Hillside plan and upcoming talks

The county commission next Wednesday (that's April 13 if you're really taking notes) plans to hold a workshop to talk about the Hillside Ridgetop Protection Plan.

It's at 8 a.m.

I'll be there. (Maybe. I'm not sure I'm even human at that hour.)

Anyhoo, you might want to sit this one out. Because they're not going to let you talk.

Uh, uh. Not this time.

(Which means I'll probably be back at the office by 9 a.m. I hope.)

I'll let the commission's big dog explain:

“We've had a lot of calls from people, saying that we're holding the meeting at 8 a.m., so the public can't participate, but that's not the case,” said Chairman Mike Hammond. “It's not designed to be a public hearing. This is a workshop for the commission. If I've got a question and need to get it answered, well, that's what we're holding it for.”

In other words, this one time, they want to get the facts without the emotion and the personal attacks.

However, it is open to the public.

So come on down. Just don't say anything.

Additionally, the commissioners will talk further about the issue at the regular work session ( 2 p.m. April 18) and again on April 25 during the regular meeting.

Please note – because I understand people are spreading all kinds of rumors about this thing – that the commission will talk about it at 6 p.m. during the REGULAR meeting. No, it will NOT be moved to 2 p.m.. It is part of the zoning agenda. That means 6 p.m.

Now, with that said, expect it to get tabled. Again.

Heh.

Because a number of commissioners want to hold a joint workshop with the City Council, which also has to sign off on this mess.

And of course, these things never, ever can get done without getting tabled two, three, four, whatever, times.

Burchett at least gave it a shot

Deep down I think I wanted county Mayor Tim Burchett’s Carter proposal to work.

If only because he was the one elected official who really, really worked to rebuild - not just renovate - that busted-up, low-grade, mold-ridden, toilet-leaking, floor-creaking, ceiling-dripping (you get the point) building.

The school board sure didn’t give it a shot.

And the ra-ra-we’re-going-to-do-something-about-it commission during last year’s budget hearings, when it withheld the renovation coin and – at one point – appeared to tell school officials how to spend it (which by the law is either illegal or borderline illegal), sure didn’t give it the old college try, either.

So, yeah - despite kicking the administration in the nads on occasion – this time I applaud the guy. He tried.

And, yeah, people are going to say it was politically motivated, or that he stuck his nose in the school system’s business, or whatever.

It doesn’t matter.

The residents went to the school board and were turned away. The commission failed them.

Their last stop by default was the mayor’s front door. And Burchett opened it.

He proposed the whole “let the developer build it and pay for it and we’ll lease it back” deal.

It was different.

For Knox County, anyway.

(Not the rest of the world, mind you.)

But here’s the problem.

The school system has some pretty tough standards on how they build new schools.

(And yeah, when they renovate a school, it’s certainly not going to have all the standards as a new one would, which kind of makes it a moot point, but I’m getting off track here.)

Anyhoo, the high standards mean big bucks. About $13 million for a new Carter Elementary School.

(I’m not going to rehash the whole episode here. If you know it, then you’re probably still reading. If you don’t, then you’ve left and aren’t missing anything. I've also provided links to old stories along the way. That's what those underlined words are. Heh.)

We got six proposals yesterday. That’s it.

I know the administration is happy about that. (or that’s what members are saying publicly.) I know county purchasing director Hugh Holt (whom I jokingly told I hope no one bids because I’m tired of covering the story) said that’s good, too. And county communications manager Michael "he who manages one person" Grider put his spin on it, also, with some press release that I promptly filed in the trash can.

Blah, blah. Whatever.

That’s not good.

It was advertised for a longer than usual period of time. It got great play in the media. And about 100 folks representing 50 groups attended the pre-bidding conference (or whatever it was called) in March.

Six isn’t going to cut it. And yeah, I know some of the folks teamed up, so that dwindles down the real numbers.

But more should have bid.

It would have created the true competition Burchett sought when he started this ordeal. It would have lowered the price.

But I don’t think it did or will.

Here’s the problem:

Despite the county’s attempts to stave off open records laws and not release the bid packages (which I still haven’t gotten a real explanation for why that’s the case), I know some of the proposed price tags.

One group told me it would cost $12 million to build.

The other? $15 million. That’s $14 million they’ll take out in loans, and the county - I’m pretty sure this is how it is proposed - would need to come up with $1 million.

