On Monday, the Lowndes County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to provide up to $50,000 to secure an attorney to oppose annexation by the city of Columbus.

In response, Ward 2 city councilman Joseph Mickens told the county to mind its own business.

“We never got in the supervisors’ business,” Micken said. “I think if the supervisors want to get in the City of Columbus’ business, maybe they need to run for (city) office.”

Mickens is wrong. The county has as much of an interest in this matter as the city. In fact, until a Chancellor overseeing the annexation case says otherwise, the residents in these two areas are not city residents: They are county residents with their own local government – the board of supervisors.

This is not merely our opinion. It is the opinion of the Mississippi Supreme Court as well.

In 1990, the state’s highest court overturned a lower court ruling that said Harrison County could not bring legal action to prevent annexation efforts by both Gulfport and Biloxi.

That decision makes it clear that Lowndes County supervisors have the authority to get involved in these legal proceedings.

As of the present, the board has not hired an attorney, but it’s probably no coincidence that Ridgeland attorney Jerry L. Mills attended Monday’s supervisors meeting. Mills may not have written the book on county government, but he did write the chapter that specifically addresses the topic – “Municipal Boundary Expansion from a County Perspective,” found in the 7th edition of “County Government in Mississippi.”

One key element of the Supreme Court’s 1990 ruling was that the ability to take legal action in annexation cases should not be limited to suits where the county had a pecuniary interest, for “it is to the interest of the county to maintain the peace and harmony of its inhabitants.” The Court also noted that county supervisors “are charged generally to promote the peace, happiness, and economic and social welfare of the people they serve.”

Given the overwhelming objection we are hearing from both current Columbus residents and residents in the proposed annexation areas, we believe the supervisors are meeting that standard.

That’s a case city council members in favor of annexation have not made.

Data collected by the Golden Triangle Development LINK show the annexation will decrease the city’s median household income, disposable income, labor force participation and housing values while raising the poverty rate.

Given that, how does the city benefit from this plan?

The four Black Council members in favor of the annexation deny that their goal is to increase Black voting strength in the city (91 percent of residents in the two areas are Black).

But what they have yet to articulate is any coherent case for proceeding. They’ve not said how residents in these areas will materially benefit while being required to pay city taxes. Nor have they said how current city residents will benefit from annexation.

Annexation opponents will face an uphill battle, even with the services of an experienced attorney. The chancellor assigned to rule on the annexation will not base the decision on whether it is a good idea or a popular idea. The chancellor will rule as to whether or not the city has met the statutory requirements to annex these areas.

But those opposed to annexation will have the services of an expert attorney thanks to the Lowndes County Board of Supervisors.

It will at least be a fair fight.

The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.

READER FAVORITES

• 

  Slimantics: The recycling game has changed a bit

  By Slim Smith • 2 days ago

• 

  Roses and Thorns: 7-18-26

  By Dispatch Editorial Board • 16 hours ago