OCEAN SPRINGS, MS – Taxpayers are still footing the bill for two consulting contracts approved in secret back in 2021, with another $22,000 payment sent just weeks ago. GC Wire first reported on the contracts in January, but newly acquired documents reveal the secrecy behind both.
A public records request revealed Ocean Springs engaged Slaughter & Associates under two separate agreements — one introduced behind closed doors in an executive session and another quietly slipped into the consent agenda without debate.
Both contracts, signed by Mayor Kenny Holloway, lacked a fixed price, allowing spending to spiral far beyond what officials originally promised. The annexation study alone has cost 1,141% more than the public was told, with total payments to the firm exceeding $384,000 — and counting.
The way these contracts were handled raises serious concerns about transparency and possible violations of Mississippi’s Open Meetings Act.
A Contract Approved in Secret
In November of 2021, the Board met privately, using “potential litigation regarding annexation” as their justification. During that closed-door meeting, the Board discussed and approved a new contract for an annexation study — a financial decision that should have been debated in public.
Mississippi’s Open Meetings Act, sometimes referred to as a “Sunshine Law,” exists to prevent government bodies from making these kind of backroom deals. The law allows executive sessions for certain issues, such as legal disputes or personnel matters, but engaging a consultant firm does not typically qualify. No explanation has been provided as to why this contract was discussed and approved outside of public view.
The motion to approve the contract behind closed doors was made by Alderman Jennifer Burgess and unanimously approved by the Board.
Hiding a Second Contract in the Consent Agenda
Just three weeks later, the Board approved a second contract with the same firm, this time for comprehensive planning. Instead of a public debate on the matter, the contract was buried in the consent agenda, a list of everyday housekeeping items passed with a single vote and little to no public discussion.
This deliberate maneuver ensured that the contract sailed through without debate or public awareness. While the annexation contract had already been approved in a secret meeting, the comprehensive plan contract avoided scrutiny altogether.
No Fixed Price, Unlimited Spending
The Board was initially told the annexation study would cost $20,000 and the comprehensive plan $75,000, but neither contract included a cap on spending. Instead, the agreements allowed for hourly billing, leading to runaway costs.
To date, the city has paid Slaughter & Associates $384,713.36—a 305% increase over the highest estimates. The annexation study alone has cost 1,141% more than what was presented to the public. And the payments are still ongoing, with the city sending another $22,000 just last month.
Aldermen Claim They Didn’t Know
Alderman Rickey Authement, who serves on the city’s Finance Committee, admitted he never realized the spending had exceeded estimates. He said the docket of claims, a monthly report of city expenditures, does not provide enough detail for aldermen to track spending against original contract amounts.
“The docket of claims doesn’t have detailed listings,” Authement said. “It doesn’t say Slaughter & Associates was paid this much out of an expected total of this much. It just lists a generic payment to a consultant firm.”
Other aldermen expressed similar concerns but declined to go on record. None expressed knowledge of the contracts they voted to approve being open ended.
Was This a Violation of the Open Meetings Act?
Mississippi’s Open Meetings Act is meant to keep government decisions transparent. While executive sessions are allowed in limited circumstances, approving a consulting contract in secret does not meet the usual legal standard. The law explicitly prohibits using executive sessions to hide financial decisions involving taxpayer dollars.
Additionally, the decision to bury the second contract in the consent agenda ensured zero public debate on an agreement that ended up costing far more than expected.
What Can Taxpayers Do?
With payments still being made on these contracts, the final cost could climb even higher. Residents and local watchdogs are now questioning:
- Why was a taxpayer-funded contract approved in an executive session?
- Why was the second contract hidden in the consent agenda instead of discussed openly?
- Why did the Board approve agreements with no fixed price, exposing taxpayers to unlimited spending?
- What steps will the city take to prevent this from happening again?
If residents believe the Open Meetings Act was violated, they can file a complaint with the Mississippi Ethics Commission. Additionally, a financial audit could be requested to track how much has been paid — and how much more the city plans to spend.
Ocean Springs officials may have approved these contracts in the dark, but taxpayers deserve answers in broad daylight.
