That was a very graceful statement.

Might one of you paraphrase it, for the benefit of those of us who don't "do" Facebook (and don't want to)?

Well, damn
Just went back to FB to re-read his post, and it's not there anymore.
What the heck?

"I am continuing the cause to beat Senator Campfield in 2014 but not as a candidate. I will be doing so as a concerned citizen."

"It is time for someone who can do this job at a level inconceivable to Senator Campfield."

and

"I believe this man is Colonel/Doctor/Commissioner Briggs."

Graceful, indeed.

Thanks, jmcnair.

OK, it's back now (he must have revised it a bit)

here's a different snippet:

I'd like to thank everyone for all their support. I have made a decision regarding the direction my life will take. In reality, I've been making this decision for the last few months and was just unwilling to admit it to myself. I am continuing the cause to beat Senator Campfield in 2014 but not as a candidate. I will be doing so as a concerned citizen.

First and foremost, this decision was made due to what I believe my future should be. Working at the University of Tennessee as a lecturer, I am endlessly fighting for my job. I fight for my job because it is the job I've loved the most. ...

And:

I've met Commissioner Briggs and he is a kind man who treats everyone with respect. I am certain that if we have Senator Briggs he wouldn't sell off the Lakeshore property to the highest bidder. Don't just take my word for it; take a moment to read about Commissioner Briggs and decide for yourself.

Brian Stevens also said this:

"First and foremost, this decision was made due to what I believe my future should be. Working at the University of Tennessee as a lecturer, I am endlessly fighting for my job. I fight for my job because it is the job I've loved the most."

Since Brian doesn't have a tenure-track faculty position at UT, I suspect he fears that Campfield and other vindictive Republicans in the state legislature will use their pull to get Brian removed from his job...as in fired.

Definitely a possibility with those neanderthals running the show...the Tennessee GOP should adopt the Wooly Mammoth as their symbol/mascot.

He's one of those rare candidates without a discernible downside. He is smart, articulate, right on the issues, accessible, shows up at events, and doesn't run his mouth to the detriment of the party. He is also pleasant, polite and personable. He's also media friendly. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat, but can't give you a good reason why he should expose himself to the abuse from without and within by running as a democrat for public service.

He's run before though, and if he decides to run again I'll do what I can (which could be, keep my mouth shut and vote) to help him get elected.

Mark Harmon is on the short list of local Dems that I think we could build around. Madeline, Gloria Johnson, Anthony Hancock, Indya Kincannon, and Randy Tyree all come to mind on this short list as well.

in Campfield's District, and who ever says they want to run there needs the following:
1) Of course they must live in Campfield's district! Madeline and Gloria are already elected and are serving us and are proud Democrats. Mark does not live in that district; I don't know about Anthony, Indya or Randy.
2) It would need to be a person respected in that community with some name recognition.
3)It would have to be someone who could intelligently represent our values to counter Stacey's LACK of same.

My ideal candidate would be a strong Democratic female, preferably with children either in public schools or attending college here in Tennessee. She could speak against Campfield's embarassing and insulting 'laws' he has written and had passed against women, girls and their medical privacy. If she has a child in college, she could talk about why she does not want her kid going to classes with guns locked in cars on campus. If she has children who MAY appear to be gay or have said they were gay, she could definitely speak against Stacey's hatred of these children. And of course she could run on a platform of finding JOBS that pay a decent wage!

She would need a LOT of financial support because Stacey Campfield does have piles of money, from NRA supporters, from "right to life" groups, and anti-gay right wingers. Of course he didn't let the public know, but his re-election was paid for in part by those who just wanted a GOPper in that seat.

We Democrats here could support such a person, male or female, and would work HARD for his or her win. So you who LIVE IN THAT that District, help us find that person. We will do the rest.

But I really see this as a developmental issue for the Democratic party. If we don't start finding and developing and supporting qualified candidates, we will continue to be irrelevant at whatever level of government republicans target. That includes mentoring and forgiving rookie mistakes.

Case in point, why aren't we demanding a state investigation into harassing and threatening calls to candidates families? The governor has the power to investigate and make sure that the perpetrators are brought to justice, but the risk that it might lead to incrimination of his own party's participants and cost him a vote or two in the legislature seems to override any sense of civil justice. Contrast that to what we demand of members of our own party when running against a fellow Democrat.

