The Board of Aldermen won’t get to sue for the right to appoint a new St. Louis sheriff.
A St. Louis judge has dismissed a legal effort by the board to intervene in a lawsuit over whether or not the mayor has the sole authority to appoint a new sheriff.
In a Friday decision, Circuit Judge Thomas McCarthy ruled that the board and President Megan Green can’t file lawsuits separate from the city or be sued as their own entities. Only the city counselor’s office can file suits on behalf of the city, according to the ruling.
“In this case, there is no statutory authorization under which the Board of Aldermen of the City of St. Louis can sue or be sued,” McCarthy wrote. “In addition, the Charter does not provide for the Board of Aldermen to sue or be sued.”
Alfred Montgomery was removed from office as sheriff last month after a judge ruled he had neglected his official duties. A different judge appointed former St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden Jr. interim sheriff in October while Montgomery was jailed for violating his bond in a separate federal case.
Over the past several weeks, the city, Board of Aldermen and state have been involved in a three-way battle over who has the power to appoint a sheriff. State lawmakers argue Gov. Mike Kehoe has the power, while Mayor Cara Spencer has argued her office has the authority.
The board has cited precedent, including when it filled sheriff vacancies in the 1970s prior to an election. Missouri law states county commissions are responsible for scheduling special elections if the vacancy occurs more than nine months before the general election. The board’s argument is that its members, along with the mayor and the comptroller’s office, should make that decision together.
The ruling was issued days after McCarthy got the state, city and board to enter into a consent agreement to pause fighting. A different St. Louis judge said it was too early to decide who has the authority to select the next sheriff because the order to remove Montgomery from office won’t be final until Jan. 22.
McCarthy said in his ruling that he would review the board’s arguments as amicus briefs, which are statements from parties that are not directly involved in the case.