Yeah, it’s only two of the six bids. But it’s also two-thirds of the bidders and the bidders I just cited know what they’re doing. They’ve successfully done big projects before. They know the numbers.

And the prices are close to what the school system has been telling folks it would cost the whole time.

It just doesn’t appear that the old East Knox County school can get built for a bargain.

And the school board isn’t going to accept that.

(Actually, let’s not kid ourselves here. The school board was never going to sign off on the deal. Even if it did come in way under $13 million. But that’s another post for another day.)

So, what I guess I’m trying to say is that I applaud Burchett’s efforts. But I don’t see this thing happening.

(If it does, I’ll buy the guy a drink. And post about it. If only so people can call that ridiculous tattletale line.)

And when the administration does throw in the towel, I know a lot of folks will take their shots.

And maybe rightly so. I don’t know.

But, at least Burchett tried.

No one else did.

There.

Those are my nice words for the day.

Tune in tomorrow and I’ll find some way to kick the administration in the nads.

You know, cause it’s fun.

You found a what? And where?

OK, I take some liberties here, poking a little fun at the elected folks I cover.

And some I don't.

But as many of you know, I like to have some fun with the big tin can on top of the hill, too.

So, we all received the following company-wide email a little while ago:

"An electronic device was found in the ladies restroom on the second floor (near name deleted's office). If you have lost an electronic device, please come by HR to identify and claim."

Heh.

Now if it was a cell phone, don't you think the sender would have said that? Or a hair dryer? Or even a calculator?

Now if someone can find me that scene from Fight Club where the character says something like: "Nine times out of ten it's an electric razor. But every once in a while it's . . . ."

Oh man, I kill myself sometimes.

Going to go hang out by HR to see who shows up.

Cause I'm mature like that.

How the local state delegation voted

From what I understand the State Election Commission went ahead and signed off on the local delegation’s picks for the Knox County Election Commission.

It was expected, since the local folks obviously know more than the state folks, which is, uh, pretty typically in the ridiculous world of politics.

Actually, really that’s a good thing.

But don’t tell anyone on the state level that, let alone the federal level.

Because they obviously know what’s better for us, than we do. Most of the time. Just ask them.

Anyhoo, I’m rambling here. I Just wanted to note that we’ll have the same election commission as we’ve had the last few years with one notable exception.

That means Democrats Cassandra McGee Stuart and Cameron Brooks, as well as, Republicans Chris Heagerty and Bob Bowman. In addition Rob McNutt, who somehow managed to vote illegally seven times yet no one seems to care because it was an honest mistake, will replace Paul Crilly, who will go down in local Republican history as a turncoat because he didn’t vote to oust Greg Mackay, the election administrator and a Democrat, two years ago.

Heh.

The group, if I’m not mistaken, will reorganize so to speak in 20 days. A Republican - because that’s the party with the most folks in the local Legislative delegation – will be the chairman. And the secretary spot goes to a Democrat.

You can imagine what the first order of business will be.

In the meantime, if you’re curious about how the local Republican state lawmakers voted when they made recommendations to the board, I think I have the breakdown.

(This was the secret vote done a couple weeks ago. They needed to do it in secret because they didn’t want the folks who elected them to know how they voted. Actually Steve Hall didn’t mind talking about it. But I digress.)

Anyway, no one in the Knox County Deathstar can keep a secret, so they talked to someone who talked to someone else who then played the telephone game with their brother’s cousin’s mother or whomever and it got back to me.

So I’m probably off a little bit here.

But I doubt it.

The vote for Rob McNutt was 5-3.

Senators Jamie Woodson and Randy McNally and Representative Ryan Haynes voted for Donnie Ellis.

Senator Stacey Campfield and Representatives Steve Hall, Frank Nicely, Harry Brooks and Bill Dunn voted for Rob McNutt.

I'm pretty sure that's how it went down.

But, hey, if I'm wrong then they can call and let me know.

No, Wisconsin, I won't help you

I’m apparently on a number of mailing lists that I don’t want to be on, but whatever.

(You’d think people would bother to look up where I work and what I cover. But they don’t. Because they’re lazy.)

Case in point, the other day AFT send me a press release about the pissing match going on between the Republican lawmakers out in Wisconsin and the teacher union.

The Republican Party of Wisconsin wants a professor to turn over his emails to them. The AFT complains that it’s really a ploy to embarrass him and they don’t want to do it.

So, they send a bunch of reporters this release.

I responded and they responded back.

