Below is a video of City Council in a "special" called meeting on November 24 voting to increase City Administrator Tony Cox's contract compensation package yet again.
The Council met on November 17 (one week before the special called meeting) and is scheduled to meet in regular session again on December 1 (one week after the special called meeting).
Apparently, someone decided there was an emergency at City Hall that required that council run a newspaper ad so it could meet in special session at 11:00 AM on November 24 for 12 minutes with its attorney present and with no public comments ----to talk about the "urgent situation" involving revisions to Cox's contract. And these revisions won't take effect until January 1, 2016.
Sort of odd how this urgent situation arose and someone decided consideration of the proposed salary and benefit increase absolutely could NOT wait 7 days for council's next regular meeting day (December 1) and time (5 PM) when the public that foots the bill could be present and when the regular agenda would provide an opportunity for public comments.
The City Council will meet as the "Beer Board" tomorrow afternoon immediately after the 5 PM council meeting at the City Center.
On the Beer Board agenda are numerous changes to the city Beer Ordinance--the most significant of which is removing the distance requirement from a park, school, or church if there is a four-lane highway between the store selling beer and the property line of the park, school, or church.
Why did the City decide to change the beer ordinance to remove the 150' distance requirement when there is a four-lane roadway?
Because Food City Popkin--despite knowing that the City Beer Ordinance required 150' from its store and Popkin Little League Park--went ahead and built its store less than 150' from the Little League Park.
Why would Food City do this? Because Food City knew that council would turn around and change the beer ordinance so Food City Popkin could get a beer permit. And that's exactly what is happening.
Click on the image below to enlarge it, and you will see that Food City had a copy of the City Beer Ordinance on September 19, 2014, and thus KNEW that the City Beer Ordinance required a store selling beer to be 150' from any park, school, or church. Click here for a prior post on this issue when City Council passed the new "Food City Popkin" beer ordinance on first reading.
But Food City also knew that it could build its building wherever it wanted to and then get council to change the ordinance. And that is what Food City and Council did. Food City told the City that the beer ordinance would have to be changed, and council will be voting today to make some general changes to the beer ordinance, but the primary change is to say that a store selling beer CAN be within 150' of a school, church, or park if there is a four-lane roadway.
Special change in the beer ordinance for Food City Popkin. The only councilperson to vote against this special "Food City Popkin" change on first reading was Dennis Alvis. Mayor Thomas, Vice-mayor Gary Chesney, Bob Garrett, Key Senter, Chris Bivens. and councilman Paul LeBel voted for the "Food City Popkin" change. Tuesday is the second and final reading.
If Joe Smith had built a small store at the same location as Food City Popkin, do you think councilmembers would have passed a new beer ordinance to make Joe Smith's store eligible for a beer permit?
Yesterday, Mayor Thomas nominated Rod Isaacs to the MUS Board. Bob Garrett seconded the appointment, and the full council unanimously voted "yes."
Previously, the council rejected the Mayor's nomination of Max Biery and Jack Kennerly from three-person slates sent to the Mayor by MUS.
Then the MUS Board (George McGuffin, Harold Nichols, Gene Jolley, Lynn Elkins, and Bryan Dickerson) sent two slates to the Mayor that included individuals who were not qualified to serve on the MUS Board because they served on other city boards.
Finally, MUS figured out the qualifications for service on the MUS Board and sent the three-person slate of Jolley, Rod Isaacs, and Jay Smith to the Mayor.
On the surface yesterday, the six city councilmembers (LeBel, Garrett, Bivens, Senter, Chesney, and Alvis) had a different attitude and tone toward the Mayor and in regard to the Mayor's nomination of Isaacs.
Just a few weeks ago, these same six rejected the Mayor's nomination of Jack Kennerly. LeBel then asked all those in favor of Glenn Thompson to raise their hands. Six hands went up. LeBel asked City Administrator Tony Cox to send a letter to MUS telling them that council supports and wants MUS to include Glenn Thompson on its slate of MUS nominees.
MUS ignored LeBel's suggestion--or maybe Thompson didn't want to be involved in the whole MUS mess and declined to let his name be included.
The Morristown Utilities Systems (MUS) Board held a special called meeting yesterday (see post below) and nominated Gene Jolley, Rod Isaacs, and Jay Smith for the Board seat currently held by Gene Jolley.
Four members were present (McGuffin, Jolley, Nichols, and Dickerson). Jolley abstained from the vote, and Lynn Elkins was absent.
These names will be sent to Mayor Danny Thomas who will submit one of the names to the full city council for approval or rejection.
The MUS Gang That Can't Shoot Straight thinks it finally has a three-person slate where all three are qualified to serve.
