Ellington

The Tuesday night City Council meeting devolved into chaos when council members attempted to read aloud a list of very pointed questions to City Attorney Sarah O'Reilly-Evans.

Council members Margaret Barrett-Simon, Leslie McLemore, Marshand Crisler and Council President Ben Allen had prepared the questions with the help of pro-bono attorneys from outside city government because they feared the city attorney's office could not be trusted to offer impartial advice.

Council members did not mince words in their questions, many of which focused on the estranged relationship between the council and the administration.

"Would you please confirm for us that Ms. (deputy city attorney Michele) Purvis will provide advice and written opinions to the council on legal issues, even if she is ordered not to by the mayor, any department head, or anyone who serves the mayor. Will you do this, yes or no?" asked Allen, reading from a list.

The questions were a consequence of O'Reilly-Evans walking out on the council and refusing to offer legal advice on the mayor's decision to create a new city division without the council's input. Earlier this month, as the council went into executive session to discuss the mayor's decision, O'Reilly-Evans walked out of the council with her staff on the orders of Mayor Frank Melton.

Deputy Attorney Reginald Harrion, for example, only smiled and shook his head at Allen from outside the doors of the chamber when the councilman gestured for him to come inside.

"The attorney's office is supposed to work for both the legislative and the executive branch, and it's clear that they are at the exclusive beck and call of the mayor," Crisler said.

Council members took turns reading the questions, many of them pertaining to whether or not O'Reilly-Evans would pull service if the council sought mandamus relief against the mayor's office or withheld pay to unconfirmed department heads such as interim fire chief Todd Chandler, who has served unconfirmed for more than 18 months. (Mandamus relief refers to a writ of mandamus, which is when a court orders a government body official to take some action.) Melton says he refuses to bring Chandler up for confirmation because the council won't confirm him.

The council intends to bring up two non-binding resolutions of intent regarding Chandler in an upcoming meeting, designed to smoke out the council's feelings on the matter. One resolution demands the mayor bring forth Chandler in a confirmation, but also explains that a majority of the council is prepared to reject the interim's appointment.

The resolutions will be on a coming City Council agenda.

"The mayor cannot veto this order," Allen said. "The only thing he can do is ignore it, and if he does that we'll have to issue a writ of mandamus."

Councilmen Frank Bluntson, Kenneth Stokes and Charles Tillman adopted their traditional roles of protecting the administration at the Tuesday meeting. Bluntson accused Allen of debating from the chair, and Stokes accused the council members of asking city attorneys to break state law by not acting at the mayor's exclusive whim.

"State law says the mayor is over all the employees, and you're telling the legal department to ignore state law," Stokes said.

Tillman agreed that the council was violating numerous laws. "It appears that we have all type of violations," Tillman began.

"Yes," cheered Stokes.

"We're just violating and violating and violating," Tillman continued.

Stokes refused to let other council members take their allotted time on the floor reading questions and accused the council of organizing the questions without him.

"I was not invited to these meetings," Stokes said.

"They were council meetings," Allen pointed out. "Of course you were invited. That's your job."

Stokes and Bluntson continued shouting down other council members, repeating that the meetings leading up to the questions were not legitimate, eventually driving Barrett-Simon out of the chambers.

"There's no point in talking," the councilwoman said, gathering her purse after getting cut off for the third time. "He's only going to keep interrupting.

"But you have the floor," Allen begged, watching her go.

"It's not like you can stop him," she said.

Council members submitted the questions in paper form, though Chief Administration Officer Robert Walker said he would have preferred the questions be submitted prior to the council meeting.

"A whole lot of time was obviously spent putting them together. We would've liked to have had the questions before they were read out to us," Walker said.

O'Reilly-Evans gave no immediate answers to questions read out over Stokes' interruptions, though she did respond to a softball question from Bluntson about the legality of City Council getting outside counsel, nodding her head that another lawyer outside the city offering advice was a violation of the code of ethics.

Allen, however, seemed confident in the council's legal standing to seek pro-bono advice.

"We know our legal ground on this issue and we're confident in our behavior. Personally, I hope she does try to sue us for this. I really hope she does. This isn't a challenge, this is begging: Please get that in court for us. We'd love to fight it."

