March 17, 2009 Sunshine Week and Open Meetings Act Lawsuits in Hamblen County: Then and Now

March 15-21 is Sunshine Week in Tennessee. Usually, the local newspaper carries a series of front-page articles during Sunshine Week about openness in government, noting the importance of Tennessee's Open Meetings and Open Records Acts in ensuring open and accountable government. [Update: Thanks to Michael Silence for steering readers to this post]

Newspapers have traditionally been major proponents of open government, and there are some newspapers today who still continue the proud tradition of the press as guardian and protector of the public's right to know when government meetings are taking place and right to access to public records.

In this area, the Knoxville News-Sentinel has continued the tradition of the press as guardian and protector of open government. To protect the public from backroom deals and secret meetings, the Sentinel filed an Open Meetings lawsuit in 2007 against the Knox County Commission. The lawsuit resulted in an important victory for open government not only for the News-Sentinel but also for the people of Knox County.

And one time many years ago, the local Citizen-Tribune took the lead in exposing and stopping violations of the Open Meetings Law by the Morristown Civil Service Board.

The Tribune, a part of Lakeway Publishers, filed an Open Meetings lawsuit against the Morristown Civil Service Board some 15+ years ago. The Tribune asked for an injunction against the Civil Service Board to prevent secret deliberations and future violations of the Act and the Tribune asked that costs be assessed against the Board.

The Tribune won that battle, but only because it was willing to file suit on behalf of the public and the press.

What happens when there are local violations today?

In December of 2008, the Hamblen County Ethics Committee violated the Open Meetings Act by not providing notice to the public of its December 15 meeting. [Yes, as many have people have mentioned to me, there is real irony in the Ethics Committee violating state law.]

On January 22, during the public comments portion of the meeting of the county commission, Ethics Chair Joe Swann, Ethics member Stancil Ford, Ethics attorney Rusty Cantwell, and the full commission were informed of the Open Meetings violation by the Ethics Committee and the Ethics Committee was asked to correct the violation.

A Tribune reporter was present. However, in the Tribune's coverage of the commission meeting, the alleged Open Meetings violation by the Ethics Committee was not mentioned nor were comments or responses from any Ethics Committee member reported.

With no concern, questions, or reporting by the press, the Ethics Committee just ignored and denied the violation. While I would hope that the Tribune is still as concerned about the Open Meetings Act as it was fifteen years ago when it filed its own Open Meetings lawsuit, that just doesn't appear to be the case today.

Stonewalling by the Ethics Committee left only one way to enforce the Open Meetings Act--a citizen lawsuit. The citizen lawsuit was filed on February 17, 2009, only after the Ethics Committee continued to refuse to admit and correct its violation.

After the lawsuit was filed, the Ethics Committee quit ignoring and denying its violation and held a re-do meeting on March 11.

At the Ethics Committee re-do meeting, Bill Brittain, a member of the Ethics Committee, recused himself from the vote regarding discipline of Frank Parker and Paul King after being questioned about a conflict of interest regarding Frank Parker.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Fifteen years ago, the Morristown Civil Service Board violated the Open Meetings Act but did nothing about its violation until forced to do so as a result of an Open Meetings lawsuit filed by the Tribune.

In December 2008, the Hamblen County Ethics Committee violated the Open Meetings Act but did nothing about its violation until forced to do so as a result of an Open Meetings lawsuit filed by a citizen.

Some helpful links on Open Government in Tennessee: Tennessee Coalition for Open Government. Tennessee Press Association.

March 9, 2009 Official Pow-Wow...the Rest of the Story

In a recent post, I mentioned the rumor going around that at least two elected officials had met with other elected and/or appointed officials to discuss public business in a meeting that neither the public nor the press knew about.


Today at county commission committee meetings, Commissioner Joe Swann admitted that he and Commissioner Ricky Bruce had met with Director of Schools Dale Lynch and others. Joe said it was an unannounced meeting to discuss and prepare the school board's answers to questions about the proposed purchase of land for a new East High.


Joe said he was sorry if he had upset the Tribune by not telling them about the meeting. He said that no votes were taken, and he claimed that the Sunshine Law was not violated because it was just an information-gathering meeting. Ricky said nothing.

Tribune writer Bobbie Young was at the meeting.

February 28, 2009 More Official Pow-Wows Without Notice To The Public?

This blog contains my opinion on many issues. I share links to news stories that are reported across the state by various media. And I do some independent local news-gathering, posting information that the local newspaper ignores.

