Some on BOE, law director question McIntyre's Broad grant acceptance

Knox County taxpayers are footing the bill for a Knox County Schools hire the county attorney says was conducted improperly.

Documents WBIR obtained show superintendent Jim McIntyre signed the grant agreement allowing for this hire, when County Law Director Richard "Bud" Armstrong believes McIntyre has no authority to do so.

The grant agreement is between Knox County Schools and the Broad Center for the Management of School Systems, which runs the Broad Academy.

That, essentially, is a training program for people with executive leadership experience aspiring to become school district superintendents and other leaders within large education systems.

McIntyre himself was a participant in the Broad Academy, and now, some KCS Board of Education members say, he has created a pipeline for other Broad fellows to come take high-paying jobs with the district.

PDF: Law Director's Memo

In September of last year, McIntyre signed a grant agreement with the Broad Center for the Management of School Systems. In it, the Broad Center agreed to give Knox County Schools a grant totaling up to $29,700, to be put toward the Broad fellow's -- or Broad resident's -- salary.

In exchange, the district would foot the rest of the fellow's salary, plus pay benefits on top of that.

The baseline salary for a Broad fellow, according to the Broad Academy in its grant agreement with KCS, is $90,000. The Broad grant would pay for up to $29,700 of that.

That means KCS - and therefore taxpayers - have to foot the bill for not only the difference ($90k - $29.7k = $60,300), but also for the cost of benefits.

The Knox County Finance Department, Armstrong said, generally uses a figure of 30 percent of an employee's salary to calculate the additional expense for benefits and taxes.

That would put the Broad fellow's position at a total of $117,000. The center is paying for nearly $29,700 of that, putting taxpayers on the hook for the remaining $87,300.

BOE member Amber Rountree said that's a dollar figure that, roughly, could support two teacher hires.

"Is it the best way for us to spend limited funds?" Rountree said to WBIR in a phone interview Saturday afternoon. "We need to be making wise decisions with what little funds we have."

Armstrong, however, believes the contract is unenforceable, since he says McIntyre has no authority to accept a grant, especially one that requires matching funds.

In a memo to board members this week, Armstrong said, "The superintendent, under statute, is given no authority to unilaterally accept grants and to sign grant contracts. Further, the statute requires a resolution by the BOE and notification to the County Commission."

But McIntyre says he was acting in accordance with Knox County Board of Education policy and that the document he signed is "a grant agreement, not a procurement contract."

In an email to WBIR, he wrote, "Through written School Board Policy, the Board of Education has delegated the acceptance of grants, in some circumstances, to the Superintendent. In accepting this grant, I acted in good faith and in accordance with my understanding of School Board policy."

You can read the rest of the story RIGHT HERE.

Knox County to potential sue Farragut over liquor by drink tax revenues

Knox County in the coming days will send the Town of Farragut an “intent to sue” letter tied to unpaid liquor taxes, although officials hope they don’t actually have to file a lawsuit.

State law says that 50 percent of the mixed drink tax has to go to education. However, Farragut, which passed an ordinance in 1988 to allow establishments to serve mixed drinks, only recently starting paying the tax.

The matter has caused confusion across the state and many officials for years didn’t even realize the law existed or that school districts were owed money. The issue was brought to the attention of county and city officials several months ago after Knox County received an email from the Tennessee Governmental Finance Officers Association.

Since then, Farragut has started paying the tax.

But, Knox County Law Director Richard “Bud” Armstrong said the county has until June 1 to submit a note to sue in order to have a chance at collecting any back taxes prior to 1999.

If he doesn’t, then the county can seek only some $1.1 million owed since the late 1990s.

“The suit preserves our right to go back to mid-1980,” said Armstrong, adding that the money owed between 1988 and 1999 is about $240,000.

The law director, however, stressed that his office and Farragut officials are negotiating a plan to pay back the money, and that an actual lawsuit is his last option.

“This is to preserve the money that is on the table – the total pot and not just part of it,” he said.

A number of similar lawsuits by other local governments across the state have been filed in recent months.

