county, county district...” (Ok stop there). You must be a resident of the city or county for two years not the ward or supervisor district. General language is controlled by the specific. Under the AG opinion if the city or county redistricts after the census within two years of an election persons moved out of a ward or supervisor district into another would be disqualified for running for office period. Jeez Phil got got this one wrong
All of this could be eliminated by the Mississippi State Legislature CLARIFYING what criteria has to be met in order to CERTIFY/CONFIRM residency. School Districts require utility bills/rental leases/mortgage documents and other such items. Our laws do not say what it takes to prove residency and until that is done everyone can serve wherever they want to because our law is deliberately (IMO) vague. Of course if we clarify the law we may also have to live by it ourselves......
I'm waiting for David Archie's response.
"This is what happens when an unqualified Barbie doll and her friends take over the AG’s office. Useless."
Be careful! Kingfish two days ago said there are some Fitch haters out there but he lets one of their posts get through on occasion.
No...It's not misogynistic at all to point out that the woman is unqualified, in way over her head and has never been anything but a token in each of her state jobs. The same would be true if she were a male in a red suit.
She reminds me of Joe Biden...Has utterly no idea what she's signing.
The opinion is signed by Phil Carter. Phil Carter is not one of Lynn Fitch's barbie dolls. He served in the attorney general's office for many years, specializing in elections, and he is recognized among the political people in the State as being a true expert in the field. He retired years ago, but attorneys general have kept him on contract because of the extremely specialized knowledge he has. I do not know why the statute mentioned above was not taken into consideration, but I would not be quick to doubt Carter's opinion. You all may be correct that a decision was made to narrowly answer the question presented, though. But if so, that decision was likely made above Carter's station in life. There again, he might not have addressed that statute because he did not think anyone could think if was relevant in light of other statutes of law. In any event, I would give his opinion respect and would not jump to the conclusion that some not-so-cute thing hired by Lynn Fitch came up with that opinion.
So Pelahatchie mayor Ryshonda should have been disqualified? She did not live in Pelahatchie until after she was elected. That’s 110% fact.
12:08 - Since Mr. Carter is NOT an employee of the State of Mississippi or the AGs office, will the mayor of Madison be challenging the opinion he signed? An official state document bearing the signature of someone not employed by the State is invalid on its face just as if the janitor had signed it.
7:37, this law was effective for elections after January 1, 2020. Beecham was elected in 2017, right?
This isn't the only relatively recent AG Opinion re elections that is suspect.
9:14, you must be one of those Barbie dolls working up in the Sillers Building, based upon your legal ability.
It would depend entirely upon what Mr. Carter's contract with the state has to say about this matter. There could be delegated powers as a contract employee that would be equal to or above the authorities that a state employee has.
I'm not privy to Mr. Carter's employment contract terms; and I doubt seriously you are.
But we appreciate your opinion; why don't you now go join forces with Mr. Liddell and when not selling pillows give us your opinions abouot cybercrimes.
If Phil Carter is writing an opinion you can bank on it! He may be the only legitimate attorney at the AG s office now!
" Barbie dolls "
Laughing very loud at that.
But since we're talking about such,
. . . (and to be Fair and Diverse) . . .
That little boy Mayor of Jackson looks like the Black version of a 1970's GI Joe action figure with . . . "life-like hair".
@3:28 PM How can you say Stop here when interpreting the law? There is a video from the Senate floor when this bill was presented and the question was asked would it apply to an alderman and the answer was yes. "or other territory that he or she seeks to represent in such office" If that statement of the law does not apply to city wards what does that section apply to?
Post a Comment