Mayor says Waste Management won’t get paid for picking up trash Friday

JACKSON, Miss. (WLBT) - With a ruling in the mayor’s case against the Jackson City Council expected to be handed down Thursday, Jackson City Attorney Catoria Martin says Richard’s Disposal will be picking up trash on April 1.

“Richard’s Disposal will be picking up trash Friday morning,” she said. “The same way Waste management did on October 1.”

Meanwhile, additional volleys have been fired in the city’s waste-hauling controversy.

Lumumba has sent Waste Management a “Notice of Expiration” order, saying that as of March 31, “your agreement with the city of Jackson to provide solid waste collection services... will terminate at midnight.”

“Any services provided after expiration are not authorized by the city of Jackson. The city... has not authorized payment for services provided by Waste Management of Mississippi, Inc., after March 31.”

Ward 1 Councilman Ashby Foote said the council was planning to send cease and desist letter to Richard’s and also was “sending an order to the judge asking for... a temporary restraining order against Richard’s picking up trash tomorrow morning.”

However, it was unclear if the council could send a cease and desist order or file a temporary restraining order without voting to do so at a meeting. WLBT received no notices of special meetings being held Thursday.

According to court documents, Waste Management offered to continue picking up trash in the city until leaders could work out who would get a contract.

The news comes as Judge Jess Dickinson plans to hand down a ruling Thursday in Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba’s case against the city council.

In a March 31 email Dickinson sent to attorneys involved in the case, the special appointed chancery judge said he was “essentially... planning to grant all of the relief requested in the mayor’s petition.”

Lumumba filed suit against the council on March 9. He asked the court to find that the council had no authority to negotiate or execute contracts, no authority to amend his state of emergency order, and could not propose vendors to provide emergency services.

Dickinson said he planned to grant most of what the mayor was asking for, with the exception of paragraph 16-d of the mayor’s complaint, which states that the council’s orders and regulations related to the emergency “shall be in writing and shall be given widespread notice and publicity.” The same section also states that the council’s minutes only go into effect after the minutes are adopted at the following meeting by a majority of council members.

Under the mayor’s logic, the council’s decision to reject Lumumba’s state of emergency on Feb. 24 would not have gone into effect until minutes reflecting the vote were approved at the following meeting. Lumumba issued a notice to proceed to Richard’s the same day the council ended the emergency.

Martin said, based on her interpretation of Dickinson’s email, the mayor has the right to declare a state of emergency and the right to choose a contractor. However, he must take that contract to the council for ratification.

She added the mayor has 45 days to take an emergency contract to the council once work begins, and the council only has the right to vote payment for the services up and down. She points to the fact that, in October, Waste Management was allowed to begin work on an emergency contract of its own, more than three weeks before the council officially voted to accept it.

Lumumba attorney Felecia Perkins sent a letter to Dickinson saying she disagreed with the judge’s email, saying she agreed that the minutes would have “legal effect as of the date of the meeting where the minutes were approved... However, it is undisputed that the city council failed to approve any of its minutes of the meetings that occurred from the end of September 2021 through the end of February 2022 in the time frame required by statute. Therefore, any actions taken by the council during that time period do not have the legal effect of relating back to (the dates) of the original meeting.”

Deshun Martin, attorney for the Jackson City Council, disagrees, saying his interpretation of Dickinson’s email is that the state’s constitution must be followed and the Richard’s contract is invalid until that is done.

“The Mississippi Constitution states a proposed contract comes from the executive branch and is presented to the legislative branch for approval,” he said. “That thing did not happen with Richard’s. The council voted Richard’s down, time and time again.”

“That’s what (the judge is) saying and that’s our stance.”

Want more WLBT news in your inbox? Click here to subscribe to our newsletter.

Copyright 2022 WLBT. All rights reserved.