Most county offices now closed today

Knox County Communications Manager Michael "Big Sexy" Grider just sent out a release, noting that Mayor Tim Burchett has closed down all county offices under his purview due to the hazardous road conditions. Those include, but aren't limited to, libraries, health department, parks and recreation, senior centers, solid waste. (That also means the Virtual Alzheimer's Tour set for this afternoon will be rescheduled.)

In addition, the Register of Deeds and the Law Director's Office also are closed today.

And, it's a safe bet, too, that the clerk's office is closed, but I'm not positive as no announcement has been made. You should probably call if you need to go down there (865-215-2385). 

Addressing some of the county rumors

The Deathstar is a disturbingly good incubator for rumors, and most come from the county's side.

I suppose, though, they're easy to start when all you have to do is log into the computer in your mama's basement and start clicking.

So let's address a few:

A lot of people immediately assumed that Bud Armstrong was going to make a ton of changes to the law director's office when he took over in September. The hysteria reached a high point in April when he asked then-director Joe Jarrettto hire David Buuck to serve as chief deputy law director. (Jarret, who has always been a straight shooter, by the way had nothing but nice things to say about Buuck.)

Throughout the campaign, though, Bud made it clear that he wasn't planning any major personnel changes. Yet, people still perpetuate the rumor that he has hired Knox County Republican Chairman Ray Jenkins and Phyllis Severance, the GOP party's vice chair who has worked as a volunteer or staff member in many Republican campaigns, including Gov. Bill Haslam's two years ago.

Jenkins has said a number of times that he doesn't plan on working in the office. And Severance has told the Sentinel's Georgiana Vines pretty much the same thing. Further, Buuck has said there are no major changes scheduled. (Oh yeah, and there's no records in the human resource department that reflect any new hires.)

Next: a bunch of county department heads received raises, and so, too, did a number of top ranking folks in the Sheriff's Office. This one gets a big fat zero next to it. County department heads aren't getting raises. Finance Director Chris Caldwell obviously got a boost, but that's because he was promoted. Kind of makes sense. (If you want to call that a "raise," then fine. Whatever.)

Regarding the Sheriff's Office: Ashley Haynes, the department's grant manager, resigned in late June to go raise her newborn. She made $61,600 at the time. Sheriff Jimmy "J.J." Jones opted not to fill her position. Instead, he gave her duties to Allison Rogers, his finance director. He also gave Rogers about an $11,000 increase and changed her job title. Jones said the rest of the money was divvied up among other employees with most of going to a number of secretaries who were making less than $26,000.

The Man with the Badge says the increases are within his budget, and, quite frankly, I don't think he really cares what you think about the increases. (Over the years, he's also eliminated a number of top ranking jobs and created deputy positions with the left over money.)

On a side note, Rogers now makes $106,200. Compare that to Caldwell's $120,900 or Jim York over at the city who makes about $120,300.

Soooo, let's get to the Trustee's Office, which could make for a blog entry all its own. (I'm sure some knucklehead will say I'm burying it down here in the blog. Whatever.)

For months now, folks have been chirping about whether a few of the top ranking tax collectors would resign, get indicted or take a job in Washington D.C. (I'm not kidding on that last one.) And, man, it got crazy in the last month of August. People were swearing it would happen on a Monday. Then a Tuesday. No, a Thursday. Wait, it's gonna be on Friday.

In the meantime, John Duncan III is hanging out in Tampa at the Republican National Convention, with no plans whatsoever to come back to town that weekend just to turn in his walking papers.

The rumor pool then turned toward Oct. 1. But, as the rogue noted "October 1 came and left."

By the way, I've talked to a lot of the major parties involved and there's no deal in place for him to leave. At least right now. And there may never be. Just because there's an investigation doesn't mean anything will happen.

As far as the rest of Duncan's office goes, there's been some other names that folks have tagged with his. Not really worth mentioning. The names change with each new tale.

There also was the rumor that if Duncan left, then his right-hand-guy Josh Burnett would take over and clean house. Josh also apparently had a "hit list" and was ready to act. Yeah, that's not true, either, although they did let one person go. Hardly a hit list.