I’m sure the Republicans will use the information against the union, if it’s damning.

But so what? It’s public information. Don’t write stupid crap in public records.

Here's the dialogue.

The first email:

Statement by Randi Weingarten, president, American Federation of Teachers, on Wisconsin Republican Party’s FOI requests for university faculties emails.

The Wisconsin Republican Party and others filed Freedom of Information Act requests for e-mails sent by William Cronon, a professor at the University of Wisconsin who has criticized the recent anti-union legislative actions of Gov. Scott Walker and others. The requests were for e-mails from his university e-mail account containing a wide range of terms, including the word “Republican” and the names of certain Republican politicians.

WASHINGTON—The information requests by the Republican Party of Wisconsin and conservative think tanks such as the Mackinac Center for Public Policy are nothing more than attempts to intimidate university faculty members. Clearly, their goal is not to seek the best solutions for the economic problems we face in the states and as a country, but rather to shut down open political discourse and to limit the academic freedom of professors whose independent voice has always been a critical component of public debate. It is time for politicians and policymakers to stop vilifying educators and public employees, and tackle the real work of strengthening our schools, institutions of higher education and public services so we can get our state economies back on track.

###

The AFT represents 1.5 million pre-K through 12th-grade teachers; paraprofessionals and other school-related personnel; higher education faculty and professional staff; federal, state and local government employees; nurses and healthcare workers; and early childhood educators.

Here’s my response:

Hello:

Couple quick questions.

I'm not up-to-speed on Wisconsin open records laws, but regardless . . .

Don't you think you subvert the freedom of information by not releasing these emails and, perhaps, set a precedent by not releasing them?

I have no dog in this fight (although I'm watching it closely since there is some overlap with a teacher union battle here in Tennessee), but if you have nothing to hide, then why not release the emails?

Then defend yourself if there's an issue over their content.
I don't know. Maybe it's just me.

But I don't think you're going to find much sympathy from a reporter.

Regards,

Mike Donila

Do you think they had a good answer? Hell no. They send me some BS editorial written by one of their own that appeared in the New York Times. Don’t bother reading the crap. Just look at the one bold telling sentence I underlined. And note that the writer is wrong. The open records law applies to all public officials. And yes, university professors are public officials if they're getting paid with tax dollars.

I don’t care what your political leaning is. If you’re a reporter and you want to defend them for keep the emails private, then you suck.

This is what they sent me (The American Thought Police by Paul Krugman):

Recently William Cronon, a historian who teaches at the University of Wisconsin, decided to weigh in on his state’s political turmoil. He started a blog, “Scholar as Citizen,” devoting his first post to the role of the shadowy American Legislative Exchange Council in pushing hard-line conservative legislation at the state level. Then he published an opinion piece in The Times, suggesting that Wisconsin’s Republican governor has turned his back on the state’s long tradition of “neighborliness, decency and mutual respect.”

So what was the G.O.P.’s response? A demand for copies of all e-mails sent to or from Mr. Cronon’s university mail account containing any of a wide range of terms, including the word “Republican” and the names of a number of Republican politicians.

If this action strikes you as no big deal, you’re missing the point. The hard right —which these days is more or less synonymous with the Republican Party — has a modus operandi when it comes to scholars expressing views it dislikes: never mind the substance, go for the smear. And that demand for copies of e-mails is obviously motivated by no more than a hope that it will provide something, anything, that can be used to subject Mr. Cronon to the usual treatment.

The Cronon affair, then, is one more indicator of just how reflexively vindictive, how un-American, one of our two great political parties has become.

The demand for Mr. Cronon’s correspondence has obvious parallels with the ongoing smear campaign against climate science and climate scientists, which has lately relied heavily on supposedly damaging quotations found in e-mail records.

Back in 2009 climate skeptics got hold of more than a thousand e-mails between researchers at the Climate Research Unit at Britain’s University of East Anglia.

Nothing in the correspondence suggested any kind of scientific impropriety; at most, we learned — I know this will shock you — that scientists are human beings, who occasionally say snide things about people they dislike.

But that didn’t stop the usual suspects from proclaiming that they had uncovered “Climategate,” a scientific scandal that somehow invalidates the vast array of evidence for man-made climate change. And this fake scandal gives an indication of what the Wisconsin G.O.P. presumably hopes to do to Mr. Cronon.

