Live- April 28th Commission Meeting

• 35 minutes just to make modifications to the agenda...
  
  
• Noise over approval of the contract for the new school superintendent. Even though CC approves the contract and provides an overall school budget, it really doesn't have the authority to set the salary or tell the schools how to spend their budget. Clearly this contract will make it difficult for the school board to get a budget increase in this tight year, in the eyes of some commissioners.
  
  
• South Knox school will go out for open bid, with right to reject the results if they are not deemed satisfactory. I have heard of at least one developer that is interested.
  
  
• Libraries will take over maintenance and operations from PBA, in hopes of saving about $1M.
  
  
• Passed resolution to ignore unfunded mandates from the State Legislature. Also voted to urge State officials to comply with same standards (e.g., Open Meetings Act) as those affecting Knox County.
  
  
• Resolution opposing toll roads in Knox County. Some noise that the State wanted to come down and explain why they wanted to do their study. Too bad, CC sez, we don't want a bloody toll road. Motion passes to light applause.
  
  
• Motion to ask Fansler for an advisory opinion on the Open Meetings Act. John Owings, as in the Committee meetings, continues to warn that this is a bad idea. Resolution withdrawn.
  
  
• John Owings noted that the law office has spent 10 hours on an issue Moore brings up about someone who was turned down for a $730 business tax license (apparently hung up due to a successorship issue and unpaid back taxes from the previous owner). Moore is mad because the clerk's office won't return his calls. Apparently the new business owner is using the same address, business name (Knoxville Pre-Owned Center), and phone number. Apparently the Clerk's office feels this is an attempt to avoid due taxes and is denying the license.
  
  
• Audit meeting set for May 19th.
  
  
• Ordinance to amend Charter Committee process to allow CC to be part of appointment process (rather than just the Mayor) passes first reading. Ordinance to change timeline for Charter Amendments also passes first reading.
  
  
• Charter Petition Committee proposals:

1. Reducing number of signatures- passes second reading
2. Reducing size of commission, adding two at-large positions- Scott Moore moves to withdraw, with considerable support from other commissioners. Hammond says one person can't do the job, but he's not against people voting on it. Trouble with school board alignment issue, as some school board members would have to move to stay within their elected districts. Stackhouse is raising lots of reapportionment issues (2010), as well as future civil rights lawsuits. The school board provision is problematic. KCP is offering to drop the school board alignment provision (Don Parnell). Current motion is to withdraw (after Moore calls the question cut off Larry Smith's input!). Motion to withdraw passes, so no action on this.
   
3. Conflict of Interest- attempt to withdraw fails, motion to approve fails 12-6-1 (Lambert passes). THIS WAS A NO-BRAINER.
   
4. Inspector General- Fails, Pinkston, VDF, Wright, Ballard, Lambert, Leuthold, Davis, Ivan Harmon, Strickland + 1 other voting against.
5. Anti-Nepotism- Fails. Against: Ivan Harmon, Davis, Leuthold, Lambert, Moore, VDF, Pinkston. THAT ONE WAS A NO-BRAINER.
6. Qualifications (No County Employees on Commission)- Against: Pinkston, Moore, Davis, Ivan Harmon +1 other i didn't catch, Lambert passes. Leuthold recuses. FAILS.
7. Conflict of Interest for County Commission. Against: I Harmon, Davis, Leuthold, Lambert ,Moore, VDF. Pinkston recuses. FAILS.

How does anyone square voting against anti-nepotism and against conflicts of interest????

Tonight left me totally speechless.

Live Blogging- Intergovernmental Committee Meeting April 21

I had commented before the Committee meeting this AM that things would be going smoother and faster, with some of the more contentious things out of the way. Of course, I jinxed the whole thing. Less than 10 minutes in, Lumpy Lambert proposed a resolution in memorium of Charlton Heston, a "strong defender of the Second Amendment." Were Charlton Heston a Knoxvillian, I could see this, but I have to agree with Davis that this opens the door to all kind of non-Knoxvillian memorium resolutions. The other commissioners apparently wanted to pick their battles with Lumpy, and it was let to pass. Fortunately, not too much time was wasted.