In the meantime, others have speculated on a number of names who would replace Duncan if he left. A lot of people are drooling over the salary, prestige, the whatever.

Most of those rumors are actually true.

Ethics chair opposes law director plan

Knox County's Ethics Board Chairwoman Elaine Davis yesterday sent an email to a bunch of local big wigs that was addressed to the charter review committee.

She's against a possible proposal to let change the county law director's seat from that of an elected position to an appointed one.

Here's the email:

Dear Charter Review Committee Members,

Unfortunately due to prior commitments, I am unable to speak before the committee tonight during Public Forum. I appreciate the Chair allowing for me to speak to you at your last committee meeting on April 11, 2012. Due to time constraints, I was unable to fully express my concerns.

I am writing in reference to the April 25, 2012 Agenda item no. 9. (8.) under the Discussion heading with reference to Section 3.08-Appointment of Law Director. "Appointment of Law Director by the Mayor effective September 1, 2016. Other branches of government will be allowed to hire on a contract basis an attorney to represent their interests."

I am writing concerning a potential conflict of interest with the appointment of the Law Director and the Ethics Committee. As you may or may not be aware, the process in which ethics complaints are initially received originate with the Law Director's office. Either a sworn complaint is received by the Law Director or a complainant may call the office and speak with the Law Director who then discerns the validity of the concern as to whether it may rise to an ethics violation. The committee as a whole is made aware of sworn complaints that are received however any calls that are made to the Law Director's office and those conversations with complainants are not. This is an appropriate process. I believe, that any verbal complaints received, the Law Director deftly handles and gives appropriate instructions to that citizen based on their complaint and situation.

However, if the Law Director is appointed by the Mayor and can be fired by the Mayor at the Mayor's discretion, my concern is that this allows for any complaints received about the Mayor or any of the Mayor's staff to be manipulated to never rise to a violation or be determined to be a credible complaint, be used to warn any wrongdoers and cover up any malfeasance, or conversely retaliate against any political enemies. In my opinion, the Law Director's loyalties would lie with the Mayor instead of remaining independent.

Additionally, there is a conflict with the language of "other branches of government contracting counsel". The Ethics Committee at one point did have a budget in order to pay for the noticing of its meetings. However, at present, the committee does not have a budget and would be unable to contract outside counsel. As a quasi-governmental body that can make recommendations of violations of T.C.A. to the District Attorney's Office that could result in a criminal charge, it is imperative that the legal advice that the Ethics Committee, a citizen's committee, receives is to be trusted.

To date, I can state that the Law Director has aided in creating Whistleblower Protection and the Process and Rules by which a formal hearing is conducted. Having served on the Ethics Committee during the hearings in which the prior Mayor's administration was found guilty of retaliating against a County employee, I can firmly say that having the Law Director independent of the administration allowed for me to make an informed decision based upon my trust of the Law Director's counsel not political machinations.

I am currently Chair of the Knox County Ethics Committee. Please know that I write this letter to you as a citizen who serves not as a spokesperson for the committee as we have not met nor discussed this matter as a body.

Thank you for your time and attention to these serious matters. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, thank you for your willingness to serve.

Sincerely,
Elaine Davis

Jarret, Armstrong meet, move forward

Georgiana Vines in her column – click right smack here – on Saturday provided some insight into incoming Knox County Law Director Bud Armstrong’s plans. She noted that Bud and his former political foe and GOP primary challenger Joe Jarret were gonna meet today.

They did, according to Jarret, who will leave office at the end of August. And the meeting went pretty well.

He said the office ordered coffee and bagels and held a small reception for Bud as employees introduced themselves. Also along for the ride was local GOP Chairman Ray Jenkins, who – according to Jarret – will lead Armstrong’s transition team.

Not sure that works. I know presidents have transition teams. But law directors?????

Heh.

Anyhoo, Joe said everyone “was very cordial and Bud and I both agreed that was best for everyone and for the county was to put everything behind us and have a completely seamless transition.”

He said he has an empty office that he offered to let Bud use and said he’s putting together a transition notebook for him.

“I told him I’ll share everything I can except those things privileged by law,” Jarret said.