After all, if you go through a large number of messages looking for lines that can be made to sound bad, you’re bound to find a few. In fact, it’s surprising how few such lines the critics managed to find in the “Climategate” trove: much of the smear has focused on just one e-mail, in which a researcher talks about using a “trick” to “hide the decline” in a particular series. In context, it’s clear that he’s talking about making an effective graphical presentation, not about suppressing evidence. But the right wants a scandal, and won’t take no for an answer.

Is there any doubt that Wisconsin Republicans are hoping for a similar “success” against Mr. Cronon?

Now, in this case they’ll probably come up dry. Mr. Cronon writes on his blog that he has been careful never to use his university e-mail for personal business, exhibiting a scrupulousness that’s neither common nor expected in the academic world. (Full disclosure: I have, at times, used my university e-mail to remind my wife to feed the cats, confirm dinner plans with friends, etc.)

Beyond that, Mr. Cronon — the president-elect of the American Historical Association — has a secure reputation as a towering figure in his field. His magnificent “Nature’s Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West” is the best work ofeconomic and business history I’ve ever read — and I read a lot of that kind of thing.

So we don’t need to worry about Mr. Cronon — but we should worry a lot about the wider effect of attacks like the one he’s facing.

Legally, Republicans may be within their rights: Wisconsin’s open records law provides public access to e-mails of government employees, although the law was clearly intended to apply to state officials, not university professors. But there’s a clear chilling effect when scholars know that they may face witch hunts whenever they say things the G.O.P. doesn’t like.

Someone like Mr. Cronon can stand up to the pressure. But less eminent and established researchers won’t just become reluctant to act as concerned citizens, weighing in on current debates; they’ll be deterred from even doing research on topics that might get them in trouble.

What’s at stake here, in other words, is whether we’re going to have an open national discourse in which scholars feel free to go wherever the evidence takes them, and to contribute to public understanding. Republicans, in Wisconsin and elsewhere, are trying to shut that kind of discourse down. It’s up to the rest of us to see that they don’t succeed.

More on election commission mess

On Monday, the State Election Commission is expected to rubber stamp the nominations the local Legislative delegation made to the Knox County Election Commission.

That means the panel won’t change except for Rob McNutt taking over for Paul Crilly because the Republicans couldn’t stomach one of their own jumping ship and voting to keep county Elections Administrator Greg Mackay, a Democrat.

Late last week I wrote a story about McNutt forgetting seven times that he voted in the wrong precinct, and word was going around that he might step down.

You know, because the election commission kind of defines elections around here, and he kind of forgot how, where and when how to vote.

I never believed he’d step down, and News Sentinel staff writer Tom Humphrey (the most kick-ass state government reporter in all of Tennessee) pretty much confirmed it earlier this week.

(I don’t think Tom wrote about it, since it’s pretty much a non-issue now, but I might as well throw it up here, since I mentioned it earlier in the week.)

Humphrey said that the state senators and representatives he spoke to about the issue said the matter is over, so far as they are concerned, barring anything further.

Republican state Sen. and (McNutt's good pal) Stacey Campfield, for example, said the election is finished and “the time for yelling is before the election, not after.”

(On a side note, I have no idea what he’s talking about. What election? The nominations the delegation made last week without bothering to research the candidates? That election? Nooooooo. There’s always time to yell. Or scream. Heh.)

State Rep. Ryan Haynes, also a Republican and the chairman of the Knox County delegation, says if there’s anything problematic, it would be left to the state commission to decide against the delegation recommendations.

Of course, that’s not going to happen.

Campfield only vote for term-limits

Republican state Sen. Stacey Campfield, left, is certainly a polarizing figure.

But, he’s also the only member of the Legislature - given the chance Wednesday to move a bill that would term-limit state senators and representatives - to man up.

In fact, Democrats and Republicans voted against the measure. You know it wouldn't have killed the committee to sign off on the proposal and let the entire General Assembly decide.

Then again, maybe it would have.

Now we won't know where the rest of them stand.

But, I'm sure you can figure that one out.

According to News Sentinel reporter Tom Humphrey:

Committees of both the House and Senate on Wednesday rejected attempts to set term limits for state legislators.

On a bipartisan basis, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee soundly rejected SJR008 by Republican Sen. Mike Faulk of Kingsport.

It proposed to amend the state constitution to restrict representatives to four two-year terms and senators to two four-year terms, or eight years total for each.

Faulk contended that term limits would help legislators vote on the basis of principles, rather than popularity.

