Anna Wolfe

The Clarion-Ledger

An alleged sex scandal involving Mayor Tony Yarber has some residents of Jackson prophesying the various possible outcomes.

In her federal lawsuit filed Thursday, Yarber's former assistant Kimberly Bracey tells a story of sexual coercion, harassment and inappropriate parties attended by the mayor and his staff. While the implications of the claims are wide-ranging, much depends on factors yet to be established.

Officials blocked information to the public in a city council meeting called Tuesday after city councilmen were forced to enter executive session. After two hours of meeting privately, the council announced that they will seek outside counsel to litigate this matter and recessed until Friday.

Defendants in the suit include both the city and Yarber as an individual, not in his capacity as mayor. But the suit also implicates the city attorney, making this particular litigation an "ethical minefield," as described by Hinds County Board Attorney Pieter Teeuwissen, Jackson's former attorney.

RELATED: Former Jackson employee claims Mayor Yarber sexually harassed her

Jackson leaders have several decisions to make in the aftermath of these allegations. First, the city must identify if it has the necessary insurance, Employment Practices Liability Insurance, which could provide legal counsel without forcing the city to dip into its own funds. If the city does not have this protection, officials must find money within the already cash-strapped budget.

Yarber's spokesperson Shelia Byrd could not answer Tuesday whether the city has this insurance or whether Yarber possesses any public surety bonds that could potentially pay for his legal expenses. She said she forwarded the question to the legal department.

Additionally, the lawsuit presents a fairly obvious conflict of interest for the City Attorney's Office. The complaint alleges City Attorney Monica Joiner, the plaintiff's roommate at one time, sought a sexual relationship with the mayor. Another recently filed lawsuit alleging racial discrimination in the city workplace implicates Joiner.

"The first step would be to get independent legal counsel to defend against these very serious lawsuits and give an unbiased assessment of what’s happened," said Councilman Melvin Priester. “There’s a conflict of interest here between the mayor, the city and the city attorney because of the facts alleged in these two lawsuits."

This puts the city council in a unique position, considering the administration, not the councilmen, typically deal with the city's pending litigation. Since the attorney's office is likely conflicted out, the council has a greater role in determining how to proceed in defending the city.

"We don’t know that the interest of the mayor and the city are synonymous," Teeuwissen said.

Conflicting relationships are not a new phenomenon in Mississippi's capital. In Bracey's harassment case itself, the family relationships between Jackson employees might have played a role in Bracey's ability to seek help.

Jackson's Personnel Management director, tasked with protecting the city's employees from unfair treatment, is Denise McKay, kin to one of Yarber's top administrators. McKay is a sister to Jackie Anderson-Woods, Yarber's chief-of-staff and one of the staffers listed in the lawsuit as attending a strip club with the mayor.

Additionally, Special Assistant to the City Attorney James Anderson is the cousin to both women.

Bracey told The Clarion-Ledger that she reached out to McKay to address harassment by Anderson-Woods, whom Bracey accuses in the lawsuit of threatening to fire her. McKay asked another employee to handle the situation, Bracey said, but the harassment continued.

Before the council entered executive session Tuesday, McKay said that EEOC complaints do not come to her directly and that "anything that deals with a relative, I recuse myself from the process completely."

Officially, McKay directed comment to Byrd, who said Monday evening that the city does not comment on personnel or litigation matters.

Because the mayor is being sued as an individual, Teeuwissen said it is unlikely that the city would pay for Yarber's representation and similarly unlikely that whoever the city hires as outside counsel would also represent Yarber.

"Based on these allegations, I think it would be difficult for the city to find a financial situation which would warrant paying for Mayor Yarber's individual counsel unless Mayor Yarber was exonerated," Teeuwissen said.

So while the city could eventually pay for Yarber's legal fees on the back end, Teeuwissen said, that would require proof of innocence. "If what is alleged is true, they definitely cannot pay for it," he said.

Yarber released a statement Tuesday saying: "My private legal counsel will respond accordingly," indicating he has retained his own attorney.

Plus, the legal arguments in the mayor's defense and the city's defense might not be the same. And the parties might differ on ways to move forward — settling or taking the case to trial.

“We’ve been sued in federal court twice and the council doesn’t have any information about whether these lawsuits are well grounded or not,” Priester said. “But the potential damages in a case like this are huge if there’s merit to these allegations.”

A federal trial would likely not begin until after the mayoral campaign of 2017 and the process could be drawn out for years. A trial could cost the city $100,000 or more in legal fees, whereas a settlement could save the city money.

The Department of Public Safety recently settled a sexual discrimination suit for $75,000, by comparison.

Councilman Tyrone Hendrix called a meeting for Tuesday at 10 a.m. to discuss "litigation matters" and "personnel issues." Typically, the council has used exemptions under the state's Open Meetings Act to hold these kinds of discussions in private. But considering the intensity of the claims, there's pressure to address the allegations in public.

"I think we have an obligation to the public to at least explain the process," Priester said Monday.

Determining how the city will pay for the litigation, Priester said, should be a public conversation. After being stonewalled by members of the administration in Tuesday's meeting, councilmen agreed to enter executive session so that they could get answers from city officials. Only councilwoman Margaret Barrett-Simon opposed the move to executive session.

Local attorney Sam Begley said in a Facebook post Friday that a meeting to discuss the lawsuit should be held in public, because the Open Meetings Act only exempts legal discussions pertaining to "strategy sessions or negotiations." This narrowly defined exemption should not be a factor this early on considering a settlement offer is not yet on the table.

"I cannot see a reason why any of these matters should be discussed in executive session," Begley said.

Contact Anna Wolfe at 601-961-7326 or awolfe@gannett.com. Follow @ayewolfe on Twitter.