We're real tough when it comes to ganging up on our own, but when it comes to standing up against the big boys, well, we're pussies. Since we're pointing out the obvious and all.

Case in point, why aren't we demanding a state investigation into harassing and threatening calls to candidates families?

Bob, I don't know what you're referring to here? Can you elaborate?

(Apologies if I'm the only person who isn't grasping this reference...)

I'd rather not expound in a public forum. Both Dems and Repubs have a tendency to attack personally those that step out of line. Feel free to ask around. It's no big secret.

I'm guessing Mark Harmon wouldn't want to take the pay cut to be a state legislator. Nor would a lot of other good, qualified candidates. We ought to raise the pay for the job.

We ought to raise the pay for the job.

Well we ought to raise the pay for one that's worth a tinker's dam, not the one we have now.

We ought to raise the pay for the job.

This really is a huge problem.

You may be aware that Thomas Deakins won't seek another term on the BoE?

At that recent State of the Schools address, I was encouraging him to run for state office.

He says "not likely." He works full-time and will continue to, while he's raising four kids.

Our loss.

No term limits for BOE

Tamara, they draw down more money that you are aware of, including some kind of home office allowance.

Gotcha, Bob (and Betty). I didn't know about this "office allowance."

From Bob's link:

Legislators are paid a base salary of $19,009 along with a per diem expense of $171 per legislative day.[1] If the legislature remains in session longer than ninety legislative days, lawmakers cease to draw their expense money.

Legislators also receive an "office allowance" of $1,000 per month, ostensibly for the maintenance of an office area devoted to their legislative work in their homes or elsewhere within their district. Traditionally, it has been easier, politically speaking, to raise the per diem and office allowance than the salary.

It's not as paltry as I'd thought, but personally I don't find it at all excessive, either. I'm still thinking in terms of folks like Thomas, a family man raising four kids.

I continue to hear this complaint as to the financial feasibility of serving, though.

Possibly I'm hearing from folks who earn substantially more than this legislative package?

Mark has told me that he'd have to give up his tenured job at UT to run for the legislature.

That ain't going to happen and I don't know why anybody'd speculate otherwise.

Public service requires sacrifice. Obviously, some people don't want to give anything up, especially a good gig like Mark has, but it's a shame that's the case, and it's ultimately one reason why the public suffers.

i fail to see a way to interpret this as positive toward Mark Harmon, whose name you evidently plucked out of the ether.

If I may attempt to referee this point...

Betty, Don was the party to have first proposed Mark's name as a viable candidate, so I don't expect he meant to disparage him with this last comment he made.

Don, Betty's right that you would have been more exact in that comment to say that Mark isn't prudent to give up his current gig, so that it didn't appear you judged his decision harshly.

No offense intended to either of you with that observation...

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE
September 6, 2006 Session
DIANE JORDAN, ET AL. v. KNOX COUNTY, TENNESSEE, ET AL.
Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court for Knox County No. 166799-1 John F. Weaver, Chancellor
No. E2006-01377-SC-RDM-CV - Filed on January 12, 2007
In this expedited appeal, the primary issue presented for review is whether Knox County, Tennessee, has a valid governmental charter. A secondary issue is whether a term limits amendment to the county charter should be applied and, if so, to which of the elected county officials. We hold that while Knox County failed to comply with the enabling legislation for instituting a charter form of government, since September 1, 1990, Knox County has been governed under a de facto charter with a county mayor, county commissioners, and other de facto officers. For the reasons set out in this opinion, it is our conclusion that the term limits amendment meets due process guidelines and applies to all elected Knox County Government officials except for the court clerks and the school board member, each of whom is protected by either the state constitution or statute. The judgment of the Knox County Chancery Court, which invalidated both the charter and the amendment, is therefore affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Unless the opinion of Local Citizen unverified is to be given more weight than the state supreme court, term limits don't apply to the school board.

Betty's correct, LC.

Carson, Deakins, and Kincannon are all serving their third (or later?) terms.

Good catch and it shoulda been done.

Actually, there was lots more beyond that correction that shoulda been done (including more thorough correction to those clauses addressing residency for commission and school board members, for starters).

Lots of us here felt that the Charter Review Committee didn't do all it could have/should have...