TIM PRATT
STARKVILLE — When the Starkville Board of Aldermen finally appoints the next member of the Starkville School District board of trustees, as few as five of the city’s seven aldermen could be a part of the process.
Ward 5 Alderman Jeremiah Dumas said Wednesday he plans to recuse himself from actions related to the appointment of the next school board member. His decision is based on a state Ethics Commission opinion which interprets state law as forbidding any alderman or mayor from appointing someone to a municipal separate school board if it results in a monetary benefit for himself, his relative or his business. Dumas’ wife, Hope, teaches third grade at Overstreet Elementary School in the Starkville School District.
The commission has advised aldermen and other public servants in Dumas’ position to recuse themselves from voting on appointments to the school board to avoid any appearance of impropriety. School board members can vote on pay raises for district employees.
Another conflict of interest?
Ward 7 Alderman Henry Vaughn is in a similar situation. His daughter, Jessica Vaughn, is a teacher assistant at Sudduth Elementary School.
Vaughn on Wednesday said he is still undecided whether or not to recuse himself from the school board appointment process.
“I sure am thinking about it,” Vaughn said. “I don’t know for sure.”
With a 5-2 vote, aldermen appointed Susan Tomlinson to the school board on March 16, but Mayor Parker Wiseman vetoed her appointment two days later, saying the board should be representative of the district itself.
The SSD is 64 percent black, 32 percent white, 2 percent Asian, 1 percent Native American and 1 percent Hispanic. If Tomlinson, who is white, were to serve on the school board, the board would become 80 percent white and 20 percent black.
Aldermen have the power to override Wiseman’s veto, but it would take five aldermen to vote in favor of an override, regardless of how many members recuse themselves, City Attorney Chris Latimer said.
Dumas was one of the five aldermen who voted in favor of Tomlinson’s appointment, so his recusal would leave only four aldermen who voted for her to attempt to override Wiseman. Vaughn and Ward 6 Alderman Roy A. Perkins voted against Tomlinson’s appointment.
Read complete article at Commercial Dispatch.
Well, fact is if the interpretation is accurate, Jeremiah Dumas had ALREADY violated ethics by voting in the first place. He might as well vote again.
At the same time, Henry Vaughn has already violated ethical rules by voting in the first place, and it sounds as if he’s not sure if he should vote again or not.
What would the penalty be if Dumas/Vaughn voted? Appears it would be as little as a slap on the wrist or possibly as severe as $1,000/1 year in jail.
I think it is a bit over the top to have Dumas and Vaughn recuse themselves from voting on a school board member. They are each one of 7 votes toward an appt. who will be one of 5 members on a school board. Raises for teachers mostly come by as a result of state funds and would be decided via number of years of service,etc. Not because of one school board member. It would be ethically problematic if aldermen were more directly voting toward monetary benefit toward self or relative–city contract, for example. I guess I do question wording of article, so Tim P– please do clarify– did the Ethics Commission opinion interpret the law in this specific case? that is relative to a school board appt? or is the opinion more general about monetary benefit of an appt.?
I know that the right thing will be done, The prayer of the righteous availeth much.