Statement on the City of Jackson Water Authority Governance Structure (HB 1677 - 2026)
- Zakiya Summers
- 1 day ago
- 2 min read
Mississippi is at a critical juncture in determining the future of Jackson’s water system—one of the most essential public infrastructure systems in our state. While I agree that a long-term governance structure must be in place following the completion of the third-party manager’s work, I have grave concerns about the bill sent to the Governor.
As currently structured, the legislation grants the State majority control over the City of Jackson Water Authority Board. That decision fundamentally shifts power away from the people who rely on, pay for, and are directly impacted by this system every single day. Water is not a partisan issue. It is a basic human necessity, and its governance should reflect accountability to the residents it serves.
Placing majority control in the hands of the State risks entangling critical operational decisions in politics, bureaucracy, and confusion. We cannot afford a governance model that dilutes local accountability or slows down decision-making for a system that already requires urgent, competent, and responsive leadership.
That is why I offered an amendment during conference negotiations to establish a three-member board designed to balance authority, strengthen oversight, and ensure transparency. My proposal included:
A mayoral appointee, confirmed by the City Council
A gubernatorial appointee, confirmed by the Senate
A member elected directly by residents within the service area
This structure was intentional. It ensures shared responsibility between the State and the City, while also giving ratepayers—those who fund the system—a direct voice in its governance. That is a fundamental principle of fairness and good governance.
Additionally, my amendment required board members to possess relevant expertise in areas such as water systems, engineering, utility management, and environmental compliance. Jackson’s water challenges are technical and operational—they demand qualified leadership, not political appointments without subject-matter competence. Equally important, the amendment reinforced transparency through compliance with the Mississippi Open Meetings Act and Public Records Act, ensuring that decisions are made in the light of day and with public trust at the forefront.
The version of the bill that has been sent forward falls short of these principles. It risks creating a structure where accountability is unclear, decision-making is politicized, and the voices of Jackson residents are diminished.
We all agree: something must come next after the third-party management period ends. But “something” cannot mean “anything.” The governance structure we put in place must be durable, transparent, and rooted in the best interests of the people—not convenience or control.
Jackson deserves a water system that works—and a governance structure that reflects fairness, competence, and accountability. I remain committed to working with all stakeholders to ensure that whatever comes next truly serves the people of Jackson and restores confidence in this critical system.
