Jordan et al. v. Knox County: TERM LIMITS ENFORCED

Fri

Jan 12 2007

01:41 pm

By: R. Neal

Placeholder for discussion of erupting news due out at 3:00 PM. If ny sources are at any meetings or pronouncements and want to phone in a play-by-play let me know and I'll live blog it.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: Michael Silence reports that the word around the KNS newsroom is term limits are valid, and they apply to everybody. Developing....

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: The Tennessee Supreme Court has ruled that the Knox County Charter is INVALID (but in force), and term limits are VALID. Full text of the ruling here. More as events unfold...

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: The Beanster reports that County Mayor Ragsdale will hold a news conference at 4 PM. General consensus at the moment is that the ruling means all term limited officials (including the Sheriff) must be replaced.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: The Knoxville News Sentinel files this report:

Sheriff Tim Hutchison, eight of 19 county commissioners and other officeholders must leave office under a ruling issued today by the Tennessee Supreme Court.

The court upheld two-term limits approved by voters in 1994 for all government officials except court clerks and school board members. Politicians who have served more than two terms therefore must leave office.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: From a comment by CL below on replacement of term limited officials:

"Article VII, section 2 provides that “[v]acancies in county offices shall be filled by the county legislative body, and any person so appointed shall serve until his successor is elected at the next election occurring after the vacancy is qualified.” See State ex rel. Winstead v. Moody, 596 S.W.2d 811, 812 (Tenn. 1980)."

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: From the KNS report cited above on the Knox County officials affected by the ruling:

Affected officeholders include [Sheriff Tim] Hutchison, Register of Deeds Steve Hall, Trustee Mike Lowe, County Clerk Mike Padgett and commissioners Mark Cawood, John Griess, John Mills, Diane Jordan, Larry Clark, Billy Tindell, Phil Guthe and John Schmid.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: By way of KAG in comments, WBIR files this report with interpretation of the replacement process.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: Betty Bean files this report from the scene of County Mayor Ragsdale's press conference (or more accurately on her way to the Bistro with Frank Cagle after the press conference, with apologies if I misquoted her):

- No time frame has been set for appointing new officials to replace term-limited officeholders, but the intent is "sooner rather than later."

- There is some question as to the order of the appointments, i.e. all at once or County Commission first. The thinking is that it is appropriate for County Commission to appoint the new County Commission and let them appoint the other replacement officeholders.

- Rumor is that outgoing commissioners have already lined up political allies or relatives as successors. It is also believed that there are already deals in place to replace Democrats with Democrats and Republicans with Republicans.

- Mayor Ragsdale had his personal attorney Bud Gilbert at his side instead of Knox County Law Director John Ownings.

- The biggest dogfight will revolve around replacing Sheriff Tim Hutchison. The two names that have surfaced as leading contenders are JJ Jones and Tom Spangler, with Spangler possibly having the better shot.

Betty Bean will have lots more with full and complete coverage in the upcoming Halls Shopper.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE: Knox County Administrator of Elections Greg Mackay says that the ~~August 8th~~ August 2008 election would be the "the next election occurring after the vacancy is qualified" mentioned in state law re. filling vacancies. Meaning that officeholders appointed to fill vacancies created by the term-limits ruling would presumably hold office until then, and then there would be an election.

COUNTY MAYOR REACTION: Message from the office of Knox County Mayor Mike Ragsdale, text of Mayor Ragsdale's remarks at yesterday's press conference.

BLOG COVERAGE: Michael Silence, Terry Frank, Linda Noe, Scott Emge,, David Oatney, Gene Patterson, CE Petro, Brian Hornback. And over at the Blab. BONUS: County Commissioner Mark Harmon blogs from the Sixth Floor.

SATURDAY LOCAL MEDIA ROUNDUP: Knoxville News Sentinel here and here, WATE, WBIR, WVLT.

BACKGROUND: Previous articles and discussion of charter and term limits controversy at KnoxViews.