Joe said he, Ray and Bud talked about “the challenges (i.e. charter review) that lie ahead as (Bud) takes over,” but didn’t go into many details, noting that whatever he told me would make its way onto Screams from da Porch.

That’s about it.

Bud takes office Sept. 1.

As Georgiana noted, Bud told her that David Buuck is on his list for a possible gig in the law director’s office. To my knowledge there’s only one open position and that’s for law director junior (or whatever the right-hand man or woman position is called). Joe never filled the job, opting to do all of it himself. That’s not to say Buuck will get it. Bud could promote someone and then fill that position.

Ray has said publicly that he has no plans to join the department.

Oh wait, one more thing. You might have noticed that Georgiana reported that Bud would have people representing him or whatever at the charter review committee meetings. He wouldn’t, however, tell her who they were.

That’s strange. But whatever. It’s not like you can’t look around the room and figure it out.

Audit email war Day II: Jarret returns

(Note from Mike: No idea why the font is so small and funky. Blogger sucks sometimes.)

Frank Cagle has a good read about county law director stuff right smack here. And speaking of law director stuff: You remember the email correspondence the other day between the builder, the auditor and the rogue? Click right smack here for the original blog entry and right smack here for all sorts of electronic goodness and read further.

If you don't want to click, then the short of it is that local developer Sandy Loy wanted the county's internal auditor, Richard Walls, to turn over some information (I think it was his notes) that he put together when he was investigating the PBA's handling of the Hardin Valley Academy project.

Walls refused, citing some state law stuff. Brian Hornback then sent Law Director Joe Jarret a note, asking whether Walls could turn down Loy. Jarret pretty much said that the information Loy wanted was public record.

Loy, then asked for it again. Now, however, Joe says that's not the case.

In an email to Sandy this morning, Joe said:

I misread Mr. Hornback's email. While the completed audit is a public record, the TN code does render confidential, audit working papers. I believe the purpose behind the legislation was to project (I think he means “protect”) innocent parties should the auditor's initial mental impression prove incorrect.

Now, before you get all crazy and say: “Jarret flipped flopped again,” Joe sent me a follow up email that reads:

This wasn't a "he changed his mind again" issue, I was cooling my heels at the hospital (where he is with his mother right now) and misread the email.

Now, this isn't a blog entry if I don't have a Sandy Loy follow-up to Jarret's initial email. Take it away, Sandy:

Joe,

Thanks for your reply. I am constantly amazed at how complicated keeping the rules straight is in local government.

Private business people such as myself just don't understand how the same tasks we perform every day, place in the hands of government becomes so complicated and difficult.

Given the obvious, that there are enough laws and rules now passed to allow even the most inefficient and duplicitous of management schemes to be declared OK because it is “LEGAL” … I am going to get back to the work which I do understand.

At the audit committee meeting last week there were 28 people in the room at one time, of which 26 were being paid to be there by my taxes. I have to get back to work; so I can pay the 15 different types of taxes currently “LEGAL” to support those 26 people who obviously think I have no right to know they spend the money they collect 15 different ways from me and every other business in Knox County.

Just a “sidebar” … if I “accidentally” short one of those tax payments by even $6 do you think they will just forget about it as “insignificant”?

What an indictment of our county government.

Sandy Loy

On a side note, I was at the meeting and so, too, was Hornback. (He blogged about it right smack here and right smack here.)

OK, finally, Joe responds back to Sandy:

Sir, it is certainly understandable. The TN Legislature of late seems to be expanding rather than contracting the list of documents deemed confidential. This is one of the reasons why my attorneys must be constant students of the despite our respective experience levels.

Now, there is an inside baseball jab there right out of Screams from da Porch.

Law director explains resignation process

Knox County Law Director Joe Jarret this morning sent a letter to county commissioners. And no, he hasn't flipped-flopped and opted to un-unresign. Heh.

In the note, which you can find right smack here, Jarret simply clarifies a few questions. Some folks apparently were wondering about the process of stepping down and whether he could announce his resignation and then take it back after commissioners began collecting resumes to fill the job on an interim basis.

Jarret says he can.

