Indianola City Attorney Derek Hopson sent a “notice of claim” to the Sunflower County Consolidated School District over damages to a city street, despite having no authority from the mayor and board of aldermen to do so.
During last week’s city board meeting, Hopson had been instructed to send a request to SCCSD’s board attorney to repair damage allegedly done to a portion of Battle Street by the district’s contractor during Gentry High School’s recent renovation.
According to Dr. Adrian Brown of Brown & Associates, who had been negotiating with the district about the street, SCCSD had been prepared to cover the estimated $102,060 for repaving Battle Street from B.B. King Road to Duke Avenue.
However, that is now in jeopardy after Hopson sent the notice of claim to the district on Monday, a letter that was immediately forwarded to SCCSD’s insurance carrier.
“On behalf of the City of Indianola, Mississippi (‘City’), this letter is a notice of claim and request for the Sunflower Consolidated School District (‘SCSD’) to pay for the repair of the portion of Battle Street damaged by the contractor renovating Gentry High School,” the notice, obtained this week by The Enterprise-Tocsin, states. “This letter is a notice of claim pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 11-46-11 for damages for the acts set forth herein.”
No claim had officially been filed in Sunflower County Circuit Court as of press time.
SCCSD Superintendent Dr. Miskia Davis told The E-T this week that she was shocked upon receiving Hopson’s correspondence, especially since the district had recently agreed to act as the fiscal agent to revive an MDOT grant for sidewalk construction that the city lost due to its audit delinquency.
That project’s cost exceeds $400,000.
Indianola Mayor Ken Featherstone also expressed concern, sending a letter Tuesday to Davis and the SCCSD board to clarify that the claim was sent in error.
“The correspondence received by the SCCSD does not reflect the sentiments of the City of Indianola board,” Featherstone said in the letter, which he shared with The E-T. “At no time did the City of Indianola Board authorize the city attorney to bring any causes of action against the SCCSD. This was done in error. As such, it is my duty to convey the Board’s correct account of what was said and intended. Please accept this letter as a clear explanation of what transpired. We hope that this error does not diminish the harmonious relationship we have with the SCCSD.”
Hopson did not attend the city’s special-called meeting on Wednesday, and attempts to reach him by phone afterward were unsuccessful.
This incident comes one week after Hopson returned just over $4,000 to the city’s coffers out of a $38,887 payout for invoices from the city, due to the fact that some of the charges appeared to have predated his employment with the city.
Hopson was also reimbursed $14,100 last week for hiring an expert in the Mississippi Home Corporation case, a hire that had not been previously approved by the board.
Brown had informed the board last week that SCCSD had located funds to fully cover the street project costs. He was scheduled to appear before the district’s board Tuesday night to finalize the partnership. However, after the notice was sent on Monday, the city was informed that the matter is now a matter of litigation.
“Upon receipt of the letter from Attorney Hopson, the district immediately forwarded the document to our insurance carrier,” SCCSD’s Davis explained in one correspondence this week. “We were advised by legal counsel that because this is a litigation matter, the board should not speak about or obtain information regarding the situation. I then informed Dr. Brown, who was scheduled to present to the board, that he no longer needed to speak to the SCCSD Board of Trustees. The board has not agreed to fund any portion of Battle Street, neither partially nor fully. The board has not accepted any responsibility for the damages and is awaiting guidance from our insurance carrier.”
During Wednesday’s meeting, Ward 1 Alderman Gary Fratesi made a motion to terminate Hopson. The motion was seconded by Ward 2 Alderman Darrell Simpson, and it was defeated on a 2-3 vote. Ward 3 Alderman Ruben Woods, Ward 4 Alderman Marvin Elder, and Ward 5 Alderman Sam Brock voted against the motion.
The board also voted to table a three-point discussion regarding Hopson’s hiring of third parties without board approval, his attendance at recent annexation hearings, and details about his contract with the city.
These items are scheduled to be addressed at the next regular board meeting on May 5.
