Carthage council declares mayor's veto void, agrees to another special meeting

May 20—CARTHAGE, Mo. — In a special meeting Monday to reconsider Mayor Dan Rife's veto of a resolution setting up his impeachment and the charges he would face in the process, the council declared Rife's veto invalid for parliamentary reasons, according to a recommendation from special counsel Paul Martin, the attorney hired by the city to handle the proceedings.

Martin, who made a surprise appearance at Monday's meeting, told council members that he believes the veto violates state law and the city's charter as well as parliamentary procedure.

He said when Rife turned the gavel over to Mayor Pro Tem Alan Snow on Friday because the proceedings at that meeting pertained to Rife and his office as mayor, he relinquished any authority to do anything else during that meeting, including veto the resolution after it was passed by the council.

"Once the mayor makes himself unavailable to act on this resolution, he has effectively let go of his mayoral authority and the person who takes over in those circumstances is the president pro tem," Martin said. "So as a parliamentary matter, the only person who could veto substitute resolution 2042 was the president pro tem who was presiding over the meeting on Friday. It's the same thing as if the mayor was on vacation. He wouldn't come back from vacation and start vetoing or repealing things that occurred lawfully when he was gone."

Snow then ruled the veto invalid and after questions by council members Lori Leece and Chris Taylor, the council proceeded to set a date for the hearing.

Martin suggested the June 5 date and council member Tiffany Cossey asked if any council members had a conflict.

Martin suggested that the hearing should start as early as possible

Council member Lori Leece said she had an all-day meeting at her work place that would last until 4 p.m.

No other council members talked about a conflict and Cossey made a motion to start the hearing at 8 a.m. on Wednesday, June 5, despite Leece's conflict.

Leece protested, saying she thought Cossey was ignoring her conflict and bulldozing her way to an early hearing no matter who could attend.

Cossey said she felt the hearing could proceed because a majority of council members did not have a conflict and "the process needs to start earlier rather than later."

An initial vote came out 5-4 in favor of holding the meeting at 8 a.m. on June 5, but council member Tom Barlow said he was against setting the meeting that early because Cossey had made no attempt to see what other reasonable times were available.

Eventually the 8 a.m. time was defeated when four council members voted for it, four against and Barlow abstained.

Another special council meeting was set for Tuesday night to consider making the resolution approved on Monday into an ordinance. Martin recommended passing an ordinance including the bill of impeachment as well, in case Rife and his attorney decide to challenge the resolution in court.

He said if the resolution is challenged in court, the city can proceed with the hearing based on the ordinance.

However after the meeting, Martin told reporters there was nothing preventing Rife from appealing both the resolution and ordinance in court and possibly delaying the impeachment proceedings.