He also said he got in touch with interim candidate and former Law Director Richard Beeler to let him know. According to Jarret, Beeler was on board.

Jarret said he didn't get in touch with the other candidate, David Buuck. But, he said, the commission couldn't have appointed him anyway, since he's a Blount County resident and the law requires those who fill elected offices to be “a qualified voter of the county,” Jarret noted.

The county commission was supposed to interview the two candidates during today's work session. That doesn't appear to be the case now, although I'm sure they'll have a few questions for Jarret.

Joe Jarret says he'll stay as law director

Ah, that sneaky Joe Jarret. Last night he sends me a text at 6:04, saying his last day would be March 30. There had been some rumors going on earlier in the day that he would rescind his initial proposal to step down, so I asked him about them. But, this morning, Jarret said, he talked with some more people and his wife and opted to stay. Here's the story:

Knox County Law Director Joe Jarret on Saturday morning withdrew his letter of resignation and said he’ll continue to serve through the rest of term which ends in late August, according to an email he sent to county commissioners.

Jarret submitted his submitted his resignation effective for March 31 a few days after losing to Richard “Bud” Armstrong in the March 6 GOP primary. He said he wanted to give Armstrong, who faces no opposition in the August election, a chance to come in early as the interim director and walk the charter review committee through the process.

Armstrong, though, declined.

In the meantime, the County Commission began taking resumes to fill the position. Local attorney David Buuck, former attorney for the town of Louisville, and former Law Director Richard Beeler applied. The county commission on Monday was supposed to interview them.

Now, however, members aren’t so sure.

For example, commissioner Vice Chairman Brad Anders said members may decide to just ignore Jarret’s original resignation letter and let hi stay.

“I think it will be a better transition to have Joe stay until September and have Bud ease into the job,” he said “That way we have consistency and don’t have to appoint someone to a five or sixth month term.”

In the next few months, the person in charge will have to represent the Charter Review Committee, which will meet through the summer, look over the county's governing documents and decide whether voters in November should make changes to them.

In his email to commissioners, Jarret said he first proposed stepping down to give Armstrong the chance to “become involved with the Charter Review Committee during its formative stages. But because Armstrong declined and “coupled with the fact that most elected officials and a large number of citizens have asked me to serve until Aug. 31” Jarret said he would stay.

He said during Monday’s work session, though, he would like permission to retain outside legal counsel to help advise the review committee on “those issues that raise any potential conflicts of interest, thereby de-politicizing the process.”

He also said he would encourage Armstrong to spend time in the office during the next few months “thereby ensuring a seamless transition come September, 2012.”

Jarret told the News Sentinel on Saturday that during the past weeks "citizens and elected officials told me that they wanted my expertise and asked whether I would continue to serve." He said he reached the decision Saturday morning and then sent the email to commissioners.

"I only had a single reason (to leave) and that reason is gone," he said.

The job pays $156,800 a year and oversees a budget of $1.7 million and 15 employees, including seven other attorneys.

Beeler to apply for interim law director job

Been a lot of rumors going around about who will replace Joe Jarret as law director before his former opponent Bud Armstrong takes over.

I'm thinking it's probably going to be Richard Beeler, the law director from 1990 through 2000 and the pension board's litigation attorney. He told me today that he would apply.

Personally, I can't think of too many more people qualified at this point in time. He knows the job, he can step in and run the office. And he can help oversee/represent the charter review committee. Heck, he helped write the charter back in 1987. (Plus, the guy skydives, which is kind of cool.)

Anyhoo, he'll be submitting his resume tomorrow morning. I don't think a lot of people are going to apply for the gig.

But, that's just my guess.

UPDATE: Just saw that the rogue blogger says David Buuck will also apply. Click right smack here for his thoughts. As I recall, Buuck applied for the spot back when the county commission appointed Jarret. He also practices government law.

Jarret seeks audit of own department

Knox County Law Director Joe Jarret this evening sent an email to the county's internal auditor, Richard Walls, asking him to audit the legal department.

Don't read a whole lot into this. The move is pretty much protocol for Joe. He did the same thing after he took over for Bill Lockett a few years ago.