Summary of ruling:

"In this expedited appeal, the primary issue presented for review is whether Knox County, Tennessee, has a valid governmental charter. A secondary issue is whether a term limits amendment to the county charter should be applied and, if so, to which of the elected county officials. We hold that while Knox County failed to comply with the enabling legislation for instituting a charter form of government, since September 1, 1990, Knox County has been governed under a de facto charter with a county mayor, county commissioners, and other de facto officers. For the reasons set out in this opinion, it is our conclusion that the term limits amendment meets due process guidelines and applies to all elected Knox County Government officials except for the court clerks and the school board member, each of whom is protected by either the state constitution or statute. The judgment of the Knox County Chancery Court, which invalidated both the charter and the amendment, is therefore affirmed in part and reversed in part."

Topics:

R. Neal's blog
Login or register to post comments

opinion probably released here:

Submitted by StaceyDs Cat on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 2:00pm.

(link...)

I googled and found the above link.

Term Limits Upheld!!! first

Submitted by pan on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:09pm.

Term Limits Upheld!!!

first reports, breaking news.

Wow! Where did you hear

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:10pm.

Wow! Where did you hear this?

Michael Silence confirms:

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:12pm.

Michael Silence confirms: Everybody is out!

Boom! Chalk one up for Knox County voters!

Submitted by Scott1202 on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:15pm.

Yes!!!!

here it is

Submitted by StaceyDs Cat on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:16pm.

(link...)

w00t!

Submitted by jah on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:17pm.

w00t!

it applies

Submitted by StaceyDs Cat on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:18pm.

to the county commissioners AND the constitutional officers (clerks, sheriff, etc).

Hooray for rationality!

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:16pm.

Hooray for rationality!

Link

Submitted by Brian A. on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:19pm.

Link.

[Oh, beaten to the punch]

Brian A.
I'd rather be cycling.

I've had tough week. What a

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:20pm.

I've had tough week. What a great ending!

from page 35 of the ruling

Submitted by StaceyDs Cat on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:31pm.

"Despite the irony of their election, and reelection since 1994 and despite the approval of the voters in 2006 after term limits became an issue, the Plaintiff commissioners, the sheriff, the county clerk, the trustee, and the register of deeds are all ineligible for another term."

so the next question is

Submitted by StaceyDs Cat on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:32pm.

when do they get out of office?

This is what they said re when they are out

Submitted by Mark Siegel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:37pm.

The terms of these public servants who are ineligible for another term do not, however, end with the filing of this opinion. Pursuant to article VII, section 5 of the Tennessee Constitution, every officer shall hold office until a successor is elected or appointed and qualified. In order to assure the continuous representation of all of the people of Knox County in local governmental affairs and as a means of preserving, without interruption, the continuation of essential governmental services, those county commissioners and state constitutional officers otherwise precluded from holding the offices to which they were recently elected may continue as de facto officers until their successors are named in accordance with law.

I liked that passage too.

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:38pm.

I liked that passage too.

It looks like officeholders stay in office until they are replaced "in accordance with the law." I believe that means the eligible commissioners appoint replacements for all the ineligible commissioners. What does it mean for the sheriff, register, etc?

Also, I didn't see anything to support the notion that the charter was declared invalid, but I was skimming. It seems they said the charter was incomplete, but it doesn't really matter because the government continued to operate anyway.

TCS said the charter was

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:41pm.

TCS said the charter was invalid de jure, but was de facto valid.

Which I think is the proper ruling.

It says Knox County has been

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:45pm.

It says Knox County has been operating as a "de facto" government but without a valid charter. It cites tons of case law and it's too technical for me.

P.S. It says the lower court ruling is "affirmed in part", meaning the charter is invalid part.

Yes, I think we're seeing

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:54pm.

Yes, I think we're seeing the same thing and describing it differently. I think they are affirming Weaver's opinion that the charter is/was incomplete, but denying that it is therefore invalid. Because the voters have a reasonable expectation of good faith on the part of the charter commission and the officeholders who were supposed to do things like file the charter with the Secretary of State, and because the county operated without challenge under the charter, the charter should be remedied rather than discarded.

