The legal saga over a 401(a) plan's "legality" will eventually be settled. But for the clerk of the court and comptroller--either outcome produces a pyrrhic victory so far as I can tell..... |
As I discussed via multiple blog posts way back in June and August, respectively, of last year--the ratcheting up of legal wrangling back and forth by the Clerk's office really does not help the Clerk's case.
It's simple. The 401 a plan is either legal for commissioners--or it isn't.
And a judge will decide this.
And then we can all move forward---- as the legality of the plan is and aways has been the seminal question that needs to be answered so far as I am concerned.
Meanwhile--a bona fide contract approved by the Escambia BCC has been terminated by the clerk (constructively) via her failure to uphold the terms of it by the withholding of payments stipulated within said contract. That's what my issue is and has been from the beginning--I don't take the plan at issue but I jealously guard the powers, rights, and responsibilities of this board, just as constitutional officers like the clerk guard their powers, duties and responsibilities under statute. The passive allowance of this unilateral decimation of a bona fide contract of the BCC by the clerk is bad precedent to set, outside the purview of the clerk, and in very poor form if----as many believe-----the contract and stipulations as to 401 a payments are in fact legal.
But again, that is now in the hands of one judge and a bunch of lawyers, and now even more lawyers(with new lawyers signing up recently to jump on the clerk's side churning up legal bills, fees, costs and $$ invoices the clerk will likely ask us to pay--not unlike orcas and sharks churning the bloody water feeding on a decaying whale carcass out at sea....it's an ugly display. Meanwhile-the legal team the county is utilizing has provided their service pro-bono).
So yes the legality question will get worked out--some lawyers will churn fees and costs others are