Jackson Free Press

City Council President Ben Allen dropped a bombshell during a contentious discussion of the city's claims and payroll dockets during Monday's work session.

"Will there be any demolition in (the claims docket) this week that could affect (Community Development Block Grant) funding or (Department of Environmental Quality)?" Allen asked City Attorney Sarah O'Reilly-Evans. "If I were to tell you that I received a phone call from someone involved in DEQ, and that there were some concerns that perhaps some of the houses that were burned down were actually not burned down, or they were burned down and the paperwork was faulty, what would be your response to that?"

Ward 7 Councilwoman Margaret Barrett-Simon joined Allen in expressing concern. "Some of these same concerns have been raised for me. There were some questions about whether or not the demolition folks we paid to do the work had actually done the work," Barrett-Simon said.

"To your knowledge, every home that we voted on to be demolished, that actual home was demolished by that person designated in the claims docket, right?" Allen asked O'Reilly-Evans.

O'Reilly-Evans responded that she "wouldn't have personal knowledge of that."

O'Reilly-Evans said earlier that she had signed both the claims and payroll dockets per Allen's request last week. Her disavowal drew incredulity from Ward 6 Councilman Marshand Crisler. "Wouldn't you have some kind of process to know that if you had signed off on it? It kind of defeats the purpose of signing off on it, if you don't know what's going on," Crisler remarked.

Allen would not comment further on the matter after the meeting but vowed that council would discuss it further in the days ahead.

Allen's comments came after more complaints from council members about how the Melton administration handles the claims and payroll dockets, which have been a source of controversy for months, mostly due to concerns over temporary workers

Both Crisler and Barrett-Simon complained that they did not have the dockets in their packets at the start of the work session, though they usually have the dockets by Friday afternoon.

"On claims, I know you mentioned that the claims docket was ready on Friday, but the stamped date from the clerk's office shows (March) 26. That's today. This is a lot of information (to go through)," Crisler said.

Chief Administration Officer Robert Walker explained that city legal is now going over the list in detail before sending the docket to the clerk's office, which slowed the process.

Barrett-Simon requested that Walker send her a memo describing reasons for the delay.

Previous Comments

ID

126833

Comment

Chief Administration Officer Robert Walker explained that city legal is now going over the list in detail before sending the docket to the clerk’s office, which slowed the process. OK, Walker... Where is the detail? Let us see it! If there was detail, there wouldn't be as many questions. It would be in the docket! Much better description than what was on the news last night. Good job. It is time that the Council lowered the boom!

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-27T10:46:40-06:00

ID

126834

Comment

Interesting. Wasn't there a previous story about the crew hired and that one of the houses burned/demolished had asbestos in it? Is the city possibly claiming in CDBG and DEQ papers that a certified company/crew is doing this work? What certification does one need to do CDBG and DEQ funded demolition work?

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-03-27T11:59:49-06:00

ID

126835

Comment

Well, initially, didn't Melton have his young men knocking down houses with sledgehammers? Remember that footage on WLBT with him walking with two of the teens up to a house, and Melton was carrying a gun straight down in his hand? I'm curious how they're picking the houses.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-27T12:02:00-06:00

ID

126836

Comment

So.. the city attorney signed off on something and didn't know whether it had actually happened or not? Wow. Ineffective counsel for sure.

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-03-27T12:19:14-06:00

ID

126837

Comment

I would be concerned, but since no one in Jackson, the Council, the Mayor's office, or the justice system seems worried about the lack of instutional control, I won't either.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-03-27T12:40:56-06:00

ID

126838

Comment

Just curious...is the contract city attorney liable personally for items she signs, versus the city being liable if she were a city employee?

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-03-27T12:50:46-06:00

ID

126839

Comment

Deputy City Attorney Michele Purvis has opined that city legal cannot be held legally liable for the dockets, only City Council. You can imagine how delighted council was by that counsel.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-03-27T14:23:44-06:00

ID

126840

Comment

So, Frank can do what he likes knowing City Council will either clean his mess up or go to jail for it. Figures.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-03-27T14:38:06-06:00

ID

126841

Comment

Surely, the contractor/contractors hired to do demolition have signed a statement of substantial completion with the date completed. This, to me, constitutes a legal document. Someone with the City should be inspecting the job completion and signing off on each one after inspection and prior to approving payment. No one should ever be paid by the City without an approval by appropriate City personnel.

Author

ChrisCavanaugh

Date

2007-03-27T14:57:59-06:00

ID

126842

Comment

Right, Chris. That would be in a normal city under a normal mayor. Do you get any sense that this administration cares about legalities such as those? Any sense?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-27T15:25:43-06:00

ID

126843

Comment

And, lest we forget, after statements like that, Ms. Purvis believes the public should put enough trust in her to be *district attorney*, of all things. Ahem.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-27T15:26:42-06:00

ID

126844

Comment

Deputy City Attorney Michele Purvis has opined that city legal cannot be held legally liable for the dockets, only City Council. You can imagine how delighted council was by that counsel. brian The fact that City legal is making such a point says they know there is wrong doing being done by the administration. Things are not good. The water is getting deeper. I am glad that Councilman Allen is helping to get to the bottom of this by joining the other three. I think he recognizes that Melton is bad for this City. Even Larry, the radio host, said to his "friends" (i.e. NJam'ers & MP'ette's) that they need to realize that none of the problems we are having are because the media or critics are complaining about Melton. It's not because the Council as some like to say. No. It is Melton who is doing this. It is Melton who is the problem. I was glad to hear it. Like all complains about Melton, it had to be prefaced with a complaint about Johnson; but it's a start. BTW: If someone gets the tape, there is a great clip of Charlie Ross saying, "Mississippi has a lot of obese (pause), 'fat' children..." on Kim Wade today. What? Obese wasn't descriptive enough?

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-27T17:37:24-06:00

ID

126845

Comment

I prefer lardbutts myself.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-27T17:51:57-06:00

ID

126846

Comment

[quote]I prefer lardbutts myself.[/quote] Enough, Kingfish. I doubt old Chuck has ever suffered in the slightest with the problem. He doesn't seem the type to have had any problems.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-03-27T18:13:56-06:00

ID

126847

Comment

I meant instead of using the term obese or fat on the air.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-27T18:25:49-06:00