But I'll read it more closely.

That makes sense, because

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:57pm.

That makes sense, because just scanning through I don't see any order anywhere to fix it. Maybe it's considered "fixed" now with the last referendum?

Yes, you're right. TCS said

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:03pm.

Yes, you're right. TCS said the charter was invalid de jure because of it's flaws, but was de facto valid because Knox County and Knox County government had operated under it in good faith since 1990.

Here's another good

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:46pm.

Here's another good one:

"While the limitations concept may be worthy, at least in theory, its application to popularly elected individuals, who have demonstrated competence and professionality in their service to the community and who remain the people’s choice for an office, is trying."

Yes, it is trying. Maybe we should work on a real solution to to the problem instead of the brute-force fix term limits amounts to.

now, now, rikki

Submitted by StaceyDs Cat on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:50pm.

lots of people getting ready to lose their "lifestyle," so maybe the court is taking it easy on them. :-)

Diane Jordan

Submitted by D Mac on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:32pm.

Diane Jordan was on WBIR at noon saying she will run for City Council regardless of whether she is ousted from commission. Does she have a chance? What has she done on commission to hang her hat on, so to speak (actually, I wish she would hang up the hats)? I wonder if she can keep her "lifestyle" on council as it was on commission.

Decision is up on the

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:16pm.

Decision is up on the website. I'm just about to read...

I'm in a hurry

Submitted by mpower1952 on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:32pm.

Please just tell me if John Greis is out.

Be a blessing to someone today.

Griess

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:36pm.

is out.

From what I read, term

Submitted by CL on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:34pm.

From what I read, term limits apply to everyone except the 2 court clerks and members of the school board.

Thank you supreme court

Submitted by Knoxquerious on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:40pm.

Any guesses how long the remaining commission will take to fill the voids?

Who will be new members?

This ruling only opens the door for more backroom shenanigans to replace the outgoing.

My guess for sheriff -- Ole JJ, might as well be Tim though.

"This ruling only opens the

Submitted by knoxvegas99 on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:08pm.

"This ruling only opens the door for more backroom shenanigans to replace the outgoing."

Ain't it the truth?

What is happening behind closed doors?

Submitted by Number9 on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:40pm.

Knox County Mayor Ragsdale will have a news conference at 4:00 PM. I believe WNOX FM will carry that news conference.

Dave Foulk is discussing the issues on 100.3 now.

WNOX News Talk 100 is where

Submitted by pan on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:44pm.

WNOX News Talk 100 is where I heard the breaking news, btw. After Fox News reports and in between umpteen commercials.

Foulk's concerns about

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:33pm.

Foulk's concerns about backroom deals to replace the commissioners are valid de jure, but irrelevant de facto. County commission already operates in backrooms in service of developers.

Thanks, Rikki

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:49pm.

concerns about backroom deals to replace the commissioners are valid de jure, but irrelevant de facto. County commission already operates in backrooms in service of developers.

You just made me snort water out my nose.

Big Talker

Submitted by rocketsquirrel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:52pm.

Big Talker (100.3) just said (4:51 pm) Mike Hammond and Phil Guthe and a couple of others want to call for an election.

Chapman Highway shoulder decor

Submitted by The Dude on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 5:23pm.

Please don't tell me Steve Hall is term limited! I really, really enjoyed seeing his 1 million plus campaign signs littered all over SoKno.

Here's how they will be

Submitted by CL on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:49pm.

Here's how they will be replaced.

"Article VII, section 2 provides that “[v]acancies in county offices shall be filled by the county legislative body, and any person so appointed shall serve until his successor is elected at the next election occurring after the vacancy is
qualified.” See State ex rel. Winstead v. Moody, 596 S.W.2d 811, 812 (Tenn. 1980)."

So basically, the remaining commissioners get to decide who holds all the vacated offices? Or will the leaving commissioners get in on that decision too? They will serve until their successors are chosen and sworn in.

Vacancy?

Submitted by jah on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:01pm.