South Knox High School site- vote to maintain status quo (no demolition).

Motion to ban cellphones from meetings- voted to deny recommendation. Particular opposition from Hammond (business) and Davis/Defreese (child care issues).

Motion to require Fansler to appear before Commission and "explain" deemed an inappropriate bad idea and withdrawn. Still, lots of discussion and complaints about the inability for commissioners to contact each other outside of announced meeting.

(As unfair or unreasonable as it seems... we have to live with it. It's like when your boss gives you unreasonable demands, you can complain all you want, but at the end of the day, you have to find a way to work within the parameters you are given. Announce a meeting with your co-district-commissioner every two weeks at Long's Drugstore or the equivalent if that's what it takes to have enough time to collaborate on district issues.).

Mayor Ragsdale will have an address at Hardin Valley High School no May 14th, 8:00 am.

Resolution opposing toll roads- easily passed, MacKenzie made a point that while we all oppose the Orange Route as a toll road, a resolution that bans them forever may be too strong.

Modify Process for Charter Review Committee (Davis/Daniels)- Basically, allow the Commission to vote to approve the list of names from the mayor's office to the Charter Review Committee, and to give Commission the right to approve (or turn down) the CRC's final recommendation. Lambert proposes more Commission involvement in actually picking the names (based on the process used for the temporary appointees, taking resumes, interviews, etc). MacKenzie says he opposes changing a process he doesn't see as broken. Passed with recommendation 6-2 for the 4/28 meeting.

Resolution to reduce time frame for putting petitions on ballot- passed w/recommendation.

Charter petition amendments- sent on without recommendation. Amended versions handled by separate vote?

Audit Review Meeting discussion.... motion to postpone to a later date, assuming Finance committee agrees to postpone as well.

DeFreese added a motion to only name buildings and roads after deceased individuals. I agree with this totally, I have seen this kind of thing abused over the last several years (as a political favor).

April 15 Revisions to Charter Petition

The KCP Committee has submitted some improvements to some of the petition documents, summarized here. Attached are links to the new proposals and some comments of mine.

Consistency Amendment- DROPPED.

Executive Branch Streamlining- no proposed changes yet, but the letter refers to keeping the Property Assessor as elected. I support letting either form go to the people for a vote.

Reducing Size of Commission- I don't agree with it, but again, I'm all for letting it come up for healthy debate and a vote. I'd prefer this to be delayed to allow for more debate, but as long as people know what they would be giving up (2 commissioners down to 1.22, and less choice/variety among candidates, in my opinion).

Conflict of Interest Amendments 1 and 2
Amended to define conflict as employee/official, their spouse, and their children living in the same household. Children out of the house (e.g, old enough to enter into contracts), brothers, sisters, etc- No conflict at all! Hogwash. This thing doesn't go far enough for my tastes, but it's a start- let the people vote. Even if it passes, I would bring up a stronger version to close the giant loopholes.

Nepotism
Much better. Includes in-laws, step-relatives, and grand-relatives, and "parent substitutes" (e.g., foster relationships). I'm all for this one now.

Qualifications
The overly broad "compensation...directly or indirectly" has been changed to direct employment, which solves a lot of problems caused by the "indirectly" clause. This one is good to go, and I support it.

Inspector General
Resolution of salary questions.

Don't Forget- Charter Meeting Tonight, West High School

6:30 pm. Unfortunately, I can't be there as I'm at an EPA conference. I'll have some people from my campaign there to gather notes & meet anyone who wants to chat. I'll be curious to see what our temporary commissioners see as the next step.

Interesting note from the EPA conference- I met with a representative of Washington Dept of Ecology that said they are transitioning their car testing program to a car maintenance program, because late model cars are so much cleaner. They feel they are going to get a better bang per buck by ensuring people have proper tire inflation, oil change frequency, tune-ups, etc. It could be that if TDEC looks at the current EPA template air improvement plan (SIP), it may be based on an outdated model. I'll be following up.