It would also "encourage turnover and a fresh set of ideas," he said, noting that eight years is the same term limit now in place for governors and the U.S. president.

But other senators spoke against the idea of term limits. It wound up getting only one yes vote versus seven nays.

Sen. Doug Overbey, R-Maryville, said term limits would tend to lead to a professional legislative staff that would "run the Legislature" rather than elected representatives.

Sen. Mike Bell, R-Riceville, said elections already provide term limits. About 60 of 99 state representatives and 13 of current state senators have served less than six years, he said, indicating term limits are unneeded in Tennessee. "I don't know what problem we're trying to fix," he said.

Only Sen. Stacey Campfield, R-Knoxville, voted yes on the proposal while seven senators voted no.

In the House State and Local Government Committee later in the day, a similar proposal, HJR62, by Rep. Mark Pody, R-Lebanon, failed on voice vote. Though the vote was not recorded, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Mike Turner of Nashville said all Democrats supported the measure while the Republican majority opposed it.

Make sure you click on the quotes by Sen. Mike Bell and Sen. Doug Overbey. I translated for you.

Apparently, term-limits are good enough for governors, presidents, whatever. But not Tennessee's senators and representatives.

In the meantime, maybe the voters should decide this issue.

Fee office questions to ponder

A few questions that got me curious. The first is just a natural question a skeptic would ask.

Cause, you know, the glass is always half empty.
Think the worst.

Always better to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission.
Whatever.

There’s probably a plausible explanation. But, it doesn’t hurt to ask.

So:

Authorities arrested Rhonda Gail Carter for allegedly stealing some coin from the county Clerk’s Office on Monday morning. The clerk, Foster Arnett, fired her that same day. Also, that same day the county commission was set to vote on a proposal that would give it more control over the fee office budgets. (Arnett is one of those offices although he’s on the record as saying he’d relinquish control.)

Question:

Did someone hold back this information?

It didn’t get out until Tuesday. Yes, the media could have missed this. That’s true. Deputies and police throw a lot of folks in the clink on a daily basis. But, typically the arrest of a public figure (or government employee) gets out rather quickly.

Now, it probably wouldn’t have made much of a difference whether the commission did have more authority over the financial process. She could have (allegedly) stolen this money anyway and gotten away with it (if the suspicious resident hadn’t caught her for allegedly taking it.)

Still, it would be on some folks’ minds and could have swayed the vote. Instead, the commission – because they love me so much – tabled it until next month, so they could vote on it in front of me.

Cause I’m on vacation, and they wanted me there. Cause they love me and all.

OK, that one is out of the way.

Say the commission decides not to sign off on the proposal. So far three fee officers – county Clerk Foster Arnett, Trustee John Duncan III, and Circuit Court Clerk Cathy Quist – say they’re cool with the plan.

Question:

Would they still turn over their budgets if the commission didn’t demand it?

A lot of folks have been throwing around the “transparency” word. These three say they’re onboard. Will they put your taxpayer money where their mouths are? Will they voluntarily turn over their budgets? Sure, they wouldn’t have to. But would they?

Obviously, there’s no reason to do it.

But, I’m just curious.

On a side note, I know some folks in the media have taken sides on the issues, whether the fee offices should submit annual spending plans to county Mayor Tim Burchett and the commission.

I don’t really care what they do, so long as someone finally makes a decision.

I’m tired of writing about it.

My fault officials delayed everything

I want to send a heartfelt thanks to the pension board members and some county commissioners for not taking care of business while I’m on vacation.

I mean surely that’s why the two panels delayed key issues many expected them to take a stand on Monday, right?

They were waiting for me to come back.

It’s not like the pension folks haven’t had some time to think about a proposal (to let to let four civilian employees jump onboard a retirement plan voters two years ago narrowly approved because they thought it was strictly for law enforcement and correction officers) since November.

Why not wait another month to make a decision?

Yes, the panel had some good reasons to initially delay it. That’s understandable.

The applicant’s attorney had some personal issues to take care of and had to bow out. But they’ve got a bad-ass attorney right now (the last one was pretty bad-ass, too, by the way.)

In fact, when the feds and Sheriff Jimmy “J.J.” Jones finally come crashing down on me, that’s who I’m hiring. Uh, that’s a bad joke – not reasonable cause. But I digress.