Which begs the question: are the term-limited officials now vacancies? Or are they defacto not vacancies and we have to wait till the next election? Or were they technically vacant at the last election, meaning they're actually nothing now?

or or or

"The terms of these public

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:03pm.

"The terms of these public servants who are ineligible for another term do not, however, end with the filing of this opinion. Pursuant to article VII, section 5 of the Tennessee Constitution, every officer shall hold office until a successor is elected or appointed and qualified."

So, no, it would not seem they are technically vacancies at this time.

So, no, it would not seem

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:06pm.

So, no, it would not seem they are technically vacancies at this time.

That's the way I read it too. But these folks have been declared ineligible to fill the positions they are in, so that would trigger their replacement in accordance with state law.

I think.

That's the way I read it,

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:09pm.

That's the way I read it, too. Plus they specifically say their terms do not end with this ruling.

http://www.wbir.com/news/loca

Submitted by kag on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:17pm.

(link...)

some updates/clarifications i find interesting

Wow

Submitted by jah on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:21pm.

So the Commission gets to decide just about everything, once they decide who the commission is.

I was listening to

Submitted by Paul Witt on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:24pm.

I was listening to Ragsdale's press conference and couldn't hear the first question from a reporter. Did anyone hear it? It seemed to be on the method of replacement.

Nevermind. The guy on WNOX

Submitted by Paul Witt on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:28pm.

Nevermind. The guy on WNOX just said that Ragsdale expects the Commission to appoint replacements. That's just not right. Letting people that are term-limited vote on their own replacements... no thanks.

Nevermind. The guy on WNOX

Submitted by Number9 on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:33pm.

Think there will be a lawsuit over that?

Ragsdale said he wanted the

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:39pm.

Ragsdale said he wanted the law director's input, but expected it would be the 11 eligible commissioners replacing the ineligible office holders.

shorter Supreme Court

Submitted by rocketsquirrel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:45pm.

shorter Supreme Court: county office holders actually work for the voters.

I think what will be illustrative is the "process" by which the eligible commissioners nominate and appoint replacements. One would hope that would be an open process. I wonder if they would be precluded by law by going ahead and voting to hold a special election.

Nevermind. The guy on WNOX

Submitted by Andy Axel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 7:11pm.

Nevermind. The guy on WNOX just said that Ragsdale expects the Commission to appoint replacements. That's just not right. Letting people that are term-limited vote on their own replacements... no thanks.

I would think that this absolutely requires a special election.

These positions aren't appointed. Letting the mayor pick & choose seems just wrong on it's face.

____________________________

Dirty mouth language -- it's the new black.

touch of gray

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 5:39pm.

Interesting issue you raise in that story, in what order will the replacements be named? Should the commission refortify itself to full strength before replacing the administrative positions, or would that be tantamount to stacking the vote?

Who can nominate candidates? Would citizen petitions nominating individuals be given any consideration, even if there is no formal role for petitions in the controlling language? Perhaps commission's first move should be to define ground rules for nominations.

There are gray areas still. The decision says the sitting officeholders remain in power, implying they can vote, but can they vote for their own replacement? Obviously the outgoing commissioners can vote on regular business at the February meeting.

This surely sounds odd coming from someone as irreverant as me, but I actually think the best solution to that dilemma is to give the outgoing commissioners the respect afforded by both their status as valid holders of their seat and as experienced commissioners and allow them to choose for themselves which votes to participate in and which to defer.

Perhaps the legal scholars can find something to help us through the gray. If not, commission should take its time and set ground rules. It took sixteen years for this crap to manifest itself, so there is no point in getting in a hurry all of a sudden. Last year's efforts to rush to meet immutable election deadlines resulted in more damage than resolution, so the emphasis should be on getting it right, not rushed.

Power plays

Submitted by D Mac on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:18pm.

This is how it will play out in the next few hours to weeks, IMO.

Ragsdale will scramble to appoint people he knows are loyal to him. He will somehow try to get whatever commission body (with or without term limited members) that he feels would make the decision he wants to vote or bless his choices.

