I think this just reiterates the fact that Knox County voters should support candidates that support term limits. Why let the same jackasses that got us in this mess choose the next leaders of our community? And yes this even means the Beaners shurf prince charming.

I think the law works this way -- that appointments serve until the next scheduled election. That could be November, if the court acts soon enough. I admit that I'm not certain of this, and think it's a long shot unless the court decides to make it happen, but I would love to see some clarification from someone with actual knowledge who is not pushing an agenda.

And again, I reiterate that it would be great sport to see 10 commissioners coming to nine unanimous votes to fill nine appointments. Unless I am missing something, if all the incumbents are re-elected and they are all given the boot, there would be nine Republicans and one Democrat (Tank Strickland)left to do the choosing.

Addendum: I just checked with someone with "actual knowledge," and I'm half right. If the court acts soon enough to get candidates on the ballot before the 45-day cutoff, they will stand for election in November. That means it would have to be done very early in September -- tough, but not impossible, since the Court handed down the Bailey decision within nine days of hearing arguments, and will certainly be aware of the urgency of this matter, too. The parties would have to act quickly, too. It will be a fractious good time, and I'd look for lots of Independent candidates and write-ins.

What I'm wrong about is the number of commission votes needed to appoint. I'm told it's only a majority of the commissioners actually serving -- that means six votes would do it. In fact, depending on how far-raching this decision is, it could mean that six commissioners could choose most of our officeholders -- IF the incumbents are elected.

And the mayor has nothing to do with the process. Nominations come from the commission, so it's all on them.