While I am cautious about mentioning things that I hear that have not been verified, there is a rumor going around that there was recently an (unannounced) meeting of a small group of elected and appointed officials who were engaged in important discussions of public business and expenditures.

[NOTE: This meeting may have been held in violation of the Tennessee Open Meetings Act. While not all elected or appointed officials are covered by the Sunshine Law, this meeting allegedly included two or more officials who are covered by the Sunshine Law and whose participation in an unannounced meeting to deliberate about public business could rise to a violation of the letter and/or spirit of the Tennessee Open Meetings Act. This is not an accusation of a violation because I don't know the specific nature of the discussions nor the identity of all participants.]

The public was not notified of this meeting.

The press apparently was not notified, but we'll have to wait and see if that glitch creates a problem for any of those involved in the meeting.

While the press has never reported when lowly John and Jane Taxpayer are not notified about public meetings, the press just may be ticked when the NEWSPAPER isn't notified!

One solution to solve the dilemma of whether a particular discussion or meeting is a true violation of the Sunshine Law would be to have a public message board for local public officials to use in order to share information with one another---AND THE PUBLIC. Knox County did this after the Knox County Commission was cited for private meetings and deliberations between commissioners. You can also reach the Knox County website here and then click on Commission Forum to see the public message board.

We are approaching the annual celebration of Sunshine Week in Tennessee. And the Citizen-Tribune, as it has always done, will have a wonderful editorial extolling the virtues of Tennessee's Open Meetings and Open Records Acts ("Sunshine" laws).

And at the same time, the Citizen-Tribune knows that there are unannounced meetings taking place in Hamblen County where important discussions and/or deliberations about the spending of millions of taxpayer dollars are taking place in the dark.

You can't have a "public" meeting without adequate notice to the public!

Wouldn't it be refreshing if the Tribune did more than write an editorial once-a-year about how important the Sunshine Laws are?

October 31, 2007 Local Government: If Tennessee's "Sunshine Laws" Are Gutted

How about private meetings of government officials where decisions are made without the public or press around and then a public meeting where the votes are taken to make the private, backroom deals "official"?

If city, county, and school board officials get their way in weakening Tennessee's Sunshine Laws (Open Meetings and Public Records Acts), private meetings could be coming to a local government near you.

The Memphis Commercial-Appeal recently ran an excellent editorial on this topic as did the Knoxville News-Sentinel.

If the Tennessee General Assembly does change the Open Meetings Act to allow officials to meet secretly and privately-- in groups of "less than a quorum"-- what would this mean locally?

MORRISTOWN CITY COUNCIL: Up to three members of the Morristown City Council--one less than a quorum--could meet together secretly or with local power/money interests to deliberate, swap votes, and do whatever they want to do in reaching an agreement on how to vote at the "public" meeting. When the "public" vote is later taken at a "public" meeting of the council, it will all be a sham because the decision will have already been made by small groups of council members who have met in the dark, in the backroom, outside of the public's view.

HAMBLEN COUNTY COMMISSION: Up to seven members of the Hamblen County Commission--one less than a quorum--could meet together secretly or with local power/money interests to deliberate, swap votes, and do whatever they want to do in reaching an agreement on how to vote at the "public" meeting. When the "public" hearing or "public" vote is later taken at a "public" meeting, it will all be a sham because the decision will have already been made by small groups of commissioners who have met in the dark, in the backroom, outside of the public's view.

HAMBLEN COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD: Up to three members of the Hamblen County School Board---one less than a quorum---could meet together secretly or with local power/ money interests to deliberate, swap votes, and do whatever they want to do in reaching an agreement on how to vote at the "public" meeting. When the "public" vote is later taken at a "public" meeting, it will all be a sham because the decision will have already been made by board members who have met in the dark, in the backroom, outside of the public's view.

If they succeed in eliminating public oversight and ridding themselves of the disinfectant effect of Tennessee's Sunshine Laws, county commissioners, city council members, and school board members will jump at the opportunity to have secret meetings well before the "public" meeting---especially where important and controversial issues are concerned.

And if, by chance, a snag arises during the public meeting over a decision, the chairman can just ask for a short recess during which the officials can again meet in their little groups to have their "private" discussions about "public" business.

Why do local government officials want to gut the Open Meetings Act? The official line seems to be that government officials need freedom to deliberate in private so they can share information and get "special insight" into public business.

