Opinion ID: 1885403
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 23

Heading: Whether section 109 violations were committed in appointing commissioners to the authority.

Text: ¶ 75. Falco cites as error that the circuit court ruled against it on this issue because the bill of exceptions was devoid of any evidence to support the claim of a conflict under article 4, section 109 of the Mississippi Constitution. ¶ 76. In its June 22, 1999, order, the circuit court addressed the section 109 issue: The Appellants [Falco] also appeal the appointment of the Commissioners for the Airport Authority by the Mayor and Board of Alderman [sic]. The Appellants allege that two (2) of the appointed members of the Airport Authority Commission are constitutionally barred from serving on the Commission. The allegations as alleged are not supported by any evidence before the Court.... Without evidence to the contrary the Court gives deference to the legality of the governing body's appointments. Therefore the Court finding no evidence of an illegal appointment, hereby dismisses said appeal. Falco had failed in the bill of exceptions to name the persons supposedly in conflict. ¶ 77. Falco argues that the circuit court heard from the Board's counsel, who admitted the conflict in open court. We repeat that evidence outside the bill of exceptions is not to be considered by the circuit court. Wilkinson County, 767 So.2d at 1011. ¶ 78. Falco's objection that the circuit court effectively rendered it impossible to sue for a section 109 violation is adequately refuted by our case law, which includes various examples of parties' managing to sue under section 109. See, e.g., Hinds Cmty. Coll. Dist. v. Muse, 725 So.2d 207 (Miss.1998); Moore ex rel. Benton County v. Renick, 626 So.2d 148 (Miss.1993); Towner v. Moore ex rel. Quitman County Sch. Dist., 604 So.2d 1093 (Miss.1992). ¶ 79. This assignment of error is thus without merit.