Poor judgment and legal advice are costing Tunica County
hundreds of thousands of dollars. The
current Board of Supervisors followed the law for the first 24 months of its
term of office and paid part of the gaming revenues to the Tunica Schools and
Town of Tunica – which the law requires.
The law had been being followed and compiled with for over two
decades. Once the current Board of
Supervisors voted to not pay the Tunica Schools and the Town of Tunica, the
current Board of Supervisors then sued not only the Tunica Schools but also the
Town of Tunica.
The Attorney General for the State of Mississippi and the State
Audit informed the current Board of Supervisors that this was illegal. The Attorney General and State Auditor stated
the County should not withhold the payments.
The current Board of Supervisors does not care what the Attorney General
thinks and appears to not care with the State Auditors think. The current Board of Supervisors does not
seem to care what the Circuit Court thinks.
Is there any reason to think the current Board of Supervisors will care
what the Mississippi Supreme Court will think?
The Court ruled against Tunica County and directed that the
Tunica Schools and Town be paid. Well
the current Board of Supervisors voted to appeal this decision to the
Mississippi Supreme Court. Who benefits from this
litigation – the lawyer. Reports
show that Tunica County’s legal bills for this litigation are over
$125,000! The legal cost continue to go
up as the appeal moves forward. The
taxpayers should not have to pay this cost.
One legal bill
indicates that the attorney for Tunica County spent seven and half hours for “review
and analysis of TCM spreadsheet from 1993 to 2014.” At $300 per hour, it cost the taxpayers over
$2,200 for an attorney to look at some spreadsheets.
What is the position of the current candidates
for supervisor on the unnecessary litigation cost? If you support the current Board of
Supervisors then you must support ridiculous and very expense litigation.
Who are the outside attorneys in these appeals and such? Aren't they "friends/associates" of certain supervisors? Don't they represent certain supervisors in other personal matters? Smells fishy .... I remember reading that Pittman submitted a bill a while back for $40K+ for answering questions about county employees insurance... if this bill was paid did the supervisors authorize it?
ReplyDelete