If local government officials think that secret, private meetings are good, why not just have one big private meeting of ALL commissioners, city councilmen, school board members. Now, THAT would really maximize insight and efficiency at the later public meeting!!!

It is obvious that local government officials simply aren't interested in open and accountable government and that they view public participation and comments as a nuisance. Local government officials want Tennessee's Open Meetings Act changed so they can have special private meetings where the decisions are made and then have a public meeting where the votes are taken to make the backroom deal "official."

Quick and efficient. Yes. Open, accountable, and ethical. No.

October 28, 2007 Local Government Officials Want To Gut Sunshine Laws

A state legislative study subcommittee has decided to recommend that political backroom deal-making and secret meetings of local legislative officials be made legal.

If the full committee and later the General Assembly adopts the subcommittee proposal, local public meetings will be a sham, a shame, and nothing more than a "public" vote/rubber stamp of whatever the local officials have already decided during their private deliberations and secret dealmaking.

The "Open Meetings" subcommittee wants to allow groups of county commissioners, groups of city council members, and groups of school board members to meet in secret (or with the rich and powerful) to deliberate and decide public issues---just as long as the secret meeting involves less than a quorum of the members of the whole body.

The Knoxville News-Sentinel has a good editorial 'Sun' burn sends officials scurrying.

The Tennessean offers its opinion Bolster, don't soften, open meetings law.

The Memphis Commercial Appeal recalls the history behind Tennessee's Open Meetings Act and labels as "hogwash" Memphis state representative Ulysses Jones' public excuse for wanting to allow secret meetings. The C-A has another biting editorial on Redefining 'open' meetings.

If the nightmarish proposal of the subcommittee is adopted by the Tennessee General Assembly, local government officials will be ecstatic and the public will be left in the dark!

You can bet that local government officials will happily revert to the "good old days" when the good old boys and girls had the meeting before the meeting without the pesky public or press (newspaper, radio, TV) around to ask questions.

The subcommittee's proposal is a real step backward for open government. It will dash whatever hope and possibility existed for accountable and ethical local government.

The proposal will give county commissioners, city council members, and school boards state approval to make decisions on both routine and controversial issues in "secret" small group meetings and then come out in "public" only when it's time to vote.

October 3, 2007 Knox Sunshine Verdict: 12-0 For the People

Twelve jurors gave a BIG victory to Tennessee citizens and to open government advocates yesterday. The plaintiffs in court were the Knoxville News-Sentinel and nine citizens. The defendant was the Knox County Commission.

At issue in the trial was Tennessee's Open Meetings Act which states in part: "...the policy of this state [is] that the formation of public policy and decisions is public business and shall not be conducted in secret." TCA 8-44-101.

The Knoxville News-Sentinel and the nine citizens sued Knox County Commissioners for violations of Tennessee's Open Meetings Act (TOMA) in a January 31, 2007, special meeting of the Commission and in actions and conduct prior to that meeting. At the meeting, commissioners appointed 8 new commissioners and 4 new countywide officials (trustee, county clerk, sheriff, and register of deeds) to replace the officials then in office.

Why were 12 officials suddenly being replaced? These 12 officials were term-limited by a Knox County Charter provision that had been approved by Knox County voters in 1994 but that been ignored for 12 years.

When a 2006 Knox case involving term-limited officials reached the Tennessee Supreme Court, the Court issued a ruling in January 2007 that the term limit provisions of the Knox charter were valid and that the 12 officials who were then holding office were in fact term-limited and should be removed from office and replaced.

Yesterday, 12 citizens said that Knox County Commissioners violated both the letter of Tennessee's Open Meetings Law as well as the spirit of the law during the process of appointing replacements for the term-limited officials.

The jurors decided that numerous violations of the law occurred during private meetings of commissioners that took place during numerous recesses at the January 31, 2007, meeting and that other violations occurred during private meetings and deliberations that took place prior to the January 31 meeting.

The ball is in the Chancellor's court now (pun intended). Chancellor Fansler will fashion a remedy for what happened. He has wide latitude in this regard, and you can be sure that Knox County and other public bodies and citizens across the state are watching with deep interest.

Some of the options he has are (1) Order a re-do of the meeting to make the appointments in an open meeting with all deliberations made publicly; (2) issue an injunction that prohibits future "Sunshine" violations and requires that commission report on its compliance to the court.

In a very complex case, each of these options raises its own unique set of issues.