Individual commission members, both termed and those not termed, will each vie for what they feel is IN THEIR BEST INTEREST. The termed ones will try to select their replacememts. The rest of the commission will work to make sure there is a decent commission to continue the work.

We, the people, need to start now for a special election or to have this be addressed at the next scheduled election.

Nevertheless, it will be a real mess for awhile and much fun to watch.

It would seem a bit perverse

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:05pm.

It would seem a bit perverse to allow commissioners to simultaneously be both vacant and present to vote. Unless of course the commissioner has a degree in quantum mechanics.

It would seem a bit perverse

Submitted by Number9 on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:11pm.

It would seem a bit perverse to allow commissioners to simultaneously be both vacant and present to vote. Unless of course the commissioner has a degree in quantum mechanics.

Pretty good.

I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot of political quantum mechanics today.

Five minutes to the Ragsdale Press conference. Might want to record this one.

It's go time...

Submitted by Number9 on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 3:54pm.

Listening to Mike Hammond on WNOX has been fascinating. The game is on to determine how the County Commissioners will be replaced. My psychic ability tells me there may be more lawsuits.

The choices are that there will be a special election, probably in the next election cycle this year for City of Knoxville Elections.

The second choice is that the remaining 11 Knox County Commissioners will elect replacements for the term limited Commissioners.

A new wrinkle is that the full Knox County Commission will select the replacement Commissioners. Expect fireworks if this is the game plan.

If you think this is over you would be mistaken, it has just begun.

I thought his name was Mike

Submitted by bizgrrl on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 7:34pm.

Listening to Mike Hammond on WNOX has been fascinating.

I thought his name was Mike Hamilton?

Oh, shit. Phil Fulmer is

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 7:35pm.

Oh, shit. Phil Fulmer is term limited, too?

(And what about Pat Summit? Is the Apocalypse upon us?)

Brian Hornback?

Submitted by D Mac on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 7:52pm.

So which commissioner would name Brian Hornback as his successor?

So which commissioner would

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 7:57pm.

So which commissioner would name Brian Hornback as his successor?

Ohmigod, don't spoil the nice day I'm having?

Hornback is strangely silent

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 7:59pm.

Hornback is strangely silent on the current drama. Must be in some backroom smoking a cigar or something.

A quiet Hornback

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 8:00pm.

Yeah, I checked to see what he had to say as well. Maybe he's just not had time to post.

Interesting stuff at the

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:06pm.

Interesting stuff at the very end:

This opinion is not subject to rehearing under Rule 39 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Clerk is directed to certify this opinion as final and to issue the mandate immediately. Costs are taxed to the Plaintiffs and their sureties, for which execution may issue if necessary.

See this: "The term limits

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:08pm.

See this:

"The term limits amendment, enacted under the de facto charter, meets standards of due process and must be upheld as a component of the governmental unit. Any procedural deficiencies subsequent to its adoption have been resolved."

Do they mean procedureal deficiencies in the charter itself have been resolved?

Ragsdale's press conference

Submitted by Rachel on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 4:51pm.

I can't believe none of the local networks covered this live. They can prempt programming for hours on end if we get thunderstorms, but this doesn't rate as important enough to do so??

Sheesh.

Affected officeholders

Submitted by JaHu on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 5:25pm.

Affected officeholders include [Sheriff Tim] Hutchison

Does this mean Hutchison will still receive his 85 grand a year from this moment on? and does it also mean that the county will also have to pay every sheriff elected after this ruling, 85 grand a year for the rest of their lives, with some possibly serving only one term? If it does, where do I sign up? and by any chance, this doesn't affect the wheel tax, does it? Please say it does!

Adrift in the Sea of Humility

Yeah, pretty sweet deal, eh?

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 5:28pm.

Yeah, pretty sweet deal, eh? I am told, however, that the pension deal was in the works long before term limits showed up on the radar. And personally I think the deputies deserve it, even if it means a windfall for an elected official who just got his walking papers.

Does this mean Hutchison

Submitted by CL on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 5:33pm.

