By Billy Davis

Supervisors were advised Monday that Panola County government may see a “brief window” for candidates to qualify to run in the coming county elections for supervisor. 

The heads-up advice came from board attorney Bill McKenzie, who cited back-and-forth conversations with attorneys involved in ongoing litigation over redistricting.

Panola County remains entangled in a lawsuit filed by the NAACP, which sued Panola and other Mississippi counties seeking to suspend the March 1 qualifying deadline.

The March 1 deadline came before counties were expected to finalize boundary lines based upon population shifts within supervisor districts.

Panola supervisors, as expected, finalized boundary changes in late March that affected all five districts. The new boundary lines have since been approved by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Panola also hired a consulting firm and an Oxford law firm to navigate redistricting requirements, which further ensured the federal government would approve the county’s redistricting plan. 

Still, even with federal approval, the lawsuit continues in U.S. District Court.

As the case lingers, McKenzie is in contact with attorneys representing Panola County as well attorneys representing the NAACP.

He said Monday the plaintiff’s attorney contacted him via e-mail late last week.

McKenzie informed supervisors that Webster County had reached a settlement with the NAACP, which a federal judge approved but Attorney General Jim Hood — who is fighting the NAACP lawsuit —  objected. The federal judge then vacated the order. 

Despite all the back-and-forth legal maneuvering, “the bottom line is that a brief reopening of the qualifying deadline — I think that’s where this is going,” McKenzie further said. 

After Monday’s board meeting, McKenzie told The Panolian his intent Monday was to make supervisors aware of where the lawsuit is likely headed: a court settlement that briefly allows would-be supervisor candidates to qualify.

“Nobody knows where this is going or what it will look like,” McKenzie said. “I just wanted (supervisors) to know one possible outcome.”