St. Louis County executive sues council over ordinance he says would transfer executive power while he travels

The County Executive of St. Louis County announced he filed a lawsuit against the county council over an ordinance he says would unlawfully transfer executive authority while he is out of the country, and said a judge will hear a request for a temporary restraining order tomorrow.

The County Executive said the ordinance, passed in September 2025, requires the county executive to notify the council chair when he leaves the country and provides that the council chair "will assume the authority of the county executive" during those absences. He said he complied with the notification requirement, sent notice on April 10 and identified his chief of staff and chief of operations as points of contact, but that the council chair has signaled she intends to assume those responsibilities. "We can't have 2 county executives," he said, calling the measure "unconstitutional" and saying the county charter reserves changes in executive authority to a vote of residents.

Explaining why he sought court relief, the County Executive said the ordinance risks "competing directives to contracts, visas, staff" that would "generate legal disputes that will harm the residents that we are elected to serve." He said the county has nearly $200,000,000 in reserves this year but declined to use about $6.5 million in one-time funds to preserve normal operations, and warned that unreleased appropriations could lead to furloughs or other service disruptions. "If we don't get clear direction on that, then I can't leave," he said.

He also cited what he described as a pattern of council overreach, saying council members had pressured staff to sign a noncompetitive lease and that he blocked a $3,000,000 appropriation he described as politically connected. He said the council "spent a half million dollars of NFL settlement funds to try and get the authority to fire our department head," presenting that as an example of attempts to exert executive authority.

On health services, a reporter asked about a budget file that would allow the county to contract with SSM to provide doctors for jails and public health clinics. The County Executive described the SSM relationship as a 10–15 year partnership whose renewal has been delayed and said, "there are patients in St. Louis County who will lose their doctor through the county safety net," if the contract is not renewed.

The County Executive defended traveling on a trade mission to London with Mayor Spencer and a St. Louis delegation, saying the Port Authority is providing an incentive package to British Airways to support direct service and that his travel arrangements were supported through the economic development partnership, "not supported by government funds." He said he would be reachable by cell phone throughout the trip and cited case law and precedent that being available by phone means an executive is not "effectively absent." "I've been on the phone with my staff when they were in the tornado shelter," he said, describing prior remote management of emergencies.

He said he vetoed the ordinance after it passed and that the council overrode the veto, and argued the question of who has executive authority must be decided by the courts rather than by ordinance. A hearing on the temporary restraining order is scheduled tomorrow; the County Executive said he hopes a judge will rule in time to allow transitions if necessary.

The County Executive said proposals for a temporary county government headquarters — which the transcript refers to variably as Northwest Crossing, Northwest Crossings and Northwest Plaza — will be discussed at a hearing tomorrow. He closed by repeating that appropriating available reserve funds is needed to avoid service cuts while the county pursues a longer-term solution.