Does this mean Hutchison will still receive his 85 grand a year from this moment on? and does it also mean that the county will also have to pay every sheriff elected after this ruling, 85 grand a year for the rest of their lives, with some possibly serving only one term?

One reason that his pension will be so much has to do with how long he has served with the department.

August 8th sounds like a

Submitted by rikki on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 8:32pm.

August 8th sounds like a county general election date. Is that 8/8/08 or 8/8/07? There are only city elections this year, and those occur in September and November. I think the appointed replacements will serve until the 2008 election winners are sworn in.

Good catch, Rikki. The

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 8:58pm.

Good catch, Rikki. The question was "when is the next election?"

Greg's e-mail says:

"August 08"

I was confused, thinking there was a City election in August of this year that could accommodate the County drama, which is of course not the case at all as you point out. It appears he meant August 2008.

10/'08

Submitted by bill young on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 11:13pm.

my bet on the 11/19 over under is take 19.therefore,10 is the magic number.the first question will be...are commissioners going to vote for process..or vote to fit a process to a candidate?..the next question..the order..if it's the commission first...the term-limited commissioners will have no bearing on the county wide seats.I see no way that there will be a special election,this year.The special general election,to finish the term limited officials terms, will be held in august of '08.futhermore,i see no move to change the date of the '08 tn. presidential primary from feb.therefore,if one or both partys choose a primary to elect nominees..that primary would be held in feb of '08.remember the partys can have a caucus to elect county nominees

We're celebrating over at

Submitted by Les Jones on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 11:36pm.

We're celebrating over at Johniaberry.org, hoping that a new sheriff will help her case.

That's the good news. The bad news is that one of my wife's relatives will be losing his job.

www.lesjones.com

Next Election

Submitted by Greg Mackay on Sat, 2007/01/13 - 10:09am.

Before I start let me remind everyone that I am not "The Decider". As a friend of mine said, I am a glorified clerk. I am just passing on what I am hearing and what I think will happen. The next election is the Farragut election April 10th, 2007. We have two Knoxville elections, Sept 25th and November 6th, 2007. But the consensus yesterday was that the next County election is Thursday, August 7th, 2008.

If there is a primary (and that is up to the parties) as of now it is set for February 12th, 2008. The State Legislature could change that date. The County Commission could chose to have a seperate primary. But if they couple it with the Presidential Primary then the state pays for the election. So as of now we are looking at a Feb. 12th primary and a August 7th, 2008 general.

Just to keep things riled up let me throw out a thought. Let's say that somebody has the legal authority to call a special election. How will the party nominees be chosen? Do you think the parties are not going to want to present nominees for these offices? How will they be chosen?

Do you want them chosen by caucus?
Or are you talking about two special elections? A primary and a general?

Greg Mackay
Knox County Administrator of Elections

"Do you want them chosen by

Submitted by CBT on Sun, 2007/01/14 - 6:45pm.

"Do you want them chosen by caucus?"

I think a caucus is a great idea. It can be done on short notice, doesn't cost the county any money and we get one nominee from each party for people to vote on. Note the last part...for people to vote on.

However, my guess is Commission will be appointing all these folks, one way or another. For one, I don't know if they can vote to do it by a special election and for two, I can't imagine a majority giving up the power to appoint.

New Sherriff comin' to town...

Submitted by PolliUsual on Fri, 2007/01/12 - 11:12pm.

So, who's it going to be?

Tom Spangler - Hutchison Jr.
JJ Jones - Ragsdale & Co
Bobby Waggoner - a 'Dark Horse'?

Who knows, it might even be fun.

Some questions

Submitted by CL on Sat, 2007/01/13 - 11:47am.

I have a couple of questions. What about Randy Nichols? What about the judges? I didn't see anything in the KNS about Nichols but it was mentioned that the judges would not be removed. I didn't see that in the ruling handed down yesterday.

From the decision: Although

Submitted by Johnny Ringo on Sat, 2007/01/13 - 11:52am.