Anyhoo, according to News Sentinel Rebecca Ferrar – the poor sucker our editors tapped to cover a day’s worth of meetings for me – the good pension folks who love doling out money to lots and lots of attorneys (even though we have a pretty darn good group in the county law department that will do it for free) held off voting this time presumably because members wanted the pension board Executive Director Kim Bennett to write the county’s Top Cop and The Man with the Badge and ask him for details about the applicants’ duties, abilities and responsibilities.

I understand.

It’s tough, picking up the phone and making that call yourself. It practically killed me to do it when I wrote a story about this in one day. Tough stuff, folks. Tough stuff.

The board, according to my esteemed colleague, also must determine whether the four are deemed uniformed officers. That’s another tough one.

Because it is hard folks – hard I tell you – to call the merit office and ask yourself. It took me hours to muster the courage when I did it.

And, it’s also hard to look at these folks and determine whether they’re carrying guns and sporting shiny badges.

Heh.

I tell, you, they’re just waiting for me to get back because they love me.

The commissioners love me, too – unless they read my blog – because they must want to share the glory of their decision-making with me.

Because the commissioners also delayed a key vote on a controversial isssue – whether to seize control of the fee office budgets.

Granted, it was a 6-5 vote to table the proposal, so – then again – maybe five of those folks don’t like me.

But, I understand this one, too.

These good folks only had a week – that’s seven days or 168 hours – to mull over an issue.

Maybe they really needed more time to digest it. Maybe it really isn’t about me. Could I be wrong?

I mean, it’s not like any of the local bloggers or media outlets during those seven days actually reported on the issue. Right? Do a google search. You won’t find anything. I’m sure. Really. Do one.

And it’s not like anyone – opponents, critics, crazies and others – called the commissioners, proudly claiming their stance. Just ask them.

And of course, no fee officers, like Criminal Court Clerk Joy McCroskey or Circuit Clerk Cathy Quist – held public tours of their officers last week, even after the commissioners requested it.

(Feel the sarcasm, baby. Cause, as I recall, only Commissioner Amy Broyles took the tours, along with the media.)

Wait, did I just say there were more media folks taking the tours than there were commissioners?

Hearsy!

I must not have said that. I must have rambled it.

My bad.

Oh well.

The public understands. Oh yes it does.

You never hear the public complain about public officials delaying votes. If it does, it does not understand the need for transparency and research. No sir. The public doesn’t.

And hey, even if the executive branch and legislative branch takes control of those budgets, it won’t go into effect until the FY 2012-13 budget, so everyone has more than a year to figure out how to count your coins and spend your scratch.

But really, we get it. The elected and appointed leaders wanted to wait on me.

They don’t want to study this thing to death. They don’t want to call in The Pope and seek input from him. They’re just, er, waiting.

Seriously, why decide today on something you can put off tomorrow?

In the meantime, I look forward to the fourth Monday in April when we get to hear the same information we’ve been hearing all over again.

Cause that’s when we’ll finally get a decision.

Or not.

Fee offices, drug court on agenda

Today (or tomorrow – depending on whether this gets posted Sunday night) the county commission presumably will decide whether to take oversight of the fee office budgets.

Or not.

Word going around is the board will table it for a month before then approving it.

Anyhoo, I’m out of town, but figured I’d post a few words.

I talked to one of the fee officers, Clerk and Master of Chancery and Probate Court Howard Hogan, on Saturday.

He had a few interesting things to say in our brief conversation. And he’ll elaborate more during the commission meeting. He’ll also bring 12 years of monthly budgets and reports, showing all the money his office has taken in and paid out to that meeting.

Two big boxes, he said.

“I’ve always reported everything that I’ve done,” he said. “Someone in those 12 years must have looked at them. Yet, at no time has someone ever questions a nickel.”

He said the reports go to the county’s internal auditor, the mayor and the county commission.

Heh.

There’s a touch of irony in that. The commission and mayor want more control, yet he’s never been questioned about it.

Nice.

He added: “Every check that’s written to my office is written by the finance department and signed by the mayor. I do not sign any checks for my salary or the salaries I’m paying my deputy clerks. Each check is signed by the mayor. That’s transparency. If they’re writing the checks, they know where the money is going. They don’t need anything more for transparency.”

Don’t forget, all this mess is either about transparency, accountability, or money. Or whatever.)

Additionally, Hogan said that as part of the county’s judicial branch it should be separated from the legislative and executive side of affairs.

That is typically how things work, I suppose.

And speaking of the judicial branch.