***

The following is a list of the questions City Council members asked O'Reilly-Evans:

Ben Allen

Everyone regrets the misunderstanding that occurred between the council and the city attorney. Pursuant to a specific representation from Mr. Walker in an e-mail sent to me on the afternoon of Feb. 14, 2007, following the unfortunate walkout by the City Legal Department from a special council meeting, the council is glad that Michele Purvis has been designated as the lawyer in the city attorney's office who is specifically charged with representing and giving advice to the Council.

Please confirm for us that Ms. Purvis is in fact designated as the attorney to represent the council whenever it needs legal advice or written opinion. Will you do this, yes or no?

We also want you to confirm for us that Ms. Purvis will provide advice and written opinions to the council on legal issues even if she is ordered not to by the mayor, any department head or anyone who serves the Mayor. Will you do this, yes or no?

The Council has several pressing issues on which the council needs immediate legal assistance.

Leslie McLemore

Pursuant to Section 21-8-23(1) of the Mississippi Code, Jackson has "a department of administration and such other departments as the council may establish by ordinance." Section 21-8-23(2) provides that each department "shall be headed by a director, who shall be appointed by the mayor and confirmed by a majority of the council present and voting at any such meeting." One such department previously established by the council is the fire department.

Unfortunately, the current director of the fire department has served in that capacity for over 18 months without having been confirmed by the council. We have no indication that the mayor will ever formally submit Mr. (Todd) Chandler's name to the council for confirmation. In fact, if anything is clear, it is that the mayor has no intention of complying with his legal obligations to submit Mr. Chandler for confirmation as the law requires.

This situation cannot continue.

Today, we intend to present a resolution requiring that the mayor submit appointments within 120 days. If the mayor does not submit Mr. Chandler's name within the time required by the resolution, the council will have no choice but to take this matter up itself or institute an action against the mayor seeking mandamus relief. Will you represent us in this writ of mandamus action, yes or no?

Marshand Crisler

We want a specific yes or no from you that Ms. Purvis will file and prosecute such a mandamus request if authorized by the City Council. The attorney general of Mississippi has indicated that such a mandamus action is the appropriate remedy in this situation. Will you do this, yes or no?

We also request in writing an opinion as to whether withholding payment of salary to appointed individuals is lawful if the mayor refuses to bring them forward within a period of time designated as "reasonable" by the City Council. Will you do this, yes or no?

We also have a situation in which the mayor has undertaken to create a new municipal department headed by Ramie Ford. Under Section 21-8-23, only the council has the right to establish new departments. The Council has not done so. We are concerned that if we authorize payment of salaries to persons employed in a department that is not legally authorized, we might become personally liable for improper expenditures of public funds. We therefore need a written opinion form Ms. Purvis as to the legality of the creation of this department and the Council's exposure if improper expenditures are made relative to such a department. Will you do this, yes or no?

We also need you to represent the council in seeking mandamus or other relief against the mayor establishing departments without prior council approval, as required by law. Again, we need your specific representation that this will be done. Will you do this, yes or no?

Margaret Barrett-Simon

The council knows that the city attorney's office is required by law to represent and give advice to the entire city, which includes the City Council as well as the mayor, as stated in Section 2-216 of the Jackson Code of Ordinances. This duty may require you to give advice and legal representation on issues on which the mayor and council strongly disagree. We understand that in asking you to represent the council in these and perhaps other matters, we are asking you, as our lawyer, to take positions with which the mayor and the City Council may strongly disagree. Nonetheless, you are charged to provide us with such advice when we request. Will you do this, yes or no?

Obviously, this council needs legal advice. We need fearless and independent legal advice and representation from a lawyer who will represent the council to the best of her ability, even when that representation is adverse to the wishes of mayor and perhaps, of the city attorney. We need to have confidence that you are that person. Will you do this, yes or no?

We need to know now that you are willing to do this, or if you are not, that the city attorney will authorize the council to retain special counsel to represent it in matters in which the city attorney's office is not willing to act. Will you do this, yes or no?