If a "re-do" is ordered, are the eight old term-limited commissioners brought back to vote again on the appointments? Will the re-do really be a new and open consideration of all interested individuals or will it just be a rubber-stamp appointment of the same people again?

If Fansler orders a re-do, will Josh Jordan, son of term-limited commissioner Diane Jordan and himself a former drug-dealer, again be appointed to replace his mother? Will Sharon Cawood, wife of term-limited commissioner Mark Cawood, again be appointed to replace her husband? Will Chuck Bolus, who testified under oath that he suddenly decided to be sworn in early on January 31 but has no recollection at all of how an oath of office suddenly and miraculously appeared in his hand that day, be appointed again?

I am very pleased with the verdict. The News-Sentinel and the nine citizens have given their time and have spent considerable sums of money to clarify the Sunshine Law and to support open and accountable government in Knox County.

The Tennessee Coalition for Open Government has praised the decision while recognizing that Tennessee's Sunshine Laws (Open Meetings law and Open Records law) are not very strong.

The Coalition, of which the News-Sentinel is a member, wants to strengthen these laws when the Tennessee General Assembly meets in 2008. However, the Coalition's efforts are being opposed by city and county officials and by organizations that represent city and county officials.

These city and county officials and their member associations want to weaken Tennessee's Sunshine laws by providing for more "exceptions" that would prevent citizen access to public records and that would allow officials to meet privately in groups and reach agreements prior to public discussion and sometimes even prior to the public's awareness that a topic is under consideration (the "meeting before the meeting").

If city and county officials get their way in weakening the Sunshine Laws, then the Tennessee General Assembly will need to re-write the introduction to the Open Meetings Act as follows: "...the policy of this state [is] that the formation of public policy and decisions is NONE OF THE PUBLIC'S BUSINESS AND IS TO BE CONDUCTED IN SECRET."

May 16, 2007 Anonymous(e) Pops Up at Cuppa Joe

Thanks to Joe Powell for mentioning my post on the violation of the Sunshine Law by the Hamblen County Commission at the May 8th meeting of the full Commission.

Joe has always been a crusader for open government and for getting rid of backdoor deals.

Apparently, a Courthouse Anonymous(e) was lurking on Joe's blog and started whining when Joe linked to my post where I reported that there was no public notice of the May 8th meeting of the Hamblen County Commission at which the Hamblen County Ethics Committee was appointed.

How the Commissioners sat there silently on May 8th while the County Mayor, the Commission Chair, and the County Attorney somehow said with a straight face that the county actually met the "adequate public notice" requirements of the law even when there was NO PUBLIC NOTICE or announcement of the meeting is more than a wee bit hard to understand.

Here is my reply in Joe's comments section to Joe's Anonymouse.

Linda said...
Looks like there might be an Anonymous(e) in the courthouse to go along with those termites!

Where did Anonymouse deal with the issue which was: was "adequate public notice" as required by law provided for this "special called meeting" of the Hamblen County Commission?

Anonymouse appears to admit that the requirements of public NOTICE were not met when he says "I don't think there was any DELIBERATE attempt to keep the meeting from the public."

I stated much the same thing in my post when I said "It was probably hoped and expected that the press would notify the public."

BUT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN as hoped or expected.

That means that there was not adequate public notice. There was NO public notice. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

Anonymouse should do a little reading: The law says that the County must provide "adequate public notice" not "adequate press notice."

You are absolutely right in your last comment--as soon as it was realized that the law had not been followed regarding notice of the meeting, it should have been stopped and re-scheduled with proper notice to the public.

I'll have a lot more on this on my blog in a day or so.

The Sunshine Law and the Public Records Laws are among THE most important tools and safeguards that citizens have to protect from secret meetings and to enable them to try to find out what's going on with their money and their government!

Because these laws are citizen-friendly and are so useful to citizens, governments love to stick the "troublemaker" label on those who try to enforce and actually use the law to get information.

Sorry about that, Anonymouse! Until the Sunshine and Public Records (Laws) are repealed, I'll continue to use them to get info and I'll continue to remind officials that it isn't a public meeting and the Sun isn't shining if you haven't announced the meeting to the public!

If that makes me a "troublemaker," so be it.

This "troublemaker" has saved county taxpayers a ton of money by asking questions and checking out financial info much to the chagrin of Anonymouse.

I saved the taxpayers $1.1 million dollars in 2005 by checking the math in the calculation of the county's new tax rate after the 2005 re-appraisal. I checked the rate that the state had provided and that county finance officials were using in the budget process in 2005.