The Drug Court Board of Directors met last Wednesday and – at county Law Director Joe Jarret’s suggestion – agreed that it was in the county’s best interest to consent to a fiscal audit of the drug court’s affairs and a clinical audit of the program.

No one believes they’ll find anything wrong. But they just want to make sure.

(Remember, Richard Baumgartner, the former criminal court judge who resigned and pleaded guilty to a felony charge of official misconduct, oversaw the drug court.)

The commission is expected to approve the request during its meeting.

The county’s internal auditor will then review the program from a fiscal accountability perspective. And Jarret said he’s contacted a member of the University of Tennessee, Social Work Program to assist him in conducting a clinical audit of the program.

More on election commission mess

I’m somewhere over Florida right now as I type this, on my way to see the big greed-head rodent in Orlando.

So, I got some time to kill.

Because if I don’t keep myself occupied, I’m going to throw a little snot-kid and his stoned-dad in front of me out of the plane.

Anyhoo, was thinking about today’s story (click right smack here for the bad boy), and what I’ve heard, since it came out. One rumor has it that - Rob McNutt - the Republican Legislative delegation’s pick to serve on the county Election Commission won’t accept the appointment.

I don’t buy it. The guy is passionate. He wants the job. And he’s got his party’s support. For the most part. He’s staying.

The other rumor is that the election office will turn over the information I reported (That McNutt voted out of his precinct seven times) to the District Attorney General’s Office.

Well yeah. What did you think would happen?

If Elections Administrator Greg Mackay and his right-hand man Scott “attached at the hip” Frith didn’t, then they would be breaking the law.

If it’s possible that someone violated state election laws, then the election folks will at least have some type of discussion with prosecutors. (Hey, Scott, just having a little fun at your expense.)

With that said, the issue won't go anywhere. Even if McNutt intentionally and maliciously voted in the wrong precinct, I’m sure there is some statute of limitations that’s expired by now. I’m guessing it would be a two-year limit. Some of his infractions were more than a decade ago.

Also, I know people are going to come down on Mackay if he does talk to Attorney General Randy Nichols. They’ll say he shouldn’t do it. OK, cool. Say he does nothing. Well, what happens if the next time someone screws up it’s a Democrat?

You think the local Republicans are going to give that person a pass? Hell no.

So, Mackay has to talk. He’ll at least hold a brief conversation with the AG’s office. Probably nothing more.

OK, some other thoughts, really in no particular order. Mostly, what I’m doing here is “cleaning out the notebook,” giving you some information that didn’t make it into the story because of space issues, or relevance, or whatever.

Enjoy. It’s free.

So, Steve Hall, the state representative and long-time friend of McNutt. The big rumor - and this has been going on for years now really - going around the county Deathstar is that Hall wants Mackay’s job. A few years ago when the Republicans were gunning for Mackay, he applied.

Apparently, it didn’t work out too well for him.

“I told (the Election Commission) that I thought Greg Mackay was going a fine job,” he said. “But there was an indication that there would be a change, and if there was going to be a change, then I would have liked to have had that position.”

Hall joked that he thinks his remarks made a lot of fellow Republicans mad.

“They told me that I sounded like I was doing a commercial for Greg,” he said laughing.

I asked if he was again interested in the job. The commission in the upccoming weeks will probably decide on Mackay's future - whether to keep him, fire him or take applications for his job. Or whatever it is they do. Maybe they’ll do nothing. (No, by the way, Mackay is not term-limited.)

Damn, I’m rambling here.

Hall said he was not interested and that he would not apply.

“Not in the near future,” he said. “Who knows 10 years from now.”

Anyway, a few more things to address. First, the quote by state Rep. Ryan Haynes, the local Legislative delegation’s big dog (‘cause he’s got the chairmanship spot).

Folks on the message boards have been sticking it to him for pretty much blaming “a little old lady for punching the wrong keypad” for the reason election folks should share some of the blame for McNutt voting in the wrong precinct.

The tone of his statement, however, was lost in the printed word. That happens. Unfortunately. But Ryan was somewhat chuckling when he said it. In retrospect, I could have paraphrased him, wrote something like: Haynes suggested elections officials should share some of the blame. Perhaps, he said, someone didn’t use the keypad correctly.

Whatever.

I'm not going to second guess muyself. I just don’t want people to think the guy stereotyped poll workers or doesn’t like little old ladies.

But, with that said, I don’t buy it. No one punched the wrong key in SEVEN different elections.