***

The following is a draft of one resolution concerning Interim Fire Chief Todd Chandler:

Proposed Resolution Regarding Interim Fire Chief Todd Chandler:

ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI REJECTING THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF ACTING FIRE CHIEF TODD CHANDLER

WHEREAS, Section 21-8-23(2) of the Mississippi Code Annotated states in part that each municipal department "shall be headed by a director, who shall be appointed by the mayor and confirmed by an affirmative vote of a majority of the council present and voting at any such meeting"; and

WHEREAS, the Attorney General has ruled that there is no distinction in the statute between temporary and permanent directors, and all appointments to the position of department director, whether interim or permanent, must receive city council approval pursuant to Section 21-8-23(2); and

WHEREAS, the City Council has resolved that one hundred twenty (120) days is a reasonable length of time for the Mayor to bring forward his appointments, whether interim or permanent, for confirmation by the Council; and

WHEREAS, the Mayor appointed Todd Chandler as Acting Fire Chief for the City of Jackson to be effective July 5, 2005 and he has been employed in that capacity for the past eighteen (18) months, well past the 120 day timeframe resolved as reasonable by the City Council; and

WHEREAS, the appointment is now before the City Council for confirmation as required by Section 21-8-23, Mississippi Code of 1972, as amended; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has had ample time to consider the appointment and a majority of the council present and voting has determined that the appointment should be and is hereby rejected.

IT IS, THEREFORE, HEREBY ORDERED by the City Council of Jackson, Mississippi that the appointment of Todd Chandler as Acting Fire Chief for the City of Jackson, Mississippi should be and is hereby rejected.

***

An earlier draft of this story stated that Deputy City Attorney Reginald Harrion was one of the attorneys who walked out on City Council. Though Harrion was in City Hall, he was not among attorneys who left council chambers under O'Reilly-Evans' direction.

Previous Comments

ID

125689

Comment

These actions are clearly called for by the Council and I commend them for pursuing this matter in this way. Just wonder why the C-L didn't see fit to report in full this morning? Once again, Jacksonians who really want to know rely on the JFP! Keep up the good work!

Author

ChrisCavanaugh

Date

2007-02-28T13:16:17-06:00

ID

125690

Comment

Right. It's remarkable for us to read their stories and know that they are, supposedly, covering the same events. Here's the alternative-universe version in the Ledger today. Reading the Ledger's city coverage, it is very easy to understand why people didn't know not to vote for Frank Melton. The mainstream media is an unindicted co-conspirator in this mess. I wish we'd been here years ago—but, hey, we'll do what we can to make up for what Jacksonians have not been told over the years.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-02-28T13:26:14-06:00

ID

125691

Comment

Posting big images screws up the page, Kingfish. Don't do it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-02-28T13:32:41-06:00

ID

125692

Comment

oh, sorry. wasn't trying to mess up the code stuff. If you didn't see it, I posted a picture of Lenin reading Pravda and referred it to the CL. http://www.profesionalespcm.org/foto/posters/212LeninPravda.jpg

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-02-28T13:33:42-06:00

ID

125693

Comment

I'm sure that SORE was really sore after that exchange. It is so evident that the Council needs legal remedy and so much could have been saved for this City had melton been put in check from the door. I understand the strong mayor scenario in government for Jacvkson; however, strong does not mean breaking the law and doing what you want - when you want. Where is melton trying to carry this City? He must know that all roads end somewhere.

Author

justjess

Date

2007-02-28T15:26:35-06:00

ID

125694

Comment

It was a terrible mistake to get rid of the Mayor-Commission structure. It kept the mayor in check and the city was run much more efficiently.

Author

Willezurmacht

Date

2007-02-28T17:10:36-06:00

ID

125695

Comment

Wow, Willie... that's a flash back. As I recall, it didn't do Danks any good. He pushed for it and it blew up in his face.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-02-28T20:24:32-06:00

ID

125696

Comment

I believe Ms. Michele Purvis has qualified to run for District Attorney in Hinds County. If she were to win, guess who would be running the DA's office? You guessed it, KING FRANK!! And Tyrone wants to be Sheriff. The citizens of Hinds County had better wake up before it's too late. Purvis walked out on the city council a few weeks ago when Frank said so. Do we really want Mr. Melton deciding who gets prosecuted and who doesn't? This is really frightening!

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-02-28T22:14:57-06:00

ID

125697

Comment

Yeah, I had said a while back that she is rumored to Mr. Melton's choice to replace the D.A. It is a really crazy thought to think about the mayor having control over the D.A.'s office, too. It is certainly time to wipe the sleep out of one's eyes.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-02-28T22:18:19-06:00

ID

125698

Comment

You are directly on point. I am just not comfortable with all the relationships he has with the criminal element. I keep hearing about the good influence he has had on the lives of young men. But the only results I see are juvenile delinquents and adult offenders. Something is definitely wrong with this picture.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-02-28T23:03:02-06:00

ID

125699

Comment

it's all part of the 8 year agenda folks.