I found out that the rate was 11 cents too high. This would have resulted in the over collection of $1.1 million from Hamblen County taxpayers. My figures were quickly verified as correct, and the state and county then corrected and lowered the certified tax rate by 11 cents.

Remember the $18,000 that we have saved every year since 2002 by using the state auditors which I pushed for in 2002?

And there's more we could be saving right now and could have saved over the past several years if certain spending and procurement practices were changed.

I'm sick of taxes going up, up, and away!

So, Anonymouse, watch out.

The taxpayers need commissioners who will work with the public as "watchdogs" of the public pursestrings---and not be timid "lapdogs" who spend too much time worrying that they might not get invited into the inner sanctum of government.

Anonymouse, smell the coffee and quit blaming others and trying to deflect attention from the issue. You have admitted that the public wasn't notified about the meeting: "I don't think there was any deliberate attempt to keep the meeting from the public."

Deliberate or not deliberate, it really doesn't matter. THERE WAS NOT ADEQUATE PUBLIC NOTICE OF THIS MEETING!

Is it that difficult to accept and properly deal with what you yourself have admitted. It's not rocket science. If there wasn't public notice, if it was just a glitch, do what Joe said, re-schedule the meeting, provide adequate public notice, and do it over the right way!

And next time, take an ad in the Legal/Public notice section of the paper to provide notice.

That's what the county does for rezonings and lots of other special meetings. Then you don't have to worry about someone else taking care of "adequate public notice."

May 13, 2007 Hamblen County Ethics Committee Appointed But the Sun Wasn't Shining

There was a special called meeting of the Hamblen County Commission on Tuesday, May 8, but the public wasn't told or notified.

Officials and a few other individuals received e-mail notification about the meeting from the Hamblen County Mayor's Office around May 1.

[I just happened to hear about the meeting from a Hamblen County official a few days before the meeting was to take place. ]

There is a Sunshine Law in Tennessee. The Sunshine Law states that it is the public policy of the state that the business of the public must be conducted in public.

To make sure that public business is conducted in public, the Sunshine Law provides that there must be "adequate public notice" for regular meetings and for special called meetings.

Just prior to the start of the business portion of the May 8th meeting, I notified the entire commission that there had been only e-mail notification to a very limited number of individuals about this special meeting, and I expressed my concern over this apparent violation of the Sunshine Law.

Chairman Ford turned to Mayor Purkey, and the Mayor said something to the effect that they had complied with the notice requirements for public meetings.

When asked specifically whether an e-mail notification that only went to a very limited number of individuals in Hamblen County could be considered adequate notice to the 60,000 Hamblen countians who did NOT receive the e-mail or any public notice, Chairman Ford referred the question to County Attorney Rusty Cantwell.

Cantwell expressed no concern about the legality of public notice even when the only notice of the meeting was an e-mail that was sent to a very limited number of specific recipients.

While it may have been hoped or expected that the press would notify the public of this special meeting, that didn't occur. The Sunshine Law doesn't state that a hope or expectation that someone will provide notice of the meeting meets the actual notice requirement.

The Sunshine Law states that there must be "adequate public notice" for regular and special called meetings. T.C.A. 8-44-103.

How can you conduct public business in public if you don't tell the public that there is a public meeting and if you don't provide notice as to when and where the meeting will take place?

There wasn't any Sunshine at the May 8th meeting even though it was an especially important meeting--a special called meeting during which appointment of the Hamblen County Ethics Committee would take place. The only other item on the agenda was termites in the Courthouse.

Mayor David Purkey, as expected, appointed commissioners Stancil Ford and Joe Swann and Trustee Bill Brittain to the Ethics Committee. Joe Swann then jumped in and nominated Jack Cartwright and Jim Harrison for the "regular citizen" positions.

Right before the meeting, I talked with two commissioners and recommended Patricia Stephens and Steve Sublett for the Ethics Committee. Each was nominated and received three and four votes respectively. Both Ms. Stephens and Mr. Sublett attend commission meetings regularly, are thoughtful and conscientious individuals, and would have represented the citizens and taxpayers well.

Bonnie Oakberg was also nominated. She attends meetings regularly and would have served well. Bonnie had taken the initiative to submit her own list of possible Ethics Committee nominees to commissioners several weeks ago.

I know Mr. Cartwright and Mr. Harrison by name only. I don't know how many commission meetings they have attended in the past 4-5 years.

