OCEAN SPRINGS, MS – Three Ocean Springs aldermen now say they were misled into approving City Attorney David Harris’s one-year contract, raising questions about his credibility and fitness for office. The mayor, meanwhile, has offered only a boilerplate response.
At Tuesday’s meeting, Harris cited Mississippi Code to the Board of Aldermen and stated his month-to-month interim appointment would expire after 90 days “as a matter of law.” Citing a separate code, he also insisted his new contract had to be for a year.
When Harris was asked by an alderman if they could continue month-to-month, he doubled down stating, “It has to be for a year.” Harris also warned that if the Board did not approve his proposed long-term contract that night, the city would be left without counsel in a matter of days.
But the statutes Harris referenced do not support his legal claims.
As reported earlier this week, Mississippi Code puts a time limitation on interim appointments for positions that are mandatory, like city clerk, tax collector, and other positions required in city or county governments. City attorney is not one of those positions, and state law says governing authorities “may” appoint an attorney to a one-year term. The code does not say “must” or require in any way an annual contract.
Legal experts say accuracy and honesty in interpreting statutes is not just important — it’s a professional obligation.
Benjamin Cooper, a professor at the University of Mississippi School of Law, told GC Wire that while he was not briefed on the specifics of Tuesday’s meeting, the principle is clear: “Honesty is a core duty of the legal profession as reflected multiple times in the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct. Clients must be able to rely on their lawyer to interpret the law accurately and honestly.”
Based on Harris’s narrative, the Board unanimously approved the one-year contract.
Aldermen Weigh In: ‘Cannot Continue as City Attorney’
Several aldermen say Harris’s misrepresentation shaped their decision Tuesday night.
“I believe that either he misrepresented us to get a contract or he is not qualified to interpret the law,” said Ward 2 Alderman Karen Stennis, adding that the Board was led to believe they would be without an attorney if they did not approve the contract.
Ward 4 Alderman Shannon Pfeiffer described Harris’s conduct as “either a calculated effort to misdirect the Board into acting without due process, or a fundamental lack of understanding of the law.” In either case, she said, “He cannot continue as City Attorney one moment longer than necessary.”
Even Alderman-at-Large Matthew Hinton, who made the motion to approve Harris’s contract, admitted he had been misinformed. He said, at the time, he was under the impression the city would be left high and dry, but after reviewing the statutes cited by Harris, Hinton acknowledged: “It’s different — that was pretty much the misinterpretation, I guess you would say.” He added that the matter will be addressed publicly at the Board’s upcoming recess meeting.
Stennis promised a search for an experienced future city attorney. “Action that will be taken is to seek a qualified attorney that knows municipal law well and can be trusted to interpret it,” she said. “I don’t want to pay an attorney that much money to learn on the job. He or she needs to come to us knowing about municipal law. We have to be able to trust that what they are telling us is lawful.”
Pfeiffer echoed those concerns. “The Board must act immediately and decisively to protect the City and its citizens,” the Ward 4 alderman said. “Ocean Springs deserves a competent, ethical practitioner who does not learn the law at the City’s expense.” Pfeiffer says she is working on an updated Request for Proposal (RFP) to attract new law firms to apply.
All three aldermen expressed ease that Hinton’s motion and the contract include an escape hatch, which allows the Board to cancel Harris’s contract with a 30 day notice.
Residents React
The reaction from residents on social media was swift and unforgiving.
“How do you know when an attorney is lying to you? His mouth is open,” wrote Dawn Herndon, adding that with information readily available online, “at least one of them could have, and should have, looked up these Mississippi codes instead of being blindly led to sign a contract by another money grabbing attorney.”
Others echoed that frustration. “Arrogance and ignorance at its best,” wrote Patti Boccaleri, who faulted the Board for failing to pause and verify the very statutes Harris cited. “Isn’t this exactly how we got here in the first place? By taking things at face value instead of digging deeper?”
Joe Jewell was even more blunt: “Nothing new here — the city has another crooked lawyer… The BOA did this and they now have to own it.”
Not all the commentary was critical. Mike Whitney called the 30-day termination clause “a prudent move” that allows the Board to pivot if issues arise, dismissing claims of deliberate misquoting as exaggerated. Cullen Hawkins also urged caution, suggesting the controversy might stem from differing interpretations of the word “may” rather than corruption.
But many remained unconvinced. “Unbelievable!!! Of course the attorney is going to steer the BOA toward his contract,” Alan Griffin wrote. “We expect more from our elected officials and you have started your terms as amateurs… Get it corrected quick!”
Mayor’s Office Chimes In
For now, the contract stands, but the chorus of doubt is growing louder. Three aldermen now say Harris’s legal claims were misleading, while residents are openly questioning both his credibility and the Board’s judgment.
Mayor Bobby Cox has not addressed the issue directly. Asked whether Harris misrepresented the law and whether the Board had other options, his office released only a single-sentence reply: “City of Ocean Springs takes legal matters seriously and remains committed to upholding the integrity of our legal system, while making decisions in the best interests of our community.”
Whether city officials use the 30-day termination clause may determine whether this controversy fades quietly or cements itself as yet another chapter in Ocean Springs’ long struggle with accountability in its legal office.
BOA are elected to represent its citizens with the highest of integrity, do their due diligence and if, or when issues arise, use their power and resources to quickly remedy the issues on behalf of the public interest.
If they do not utilize their 30 day out clause notification and interview and hire the Best municipal law firm then they too should be removed from office.
We deserve better.
Sorry to say this but as the article says Harris doubled down to secure himself a job at least for the next year. I am shocked the BOA did not bother to research Harris claim. So what your new BOA has show so far to the public and voters is they are not capable of researching or verifying something as simple as what Harris told them. SMH, unless that BOA starts doing their jobs properly and doing a little research they too should be replaced…….