"I kindly ask that you conduct an audit of my office . . . to ensure my (successor) is inheriting an office that is in full compliance with our auditing policies and procedures," Jarret wrote. "My last day with the county is March 31, 2012, as such, I kindly (ask) that the audit be completed by then."

The Knox County Commission later this month will pick an interim law director to serve until Bud Armstrong is sworn in Sept. 1.

Law director term limit considerations

By now, you probably know that county Law Director Joe Jarret is stepping down five months early. He's also suggested that Bud Armstrong, who defeated him earlier this week in the elections, apply for the position.

(Keep in mind, the County Commission, which is currently accepting resumes, is charged with appointing an interim director.)

Now, a few folks, including commission Chairman Mike Hammond say that Bud is the front runner for the gig. And that would make sense.

But, it's not a given that he'll apply. He says to call him later next week.

You see, Armstrong has his own business to think about. But, he also has to think about term limits.

As it stands right now, county officials, including Jarret, say that if you've been appointed to a term and then you serve a term, you're still eligible to run one more time. The Charter Review Committee, however, is expected to address this and let voters determine the definition of words like “term limit” and “appointment” and “elect.”

Voters in November could very well decide that an appointment is considered a term. So, if Bud got the gig, he could end up doing four years in five months. In other words, he'd serve one term before he even began serving the term residents actually elected him to.

Then again, voters might not do anything.

I asked Bud about this.

“I'm worried more about what's in the best interest of Knox County than what's in the best interest of (my) career,” he said.

He added that when he ran for the post he “wasn't looking for a life-time position and not necessarily eight years or even eight years and five months.”

He suggested that at this point his clients – he still has a law practice and cases to close – are what would stop him from applying for the job.

In the meantime, if you want to apply for it, then click right smack here for the directions.

Election write-in choices crack me up

So, special shout out goes to my lone reader who voted for me in the election. Heh.

Yup, got me a write-in vote for the criminal court judge, Division I job. Yeah, that’s right, unchallenged incumbent Steve Sword better watch out. I’m gaining. So, too is Aragorn King of Gondor. He got a vote, too.

Anyhoo, I pulled the list that the good folks down at the Knox County Election Commission keep of the names folks wrote in during last night’s elections.

Some funny stuff.

And you can click right smack here for all 35 pages of it. (Yeah, you’re welcome.)

In the meantime, here are some that immediately stood out to me. Note, that some repeat throughout each race (I assume the same person was filling them in), and that I’m spelling them exactly as they appear.

A sampling:

Presidential Candidates: I Pee Freely, Mickey Mouse, Roseanne Barr, Cobra Comander (one of my favorites even though it was spelled wrong – funny stuff); Al Green, Al Sharpton, Donald Trump, Eddie Murphy, Homer Simpson, Jerry Sandusky, Ron Regan, Snoopy, Someone Honest, Stephen Colbert (six votes); and Willie Nelson.

Criminal Court Judge, Division I: Any One, Anybody But, Anybody Buthim, Aragorn King of Gondor, Barack Obama, Ben Dover, Bill Clinton, Bob, Brian Moneyhun, Bruce Pearl, Chuck Norris, Dennis Francis, Emmit Smith, End Corruption in Knox Co, Greg Issacs, Mike Donila (now that’s what I’m freakin’ talking about!); Pam Strickland (that will drive some people crazy); Scott Moore (heh); Vermin Supreme; What The F—K (KNS Editor Tom Chester ironically would kill me if I actually spelled out the word on this family blog); and Yellow Dog.

Property Assessor: Any Honest Man, Anyone Else, Ben Dover (popular choice), Both Are Crooks, Donald Duck, Goofy, Jerry Sundusky, Lump Lambert, Mackay, Mick Mouse, Mickey Mouse, NA, Neither, No one, None, None of the Above, Noneoftheabove, Poop (hahahahahahaha); and Spongebob.

County Law Director: Any Honest Man, Bill Locket (whaaaat???); BobBowman (there ya go); Bubguarder (heh); H H Hill, Incumbents Leave, Open Air, Ted Nugent (I’d vote for him); and Vincent T Bugliosi.