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-02-28T23:34:30-06:00

ID

125700

Comment

I really think that the problem with Jackson government is the structure. It would be almost impossible to change at this point, but there needs to be more professionalism. We need people that actually know how to run and grow cities. I wish we could get a city manager form but a commission would be almost as good. As it is the whole system is susceptible to demogogery and corruption.

Author

Willezurmacht

Date

2007-03-01T09:15:18-06:00

ID

125701

Comment

That is the whole damn problem with Mississippi. We don't need two houses of the legislature. The Lt. Governor should not have the power the office currently enjoys. Way too many school districts. Way too many counties. We need a City-Country form of government here that allows towns like Clinton to retain their municipal status. Don't expect any changes to occur though. People here are too short sighted, too apathetic, and the leaders too power hungry for that too happen.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-01T09:31:20-06:00

ID

125702

Comment

We need a City-Country form of government here that allows towns like Clinton to retain their municipal status. Don't expect any changes to occur though. People here are too short sighted, too apathetic, and the leaders too power hungry for that too happen. " EXACTLY! AMEN!

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2007-03-01T09:33:53-06:00

ID

125703

Comment

Read the article over at the CL this morning. It puts such a positive spin on Melton, Stokes and Bluntson. The CL is not interested in reporting the truth. They wouldn't know what the truth was if it bit them on the behind. Glad I don't subscribe.

Author

Lady Havoc

Date

2007-03-01T09:34:30-06:00

ID

125704

Comment

Yes, it is absurd that a state with less than 3 million people should have over 80 counties and twice that many school districts. But the huge number of public employees thus needed is a great way to make the people dependant upon the prevailing power structure. Thus, change is ensured to never occur in absence of a precipitating event; like the Federal intervention of the 60's.

Author

Willezurmacht

Date

2007-03-01T09:36:56-06:00

ID

125705

Comment

The problem with the city government is not the structure, its the people. This mess is out of control.

Author

colby

Date

2007-03-01T09:40:14-06:00

ID

125706

Comment

Wille: Without being critical, its fairly true to say most people are poor because of bad choices they made along the way or that most people who have money problems actually do have an income but make horrible choices in planning, spending, etc. The same is true about governments and ours is so bloated and multilayered it continously holds us back. We need to over haul the whole structure in this state but that aint happening.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-01T09:51:50-06:00

ID

125707

Comment

I'm thankful that there are a lot of school districts. My children can enjoy a safe, good education outside of Jackson.

Author

Lady Havoc

Date

2007-03-01T09:54:49-06:00

ID

125708

Comment

Kingfish: I agree with you completely. But it is also true that in some of the more remote and rural areas the only jobs that are available are public jobs.

Author

Willezurmacht

Date

2007-03-01T10:00:51-06:00

ID

125709

Comment

I was trying to watch the City Council Meeting re-run on PEG last night and right in the middle of the really interesting part regarding City Legal, they cut it off. The only explaination was 'Time Limitations'! Whoa, cut it off at the beginning of the meeting; not in the middle of the most important part! Willezurmacht, I believe if you check back to the years preceding the change from Commission to Council form of government in Jackson that you will find it was being forced by the courts. In order to diversify participation by all we had to stop city-wide voting for all elected officials. Several models were discussed and Mobile officials came to Jackson to relate their experiences in changing their form of government. Agreed with all regarding 'way too many school districts'. Also, too many counties. But, Hinds County is so spread out now! How about Jackson just standing alone? Which counties do you suggest combining? Sharkey and Issaquena to begin with? Alcorn is small. Green and George, perhaps. All three of the Coast Counties or just two of them? Looks like a really good topic for another thread.

