What is normally a political &uot;formality&uot; turned into a standoff among Natchez aldermen Tuesday.

Listed on the morning meeting’s agenda was a request by City Clerk Donnie Holloway for a motion to formally adopt the 4.199 millage increase already passed at last week’s public hearing and the city’s final budget. But, when the vote to finalize the millage was taken, it failed 3-2.

Aldermen Joyce Arceneaux, James &uot;Ricky&uot; Gray and Theodore &uot;Bubber&uot; West voted against the motion. Aldermen David Massey and Jake Middleton voted for it.

Ward 3 Alderwoman Sue Stedman, who voted for the tax increase last week, was absent from the meeting to attend a Realtors’ convention.

By state law, municipalities are required to adopt a final budget by Sept. 15. City Attorney Walter Brown reminded the aldermen of the deadline and told them the board had already passed the millage increase.

&uot;This is just a formality,&uot; Brown said.

&uot;It’s been adopted and it’s over with,&uot; he said.

Natchez Mayor F.L. &uot;Hank&uot; Smith — who broke a tie vote on the issue last week — reinforced Brown’s recommendations. &uot;We’re not voting on the millage increase here,&uot; Smith said.

After a brief discussion about a possible special session or trying to reach Stedman, the aldermen voted to recess for five minutes. When they returned, Brown said it was actually not necessary to take a vote to adopt the millage increase because it had already been done at the public hearing. Brown then recommended the previous motion and subsequent vote be striken from the record.

West said it was unfair to ask Arceneaux, Gray and himself to vote in favor of adopting the millage increase, when they had already made it clear they were against it. &uot;I’m not pleased with it, but I’m prepared to work within the framework of the budget that this board passed,&uot; West said.

With West’s vote, the board then voted 3-2 to adopt the final budget for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, which includes the millage increase.

If the budget had not been not finalized, any payment made or received by the city would be illegal, and civil suits could be filed against individual city officials.