Skip to main content

Mississippi Advisory Opinions April 18, 1985: 19850418 (April 18, 1985)

Up to Mississippi Advisory Opinions

Collection: Mississippi Attorney General Opinions
Docket: 19850418
Date: April 18, 1985

Advisory Opinion Text

Honorable Fred C. Permenter, Jr.

No. 19850418

Mississippi Attorney General Opinions

April 18, 1985

Honorable Fred C. Permenter, Jr.

Attorney for City of Ripley

205 Spring Street

Ripley, Mississippi 38663

Dear Mr. Permenter:

Attorney General Edwin Lloyd Pittman has received your letter of request and has assigned it to me for research and reply.

Your letter states:

“I am the attorney for the City of Ripley, Mississippi, and as such, we have been involved in litigation concerning violations of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The City of Ripley in 1971 annexed certain property without obtaining preclearance from the Justice Department and subsequently, during our 1983 annexation this came to light. We have just recently reached a tentative agreement on the settlement of this matter which will include incorporating all of the annexed area. In order to accomplish this, a Consent Decree will be approved by the Federal Court and then the proper submittal will be made to the Justice Department. I would very much like for you to clarify exactly what steps I should take to provide for this change on the city minutes. I have made proper entries in the minute book to provide for the approval of the signing of the Consent Decree including attachment of copies of the Decree and all maps and statistics. Since this Decree is to be approved by the Federal Court, do we need to adopt an Ordinance providing for these election changes (we are changing from an at-large system to four wards and one at-large aldermanic positions)? When can we begin to register the voters in the newly annexed area? When can candidates from the newly annexed areas begin to qualify for municipal election?

“I might add that incorporated in our Consent Decree is a provision that 'no municipal election shall be held by the City of Ripley until the proper preclearance is received by the United States Department of Justice and after said preclearance is received, that at least thirty days be allowed before said election in order to properly register the voters who live in the areas annexed in the disputed 1971 and 1983 annexation and further, to give the said City of Ripley sufficient time to properly advise the public of their new system of electing aldermen since many residents will be residing in new wards.' In addition, if an Ordinance is required, should the said Ordinance be adopted before or after the proper preclearance is received from the Justice Department?”

In response to your first question even if the Federal Court and the U.S. Justice Department approve the consent decree changing the present “at-large” system to a “four-ward, one at-large” system of electing aldermen, it appears to this office that the passage of an ordinance providing for such change would be appropriate.

In response to your second question, please see the enclosed copy of an opinion addressed to Honorable Jerry L. Mills, dated July 11, 1984. In summary that opinion states that residents of a newly annexed area of a municipality may begin registering to vote only upon approval of the annexation by the U.S. Justice Department.

In response to your third question, qualifications to make one eligible to be a candidate for public office are required to be met at the time such candidate is elected. Plunkett v. Miller , 162 Miss. 149, 137 So. 737 (1931) .

Therefore, in the opinion of this office, one who resides in a newly annexed area of a municipality may, upon U.S. Justice Department approval of such annexation, register to vote and file the necessary qualifying documents thereby becoming a legitimate candidate for public office provided he meets all qualification requirements including the thirty-day registration requirement as of the date of the general or special election which will determine who will serve in that particular office for the ensuing term.

In response to your fourth question, it appears that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would require pre-clearance by any ordinance which changes the method of electing municipal officials.

Very truly yours,

Edwin Lloyd Pittman, Attorney General