From the decision:

Although not at issue, the district attorney general, while holding “an elected office” in Knox County, is a state
official. Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-42-101(3)© (Supp. 2006). The public defender, an office which is also not at issue, holds a similar status. Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-14-208 (Supp. 2002). Although with a jurisdiction limited to Knox County, criminal court judges, circuit court judges, and chancellors
are state officials. Tenn. Code Ann. § 17-1-203 (1994). General sessions judges and juvenile court judges, if not otherwise protected by the terms of the ballot or the 1994 amendment, are excluded by the enabling statute. Tenn. Code Ann. § 5-1-204(f)(1); see Spurlock v. Sumner County, 42
S.W.3d 75, 79 (Tenn. 2001) (general sessions judges and juvenile court judges are county offices).

Time to stagger?

Submitted by Indya on Sat, 2007/01/13 - 4:59pm.

Wouldn't it be nice if we took this opportunity to stagger terms for County Commissioners. Anyone who is elected to Commission in 2008 could serve a 4-year term. So 11 Commission positions would be up for election in 2010 and 8 again in 2012. Seems to me that would satisfy both the charter and state law. City Council and School Board have staggered terms and it does provide for some continuity, which is more important now that we have term limits on two of those bodies.

That right there is some

Submitted by rikki on Sat, 2007/01/13 - 8:48pm.

That right there is some creative, forward-looking thinking.

Staggered Terms et al

Submitted by DavidD on Sun, 2007/01/14 - 8:15pm.

It should be noted that the Charter Review Committee discussed this idea in depth and a proposed amendment that did stagger the terms was written and then withdrawn because of the cumbersome nature of making the change, the controversy involved and the lack of support for the idea. The Review Committee also had the opportunity to vote on the inclusion of an amendment that would have given order to the present kaos. Several of us on the Committee believed from our research of both the State Constitution and the Supreme Court's opinion in the Bailey case that what has happened was very likely. We believed it in the best interest of the people of Knox County to prevent exactly what is taking place now - where there would be great confustion and controversy over every detail of the result and that the sitting members of County Commission would in fact essentially chose the government of Knox County until the next election cycle. Of course the vested interests saw to it that our amendment was defeated without giving the people an opportunity to add clarity and reason should the Court decide as it did. It would have also clarified whether an office holder after serving 2 terms could hold a different elected office and also the question of what constituted a full term for the purpose of term limits. At present this is vague at best. This amendment fixed the remaining deficiency in the Charter as we saw it which was clarity on term limits should the Court say they were valid. We have those presently in charge (i.e. County Commission and fee office holdrs)to thank for preventing this clarification.

Richard Beeler on "Inside Tennessee"

Submitted by Number9 on Mon, 2007/01/15 - 11:21am.

Throughout this entire term limits episode Richard Beeler has made more sense than anyone I have listened to.

Part II

More from "Inside Tennessee" on the Charter mess and term limits

Submitted by Number9 on Mon, 2007/01/15 - 2:44pm.

Round table discussion on "Inside Tennessee" with Frank Cagle, Susan Richardson Williams, and Jack McElroy. Some interesting comments from Susan that may surprise you.

Part II

Discussing:

Incessant Political Fund Raising (2 replies)
Guess the Democrats should have run a man? (1 reply)
Trump Cabinet (26 replies)
What about the Social Security Fairness Act? (1 reply)
What are recess appointments and how could Trump use them to fill his Cabinet? (1 reply)
Dismantling the Department of Education? (3 replies)
Nomination for Director of National Intelligence a security risk? (8 replies)
Covenant Health Park luxury condos now up for sale, ranging from $500k to $2 million (2 replies)
Millions at risk of losing health insurance after Trump's victory (9 replies)
Is it about the bro's stupid? (7 replies)
Dozens of threats made against Knox County Schools. Students afraid. (9 replies)
WBIR investigates Knoxville's Greyhound bus experience (5 replies)

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Wire Reports

Local Media

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

Comment viewing options

Discussing:

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Wire Reports

Local Media

Lost Medicaid Funding

Search and Archives

TN Progressive

Nearby:

Beyond:

At large:

Government

About