I trust that Mr. Cartwright and Mr. Harrison along with the other members of the Ethics Committee will serve honorably, recognizing that they have perhaps the most important jobs in Hamblen County. They are the gatekeepers of ethics in Hamblen County.

It is unfortunate and ironic, however, that the appointment of this new five-man Hamblen County Ethics Committee took place at a meeting of which the public meeting was not notified.

It is unfortunate, and that is putting it midly, that the County Mayor, the County Attorney, and Commission Chair Stancil Ford (who was appointed to the Ethics Committee) had zero concern about the lack of public notice for this meeting and zero concern about the apparent violation of the notice requirements of the Sunshine Law.

It is unfortunate, and that is putting it mildly, that the thirteen other commissioners, including Joe Swann (who was appointed to the Ethics Committee), had zero concern about the lack of public notice for this meeting and zero concern about the apparent violation of the notice requirements of the Sunshine Law in Tennessee.

March 2, 2007 That Was The Week That Was

And what a week it was......

Joseph Lee, head of Memphis Light, Gas & Water, admits to a grand jury that MLG&W kept a "privileged customer" list (privileged customer=politician).

City Councilman Edmund Ford, who has already been indicted for bribery, was one of many on that list. Ford was protected from utility cut-off even when his delinquent bills totalled $16,000.

Joseph Lee recently offered to resign, but Memphis Mayor Willie Herenton, who appointed Lee, wouldn't hear of it. Herenton says it's a "witch hunt." Herenton blames everyone, except Lee, for the favored treatment of high and mighty Memphis politicians.

GOOD NEWS IN MEMPHIS. John Ford and Edmund Ford have just come into a sizable inheritance. Edmund Ford will probably rush down to MLG&W to pay his utility bill and then on over to the Cadillac dealership to pay his Escalade lease. Maybe his brother (former State Sen. John Ford) will take his share and pay for his own defense attorney.
-------------------------
Jerry Cooper. Due to a wreck in February that was accompanied by DUI and speeding charges, Sen. Jerry Cooper got a delay in his wire and bank fraud trial. Previously, the judge had denied Cooper's efforts to delay the trial.
-------------------------
Newly-appointed Knox Register of Deeds (ROD) Sherry Witt can't handle her job without the help of her former boss Steve Hall. Hall was term-limited as ROD, and Witt was appointed to replace him on Jan. 31. Now Witt has turned around and hired her ex-boss as an administrative assistant earning $69,000.

Term-limits or no term-limits, one way or another politicians are going to keep their government jobs! The Jan. 31 appointments were a farce--just musical chairs to shift the term-limited officials and their families to new and different positions.
------------------------
Speaking of the musical chairs appointments, the N-S filed suit against the Knox Commission alleging violations of the Sunshine Law when commissioners "recessed" the Jan. 31 meeting several times, During the recesses, commissioners met outside the public view to discuss and deliberate toward the 12 appointments for the term-limited Knox County officials.

Knox Commissioners recently rejected the News-Sentinel's offer to drop the lawsuit if commissioners would admit to violations of the Sunshine Law and then re-do the appointments with public deliberation in a public meeting.

Now, the Commissioners have asked the News-Sentinel to hold off on the suit until the legislature considers changes to the Sunshine Law! Since it took the legislature months to even appoint a Sunshine-in-Government committee, the Knox Commissioners know that there won't be action any time soon from Nashville.

Just a cheap delaying tactic by another set of ethically-challenged officials.
------------------------------------
Phil Williams is a great investigative reporter. He has an interesting report on who gets TDOT (Tennessee Dept. of Transportation) consulting jobs and how they get these jobs.

Gerald Nicely is head of TDOT and he alone gets to pick who gets TDOT consulting contracts. His former chief of staff resigned and went to work for CTE, a consulting firm doing business with the TDOT.

Nicely gave $2.7 million in state contracts to CTE in the first three years of the Bredesen administration. Then after CTE hired Nicely's chief of staff, the commissioner gave CTE more than $4.1 million in contracts in 9-months.

Nicely admits that there is the "potential" for abuse, but denies [of course] that there has been any abuse or favoritism.
------------------------
Speaking of no-bid deals, a former Sumner County Sheriff was convicted of wire fraud in a scheme to give his brother a no-bid contract to build a maintenance garage. Just like in Knox, nobody can resist helping themselves---and their family and close friends---to tax dollars.
------------------------