or when is a veto not a veto?
The Jackson City Council and Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba face each other in the courtroom today. The issue: Can a Mayor veto a negative vote of the City Council?
During the same meeting, the Mayor announced his intention to veto the City Council's action to deny the ratification of the emergency contract.
7. On April 14, 2022, in accordance with Miss. Code Ann. §21-8-17(2), the Mayor issued his veto of the City Council's official action of denying the ratification of the emergency contract with Richard's Disposal, Inc.
Both sides filed motions for summary judgement while the Mayor filed a motion to dismiss. The hearing will be held at 10 this morning.
The whole mess by Jess originates in the war between the City Council and Mayor over the garbage contract. The dispute wound up in Hinds County Chancery Court and was assigned to Special Chancellor Jess Dickinson. The Chancellor ruled on the case but inserted a dastardly little footnote into the opinion. JJ reported in March:
The Chancellor ruled Thursday Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba must obtain City Council approval for all contracts whether they be of the emergency or non-emergency variety. However, the jurist ruminated into the penumbras and threw this little hand grenade in the third footnote of his 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.
The footnote provided everything but clarity. Ever the opportunist, the Mayor pulled that pin and threw the hand grenade at the City Council during a special meeting Friday. City Council President Virgi Lindsay called a special meeting of the City Council yesterday to approve an emergency one-year no-bid contract with Richard's Disposal for garbage collection services. The City Council voted 4-3 twice to reject the contract.
Seizing upon the little footnote, Mayor Lumumba vetoed the City Council's rejection of the contract in accordance with Judge Dickinson's footnote as the Council members Ashby Foote, Vernon Hartley, Kenneth Stokes, and a belligerent Aaron Banks watched in disbelief. ...
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. He said the Mayor can hire a vendor on an emergency basis but must still present the contract to the City Council for approval. The City Council can not amend the emergency order but can only approve or reject the order. Only the Mayor can negotiate a garbage collection contract.
Anxious to keep his precious new toy, Mayor Lumumba sued for a declaratory judgment in Hinds County Circuit Court on April 4:
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.
Mayor Lumumba defended the veto at a press conference that day, claiming the statute used in the footnote was still applicable so he would veto any votes that rejected paying Richard's Disposal for collecting garbage.
Judge Peterson transferred the case to Judge Dickinson on April 5. However, Mayor Lumumba filed a motion for reconsideration on April 14.
Judge Peterson said the entire controversy arose out of the Chancellor's opinion so the Chancery Court should be the court that adjudicates as she rejected the motion. Thus the War of the Veto would be fought in Chancery Court.
The City Council sued the Mayor in Chancery Court. All Hinds County Chancellors recused themselves.
4 comments:
Deshun versus Felecia. Battle of the big brains. NOT!
If law or charter the city is created under allows for a Veto then it may be be legal depending how it is written. If there if no specific authority granted then the veto is not legal. This would take about 5 minutes to research.
I've observed both Felecia and Deshun in court, and they are both usually well prepared and present good argument. I just don't think the law is on the side of the mayor in this case.
Richard's employees must be getting paid somehow i doubt they would keep working of they weren't
Post a Comment