The next hurdle for any nominee is city council which has the ultimate decision on approval or disapproval.
In a council meeting weeks ago, Councilman Paul LeBel stated that Glenn Thompson was council's choice. LeBel then asked for a "show of hands" of those in favor of Thompson. Six hands went up--LeBel, Senter, Bivens, Alvis, Garrett, and Chesney.
The Council Gang of Six asked City Administrator Tony Cox to send a letter to the MUS Gang of Five letting MUS know of council's preference. Apparently, the Gang of Five didn't get the memo from the Gang of Six or decided to ignore it.
That leads us to another twist to the MUS saga. This is MUS' third submittal of three qualified names to the Mayor. The 2012 (George) McGuffin Law provides that if Council rejects the Mayor's third nominee, then MUS and the Mayor are out of the picture, and Council can make its own nominations.
So, if the Gang of Six really wants Glenn Thompson, the Gang just has to reject the nominee that the Mayor selects, and then the Gang can nominate and appoint Thompson.
[Scroll down for yesterday's post on how the self-nominating MUS Board twice nominated unqualified persons for the Board and had to back up and revise its slate of candidates.]
The City Council held a special workshop or "retreat" at the luxurious Meadowview Convention Center in Kingsport on Friday, September 13, and Saturday, September 14. Six councilmembers attended the retreat. [Mayor Thomas was present briefly on Friday but left and did not return.]
It appears that the six councilmembers attending the Kingsport retreat violated the Open Meetings Act by discussing, deliberating, and actually making a decision to give City Administrator Tony Cox a $7,000 increase to his deferred compensation package.
When you hold a "special" called meeting or workshop, there are special requirements for the public notice that is provided. The notice must include the agenda for the meeting and each item that will be deliberated on or on which a decision will be made.
According to the September 6, 2013, public notice for this special workshop/retreat, the council was going to Kingsport to work on "strategic planning" with MTAS facilitator Pat Hardy.
Apparently, they did more than just strategize in Kingsport. In this video taken at the Finance Committee meeting on September 17, 2013, Councilmember Gary Chesney, who is chairman of the Finance Committee, admits that the six councilmembers discussed and deliberated and reached a decision on additional compensation for the City Administrator--even though this was not an agenda item on the public notice for the special workshop meeting.
You might ask whether council could have amended the published agenda to add the deferred compensation item for discussion and deliberation. The short answer is "no." A special called meeting is just that---it is called for a special and specific purpose. The public must be notified of the purpose or purposes and no other item(s) may be considered. [At a regular meeting, agendas typically can be amended to add items but special called meetings are different]
There is another irony to this violation of the open meetings act. Chesney has recently been posting on his City Hall website about being a "firm believer" in Tennessee's Sunshine laws. (1) The Open Meetings Act which calls for open meetings and adequate public notice of those meetings, and (2) the Public Records Act which requires that public records be available to the public.
Click here to see what Mr. Chesney had to say about Tennessee's Sunshine laws right before he violated the Open Meetings Act as admitted in the video.
Mr. Chesney was not alone in this violation. Councilmembers Kay Senter, Paul LeBel, Chris Bivens, Bob Garrett, and Dennis Alvis were present in Kingsport as well and, according to Chesney, all discussed and "agreed" on the additional compensation.
Today, the full council will try to "cure" this particular violation by taking up the deferred compensation issue at its regular council meeting.
[As a sidenote, I find Mr. Chesney's City Hall website very informative. I recently commended him at a public meeting for taking the time to post about city business and meetings. I wish other councilmembers would do the same and, as always, I continue to ask that the council put its council packets online so that the public can see the contracts, the resolutions, the ordinances, and background information for council actions]
Married. Three grown children. Taught school 11 years. Entered law school in 2001. Graduated and passed the bar in 2004. Licensed attorney in Tennessee. Hamblen County Commissioner (2002-2006). Focused on accountability, ethics, and openness in government at all levels.
Comments to my blog posts are welcome. However, verification of the identity of commenters will be made via phone contact before comments are posted.
You send a comment by clicking on the "comments" button at the end of each post. After sending a comment via blogger, you must send me (lindacnoe@aol.com) a separate e-mail that contains your full name and phone number so I can contact you by phone to verify your identity and that you are the source of the comment.
I request phone contact information to protect both you and me. By contacting you prior to posting a comment, I try to prevent the possibility that someone else might send a comment to the blog and put your name on it.
If, during phone verification, you feel that there is still a need for your comment to be labeled "anonymous," it can be posted that way.
This is my blog, and I reserve the right to control what appears on this site.
Click on the label "anonymous comments" (below) for more background information on my blog comments policy.