Author

ChrisCavanaugh

Date

2007-03-01T10:41:14-06:00

ID

125710

Comment

I nearly spat out my coffee when I read The Clarion-Ledger piece Lady mentioned. "I will be happy to bring everything before them when they start acting like adults. The mistake that I made was I gave them free rein with my department heads. And they have abused that," Melton said. "Not a single one of them has the courage to pick up the phone and talk to me like an adult. This is one of the most stunning statements by a public official I have ever read in my life. How dare Mr. Melton condescend to City Council and the citizens of Jackson with talk of acting like adults, especially considering his impulsive stunts? If any members of city government have acted like teenagers, it is not City Council. More to the point, who gives a damn? The law says that Mr. Melton must bring department heads before City Council for confirmation. This means that even if City Council is hooting like monkeys and shooting spit balls at the department head, Mr. Melton must bring that department head before the council. There is no ambiguity or even debate about the law. Could Mr. Melton follow the law just once? Here's Allen, similarly slack-jawed: "I am not going to dignify that ridiculous assertion with a comment. That's all I've got to say about it," Allen said. And then there is the ever-eloquent Kenneth Stokes: "What happened to diplomacy? ... I think it's nothing but personalities and they all need to have their butts whipped for doing this." Ah yes, the refined diplomacy of butt-whippings. Is this the way a councilman addresses his peers? I am going to go take and a walk and some deep breaths. This is just beyond the pale.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-03-01T11:02:04-06:00

ID

125711

Comment

Russell Davis was pushing for the change to city council I remember, I dont think that there was a big legal challenge. I can remember two reasons for the change: 1. It was hoped that by moving to a multi-member council the white residents of the city would feel more control over the city and be less likely to engage in white flight. 2. Black residents would feel more empowered and engage is less litigation, especially around the time of busing. I agree the county combination would be a great topic.

Author

Willezurmacht

Date

2007-03-01T11:06:53-06:00

ID

125712

Comment

Stokes is the one who threatens to beat up people who disagree with him and yet he talks about diplomacy? Why didn't the reporter ask Melton what he meant by abusing his department heads?

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-01T11:08:01-06:00

ID

125713

Comment

melton is a joke. He can say anything to the council because there are so many agendas. I do think that Barrett Simone was sincere when she talked about personal liability when signing off on dockets. She reported that she got caught up once before and had to pay back a large sum of money. I was suprised at McLemore. He tried to convince the public that he voted to pay the docket in total because "I don't want to mess up our reputation for the City paying its bills." Come on McLemore. Who are you fooling? Bluntson was his usual "AMEN" to whatever frank wants. Poor Mr. Tillman. I wonder if he has kids or family who will step up to the plate and look beyond his faults and see his need. It's like watching Frosty the Snow Man meeting the dead heat of Summer. He is "frank's boy" but, because of his challenge,I feel a sense of sorry for him. Stokes is a serious game player. He does absolutely nothing for his Ward except eat potato pies from one end of that Ward to another and he wears the evidence. Brian C. Johnson, you raise an interesting question: "Could Mr. Melton follow the law just once?" Judge Green had an opportunity to put this City out of its misery with melton. SHE DIDN'T. We can't depend on melton to follow the laws of this City or the Country. He is IGNORANT and flawed and criminal behavior has shaped his world. To exist with him, you too must have character flaws and a willingness to participate in activities that are not above board. Many people who voted for melton knew these things about him. melton is no suprise to this community.

Author

justjess

Date

2007-03-01T11:41:28-06:00

ID

125714

Comment

Colby, you it the nail on the head, "The problem with the city government is not the structure, its the people." FM, Kenny,Tillman and Bluntson do not know the meaning of diplomacy, intelligence, class, honesty, dignity or morals! I could continue but I don't want to dominate the blog---you guys get the message! The only kicking of butts that needs to be done is the "voters" who put those four clowns in office.

Author

maad

Date

2007-03-01T11:42:25-06:00

ID

125715

Comment

By the way, I listened to Charles Evers' radio talk show last night. He was upset with melton and the council and accused all of them of being "an embarassment to the whole City." I couldn't agree more; however, I thought that he was an advisor to the mayor. Just wondering!

Author

justjess

Date

2007-03-01T11:46:17-06:00

ID

125716

Comment

I disagree somewhat maad. I look at all the duplication and fighting between Jackson and Hinds and would prefer to see them merged together. In the cities where it is used it works pretty well.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-01T11:51:05-06:00

ID

125717

Comment

ah, Mercutio speaks out.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-01T12:04:38-06:00

ID

125718

Comment

Kingfish, most forms of government can work if you have the right people. Having disagreements are normal, we're disagreeing now, but I'm not planning on kicking your butt about it. You can merge the forms of government but if you have clowns in there, it still presents the same issues.

Author

maad

Date

2007-03-01T12:07:02-06:00

ID

125719

Comment

maad, I couldn't agree more!

Author

justjess

Date

2007-03-01T12:21:54-06:00

ID

125720

Comment

haven't disagreed with the clown part one bit.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-01T12:29:57-06:00