Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meeting Schedule Statute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Harrison County supervisors cite state law requiring first and second Monday meetings; board adjourns
Summary
At an unspecified meeting, Harrison County Board of Supervisors discussed a state statute requiring the county to meet on the first and second Monday of each month, noted a $5 penalty for failing to meet, and voted to adjourn following routine scheduling discussion.
Harrison County Board of Supervisors members discussed statutory requirements for the county’s meeting schedule and then voted to adjourn at a meeting where no specific calendar date was recorded in the transcript.
A board member said, “State statute requires the Harrison County to meet first and second Monday of every month,” noting that if the board lacked a quorum it could declare that it did not have a quorum and that “everybody's gonna get fined $5.” That same member described limits on removal of elected officials under state law, saying the only practical route to removal is conviction and imprisonment for a disqualifying crime.
The discussion began with a brief reference to pending matters (including a litigation reference to Lopez v. Harrison County) and moved quickly into scheduling logistics. One supervisor referenced a previously decided meeting time, saying, “we voted on that at the last meeting,” and another said attendees would meet at “Buc-ee’s at 10:00 on Monday” while noting “our meeting is at 01:00 in Biloxi.”
Several supervisors asked staff to “look into” whether meetings could be moved when necessary with proper notice; a board member said counties they had observed sometimes schedule their second meeting “whenever as needed” while acknowledging that a statute may constrain Harrison County’s calendar. A supervisor summarized: “So the only way somebody can be removed in the state of Mississippi from office is, you know, unless they get put in prison for a federal crime or something, because they're elective duty.”
After the scheduling exchange, a supervisor requested “a motion to adjourn.” The board recorded a first and second, asked “All in favor?” and closed the meeting by voice vote.
The transcript does not specify an exact date for the meeting, the names of the board members who moved and seconded the adjournment, or a roll-call vote. The board’s discussion included requests to research whether meetings may be rescheduled with proper notice and references to statutory constraints on scheduling and removal of elected officials.