Campaign finances for Knox contests

Man, you'd think with the kind of coin Phil Ballard and John Whitehead are spending on advertising, that they were running for county mayor or something.

Not property assessor.

Anyhoo, candidates were required to turn in their first quarter financial documents today, so that means . . . Nothing.

Yeah, really, no one cares about this stuff.

But, I figured I'd bore you with it anyway. I've got the property assessor race and the county law director race (anyone else find it silly that we have to elect a law director?).

If you want information about the school board races, we got a school reporter for that. Or you can click right smack here and look up the candidates on your own.

The elections are March 6. I think.

Soooo, a quick glance at Ballard, the property assessing incumbent, shows that between Jan. 16 and Feb. 24 he raised almost $16,000. He also spent close to $62,000 and has $6,800 in folding paper left over. Ballard also has almost $6,000 in outstanding loans. Click here for the details.

Whitehead, his opponent, raised $25,750 during the same period and spent $38,000. He has almost $15,000 on hand going into the final week. Whitehead has no outstanding loans listed. Click here for the details.

Over in the law director's race, incumbent Joe Jarret raised $21,400 from mid-January to the middle of this month. He also spent $23,100 and has $8,100 left. In addition, Jarret has $1,500 in loans outstanding. Click here for the details.

His opponent, Richard “Bud” Armstrong, raised almost $9,100 during the same period and spent almost $23,000. Armstrong has $3,200 on hand. Click here for the details.

As always, I don't support any of the candidates. Write in my name, blah, blah. Have a good one.

Jarret and that pesky mediation thing

Click right smack here to read about Knox County Law Director Joe Jarret’s “mediation business.” Cause it’s Part I.

Now, on to Part II in MediationGate. Heh.

OK, good readers, the other day we discovered that I learned how to take screen shots on the computer. I know, I know, hold the applause. Anyhoo, some folks say that the county’s law director has a mediation business on the side. There’s even a web page for it (click right smack here for that bad boy).

Now, Jarret says he hasn’t conducted a mediation session since becoming employed with the county. Again, I encourage you to read one of the links above 'cause I’m not recapping.

However, one of my readers – whom I care way more about than the knuckleheads who comment over at the KNS site – sent me a screen shot from Jarret’s mediation page from a week or so back.

Here's that one:

And here’s the one I took the other day:

Now, you should note a couple of things. In the first one, Jarret says he’s the county’s chief deputy law director – not the law director. Also, in the second (and more recent) one he adds the statement: “Presently employed full-time by Knox County, precluding private mediations.”

This means, according to Jarret, that he does not run a private business. But, some folks are now curious why he now felt the need to add the additional language. I was told that he was lying to us and that we weren’t doing much to call him on it. So, I picked up the phone and called him on it.

Jarret verified that the screen shot was legit and that it was up for about two years before he recently changed it. He said:

It gets updated every year when you renew your dues, and I updated it. But I have never done a private mediation ever in the state of Tennessee. I’ve only volunteered to do public mediations and I conducted those on behalf of the Community Mediation Center on behalf of the sessions court judges. When I first came here, I did two things. I joined the East Tennessee Legal Aid and did pro bono work and I did pro bono mediation for the courts.

OK, so I asked Joe when exactly did he update it? He said about a month ago when a local mediator called and asked him to do a private mediation for free. He told him that he couldn’t. Joe gave me the guy’s name and number to verify it.

All I can do is ask. If you don’t like his answer – and I know some won’t – there’s not a whole lot I can do. But, I did take the time to ask. (And I do all this blog crap for free and mostly on my own time.)

UPDATE: A reader already pointed out that under the first screen shot, the heading is "Deputy Law Director," but the text at the bottom says "Law Director." The reader suggest Joe has been keeping this up to date the whole time.

Disclaimer: Jarret is challenged by former county Commissioner Richard “Bud” Armstrong for the law director’s seat. Both are Republicans. The Democrats were too chicken to field a candidate, so whoever wins in the March 6 primary takes the prize. As always, Screams from da Porch endorses neither of the candidates and encourages all readers to write in its author’s name as your preferred candidate.