Second thing to address is how I got this story. I’m not telling. But don’t start thinking it was Mackay. (And it also wasn’t local attorney Dennis Francis – another rumor I heard going around today. He’s never given me a tip that panned out, so he’s been shut off. Kidding. About the shut off part. His tips, however, do suck. ) But, back to Mackay. It wouldn’t have been in his best interest to tip me off. Not now, anyway.

He’s smart enough to know the best damage gets released the day before the election - not now. And no, I’m not covering for anyone. I don’t care who the election administrator is. In fact, the administrator (new or old) could screw up multiple elections and I wouldn't care. So long as the person returns my calls.

Third thing to address: McNutt.

I enjoyed talking to him. I don’t take great pleasure - despite what many of you may think - in busting someone on 1-A. I like to know them for a while before I do that.

Heh.

But seriously, he is a nice guy. He told me a few stories about how he’d take his children into the voting booths with him, when they were toddlers, and talk to them about the election process. (OK, no jokes here, please.)

He also seemed very passionate about community service, civic duty, whatever.

Again, I like the guy. (I doubt he likes me very much, but I digress.) And yes, the last thing on my mind - if my parents passed away three months apart and I was moving - would be to change my information with the election office. (Which is something he didn't do and is now subsequently in the limelight for.) However, it would be the first thing on my mind when I finally went down to the polls to vote. (Which also is something he did not do . . . .)

On a side note, I actually thought McNutt was living in the county and voting in city elections. Not that it makes much of a difference.

Last up is state Rep. Harry Tindell, a Democrat. I talked to him about for this story, but his comments didn’t make the paper. Not enough space. He wouldn’t touch it, though. Said that was all up to the Republicans. Smart guy.

I also called Republican state Senator Jamie Woodson for a comment on the story. Funny. I didn’t hear back from her.

On a final side note, I did mention county Mayor Tim Burchett in the story, but I was talking to him about McNutt's background. I never addressed the voting issues with the mayor.

Anyway, I’m out of town for a few. I imagine that I’ll still update, though.

In the meantime, I've got a mouse to catch tomorrow.

Update: I had some links connected to this post, mostly to bios, but Blogger is acting up today and I had to repost this without most of them.

Quist: 'Go ahead, take my money'

As I sit in the metal shed on top of the hill, I can hear the hootin' and hollaring, the high-fiving and the whooooooohhhing taking place on the sixth floor of the Knox County Deathstar.

Circuit Court Clerk Cathy Quist has jumped shipped, and now sides with the administration and commissioners in their effort to gain more control over the fee offices budgets.

It's now even. Three of the offices are on board. And three - as I write this - are not.

But that doesn't really mean squat.

It takes six commissioners to pass this mess. And it is a mess. I haven't been able to do any real work, since the proposal hit the commission dais last Monday. I could be out covering a sewing circle right now. But, naw, I got to deal with this.

Anyhoo, from what I understand, it appears the commission is still set to sign off on the proposal. And Quist switching sides reaffirms this - to me, anyway.

(Read the initial story right smack here, I'm too tired, bored, whatever, to go into its history and give you the background about which side of the Deathstar wants to spend, I mean, manage your money. I've also got lots of posts on this if you just scroll down, too.)

Where was I? Oh yeah, it appears that the commission is still set to sign off on this (and if they do, I'm sure Criminal Court Clerk Joy McCroskey is still gonna sue all their asses), but I have heard - from one fee officer - that "the tides are shifting."

Of course the person who told me this is going to put such a twist on it that it makes even county communications manager Michael "The Spin Doc" Grider (he who manages one person) look like a school kid with a coloring book.

Heh.

So, if you're interested in hearing the word "transparency" and "accountability" a few more times, then here's the press release. (And if you want tunnel carpel syndrome, head to the mayor's office where he's waiting to give you a fist bump.)

Knoxville, Tenn. - Knox County Circuit Court Clerk Cathy Quist today announced that, after studying the proposal to bring fee offices under budget, she believes that the resolution before commission truly is about transparency and accountability for Knox County taxpayers. She is happy to join Trustee John Duncan and Clerk Foster Arnett in supporting the proposal before commission.

"The public desverces nothing less than full transparency and accountability and a funding process that is unified across all of county government," Quist said. "I appreciate the efforts of Chairman Hammond and Commissioners Briggs and McKenzie for bringing this proposal tot he table, as well as Mayor Burchett's leadership in supporting this measure. I hope commission votes to approve this resolution Monday.