The Dispatch has filed an official complaint to the Mississippi Ethics Commission against Oktibbeha County for violating the Open Meetings Act.
The Oktibbeha County board of supervisors met with members from the Mississippi Engineering Group Thursday in multiple scheduled meetings, each of which involved less than a quorum of supervisors, to discuss the Oktibbeha Lake Dam. Such meetings are referred to as rolling quorum meetings and are illegal unless they are properly noticed and open to the public.
Oktibbeha County commissioned MEG in July to analyze the status of the Oktibbeha County Lake Dam, and the group presented its findings to the board through the separate meetings Thursday — first meeting with District 2 Supervisor Orlando Trainer and District 5 Supervisor Joe Williams and later with District 3 Supervisor Marvell Howard and board president, Bricklee Miller, who represents District 4. District 1 Supervisor John Montgomery did not attend any of the meetings.
A reporter from The Dispatch was invited to attend the meetings, but the meetings were not noticed to the general public.
“Even though no vote was taken and the media was welcomed to these meetings in Oktibbeha County, the public clearly was not included,” the complaint read. “Therefore, the public did not have adequate access to critical discussions about the content and merits of the engineers’ report.”
A previous Ethics Commission ruling — Gregory v. The City of Columbus, 2014 — involved a similar situation in which The Dispatch filed a complaint against the city of Columbus after its city council met in non-quorum shifts to discuss issues related to economic development and Trotter Convention Center. The city was found to be in violation of state law by the Ethics Commission. That decision was appealed all the way to the state Supreme Court, which upheld the decision against the city.
After Dispatch managing editor Zack Plair was made aware of the meetings on Wednesday, he contacted Oktibbeha County board attorney Rob Roberson and advised him of the previous ruling.
“Mr. Roberson responded that Mr. Plair was ‘probably right’ but that the meetings were meant to answer supervisors’ questions more clearly, ‘in an informal setting,’ before the report was presented before the full board in an open meeting,” the complaint read.
Roberson said he would ensure county administrator Delois Farmer knew of the 2014 court ruling, and Plair told him that if the county followed through with the meetings, it could result in The Dispatch filing a complaint.
“Separate meetings involving a majority of supervisors discussing a particular subject, even when the talks are ‘informal,’ must be open to the public,” The Dispatch Publisher Peter Imes said. “We will continue to challenge public bodies that attempt to sidestep the state’s open meeting laws.”
Roberson said the reason the meetings occurred was for the board to ask questions to MEG and to make certain all possible solutions were addressed.
“(Plair) has his right to file (the complaint),” Roberson said. “I think sometimes newspapers like to create drama where there is not any.”
Miller, who was the initial person to inform The Dispatch about Thursday’s meetings, said she understands the purpose of the complaint and knows the media has a duty to inform audiences about public matters.
“I think transparency is very important,” Miller said. “We always invite the public and the news outlets to cover all meetings that way the public knows what is going on because the supervisors work for the taxpayers.”
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 46 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.