Knox County Privacy Policy Needs To Be Amended IMMEDIATELY.

If you've read the news today, you're familiar with the story about the County Mayor requesting e-mail correspondence to Commissioner DeFreese regarding audits.    Clearly, it's a move to intimidate those who would send DeFreese or any other commissioner information, supportive comments, or even tips as to where to find more wrongdoing.

So, we've been having a lively discussion about the Tennessee Open Records Act and its application to this case.   I argued that e-mails from constituents would be private under the TN-ORA:

My quick read of the OMA refers repeatedly to "official correspondence." Correspondence generated BY the elected official is OC. Correspondence TO the elected official is not. If I as a commissioner write notes about a constituent's letter, that's my work product, and would be covered.

This point is easily reinforced by the e-mail section which reads "[email] correspondence OF the employee" and not TO the employee.

Also: 10-7-403. “Public records” defined.
“Public records” within the county shall be construed to mean:
(1) All documents, papers, records, books, and books OF ACCOUNT in all county offices, including..."

No mention of correspondence, which is clearly missing if that was the intent of the original author. Constituent letters are not "documents of account" as they are not documents of policy.

VDF has solid ground to stand and say "make me." I sure as heck would. And I'd say "if you take me to court, I hope you have the good graces WHEN you lose to pay all parties legal fees out of your campaign account instead of wasting more taxpayer money."

Well, I later found this under the Knox County Privacy Policy:

"Any personal information submitted through forms or email from the user is considered public information and may be subject to inspection upon request as governed by the Tennessee Open Records Act."

That's not good.  I'm not sure yet what the history of how this policy was formed, but it needs to be amended IMMEDIATELY.      We must also add specific wording in an ordinance for protection of whistleblowers, protection of private information (SSNs, medical information) that may come in an email to a commissioner, and close the loophole that would allow Commissioners to use private e-mail accounts to send county-related work product that would normally be covered by the Open Records Act.   

Right now, the ORA and the Knox County Policy only work to encourage County Officials to use Yahoo, Gmail, or other personal accounts that provide no accountability.

One could argue that a First Amendment challenge (to be free from retaliation) would sink the policy, but (a) I'm not willing to wait and (b) recent court decisions at the federal level against whistleblowers have weakened the 'free from retaliation' argument enough that we can't bank on it anymore.     

Kickoff Party - Woo hoo!

Thanks again to everyone who came and especially those who helped put this on (Erin, Tanya, Betty, Lisa, Mark, Wilma, etc). The music was great (Jazz Liberation Quartet- if you have a function, these guys are awsome!), and we even had a few brave people dancing. Good conversation, and a good time had by all.

As we mop up and gnaw on the leftovers, we ponder the coming work in the campaign ahead. Those leftover chicken salad croissants will energize us for more door to door meetings ahead.

Notes from EPA conference regarding new ozone standard

• The old (1997) standard not adequate to protect public health, based on > 1700 studies. Clinical studies show evidence of adverse respiratory response in HEALTHY adults at old standard (80 ppb). Yes, even the healthiest adults can suffer health effects at the old standard, so those who argue that the EPA is ramping standards down even though "the air is cleaner than it's ever been" aren't taking into account healthy adults coming down with asthma or other respiratory disorders.
• Studies provide the first evidence linking high ozone to mortality (deaths) in sensitive populations. Previous standard was based just on damaging or debilitating health effects. We can say now that people die due to ground level ozone at the old standard.
  
• High ozone also reduces crop yields and increases susceptibility to disease and insects (e.g., threatens our food production)
• EPA is considering expanding monitoring in areas between 50,000 and 350,000 that do not currently have monitoring. For us, that would include getting some data from the seven neighboring counties that will also be in violation of the new standard (some are in violation already, I suspect, we just don't know it due to lack of monitoring). These include Sevier, Anderson, Blount counties. I've had a number of questions before about the air quality in these counties, and all I could say before is "we don't know, there are no monitors." That could change, but wouldn't happen until after the final rule is promulgated in 2009.