The Lowndes County Board of Supervisors spent most of Friday’s board meeting hearing complaints about two previous actions, including a gun rights advocate and a business owner appealing a ruling relating to the county’s nightclub ordinance.
The board heard from Jackson-area firearms instructor/gun activist Rick Ward, who challenged the board’s decision during its Oct. 15 board meeting to comply with an order from the district chancery judges to ban all firearms from with 200 feet of courtrooms when court is in session. The move essentially turned the entire courthouse property into a gun-free zone.
Ward said the board overstepped its authority with the ruling. He cited examples he said proves that those who carry enhanced-carry permits are far less likely to commit gun-related crimes than even law enforcement officers,
He said the county sheriff — not a judge — is responsible for security at courthouses.
“That 200 feet order is a bunch of bunk,” Ward told supervisors.
Board attorney Tim Hudson said Ward was barking up the wrong tree.
“All this board did is comply with the judges’ order and spread it on the minutes,” Hudson said. “What you are saying is that the board of supervisors and the judges have no authority on this subject. So what is it you are asking this board to do?”
Ward said he wanted the board to rescind its previous vote complying with the judges’ court order. Ward said court judgments in from previous instances where the county had sought to prevent concealed carry in courthouses in Forrest and Jones counties prove judges have no authority to ban firearms from courthouses.
“The key in all this is ‘courtroom’ and not ‘courthouse,'” Ward argued. “A judge has authority only over the courtroom.”
District 5 Supervisor Leroy Brooks said those cases are different in one important respect.
“In those counties, if I understand it correctly, it was the sheriff who took it upon himself to challenge the legitimacy of the court order,” Brooks said. “That hasn’t happened here.”
Ward said he would consider filing a suit against the county if its persists in its current policy.
The board took no action.
Nightclub ordinance
Supervisors then conducted a public hearing to discuss an appeal of a ruling concerning the county’s nightclub ordinance, passed in 2013, that requires nightclubs located in the county to close by 1 a.m. and have its premises cleared by 1:30 a.m.
Jerry Westlund, owner of The Pony — a strip club located near Highway 82 and Highway 45 Alternate — appeared with his attorney, Jeff Hosford of Starkville — to appeal the ruling made two months ago by a committee composed of Hudson, county administrator Ralph Billlingsley, sheriff Mike Arledge and chancery clerk Lisa Neese. The committee rejected Westlund’s request for an exemption for establishments that operate as restaurants.
On Friday, Westlund and Hosford appealed that decision to the supervisors, noting The Pony has added $10,000 in restaurant equipment, prepared an extended menu and has satisfied all state requirements applying to restaurants.
Westlund asked the supervisors for an exemption that would allow his establishment to remain open until 3 a.m.
He said his club has complied with all ordinances, including ending alcohol sales and consumption on the premises at 1 a.m., as prescribed in the ordinance.
“The purpose of the ordinance was for public safety,” Hosford said. “That is something we understand. In order to assure that goal, we are prepared to provide a security officer for every 50 customers that are on the premises during that time period.”
Asked if the club would still have dancers performing during those hours, Westlund said yes.
“If we’re going to keep butts in the seats, we have to keep the show going,” he said.
Hosford said the ordinance’s wording is vague on what businesses are subject to the ordinance. He contends that after 1 a.m., The Pony’s business is much like other restaurants that have no restrictions on operating hours. He also said the part of the ordinance that concerns music as a part of the definition of a nightclub is ambiguous.
“What it refers to in the ordinance is amplified sound,” Hosford said. “That could apply to a Waffle House if it has a jukebox playing or Walmart if it has music playing over his sound system. The language is not clear.”
Westlund said the ordinance has produced a bad effect on his business.
“We’ve had to cut 16 employees because of the change and the downturn in the economy,” Westlund said. “Things are getting better with the economy and we think getting an exemption would allow us to bring back those jobs.”
District 2 Supervisor Bill Brigham did not appear convinced by the argument.
“It has been my experience that once you start making exemptions, you have to keep on making exemptions,” Brigham said.
A motion by Brooks, seconded by Brigham, to continue the appeal hearing until the board’s Dec. 7 meeting was unanimously approved.
Even as Hosford and Westlund were meeting with the supervisors Friday, their lawsuit against the county, filed on March 18 in U.S. District Court in Aberdeen, is still moving through the process. A settlement hearing before Judge David Sanders is scheduled for Feb. 22, 2016.
Jackson attorney Jason Dare, who is representing the county in that suit, could not be reached for comment.
Slim Smith is a columnist and feature writer for The Dispatch. His email address is [email protected].
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 37 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.