Broyles is giving him what-for for 'disrespectful' statements about County employees. Brad's respectfully saying 'too bad, that's how I feel' and using the opportunity to make points about contaminated mulch.

Pinkston- no
Brown- no
Wright-no
Armostrong-no
Carringer-no
Smith- yes
Lambert- no
Anders- no
Briggs- yes
Leuthold- no
Hammond- yes
Shouse-yes
Sanders- yes
I Harmon- no
Norman- yes
Broyles- yes
Harmon - yes
Strickland- no
McKenzie - no

The "no" votes all claim there was a mechanism already in place to remove ousted commissioners. Sure, if you're unpopular or in the minority faction.

"It's a shame that some commissioners are trying to justify voting against this simple statement of principle that, in the future, ousted commissioners shall not serve on boards and committees we appoint."

You two are on a roll today. First no free speech with Brad Mayes. Now the Scarlet O on the forehead. You both have some very strange ideas about government.

Ouster does not place a person on a notification list and require a surrender of their rights. We don't take away their right to vote or own a firearm. In addition Briggs and others had a solid point about Ex Post Facto.

How was this a statement of principle? It doesn't make any sense. It was just wrong. You may have forgotten the Recall Amendment is not for cause. It is for any reason including you just don't like the person. A Commissioner could be removed for nothing more than politics with the Recall Amendment. There was no need for this.

Completely irrelevant to the issue. This is like taking away teachers rights to serve on Commission with Charter Amendment 3. It is just wrong. And Broyles is way off base with making this a good ole boy slam.

teachers same as perjurers?

Bean: "9, have you ever criticized Scooby Moore?"

Nine: "Completely irrelevant to the issue."

That means no.

.. no make that hypocritical that you stomp your feet in fury about how Commission won't do anything about NRR, won't do the right thing, etc, but when it comes to a vote to prevent FUTURE embarrassments of an ousted commissioner sitting on a board, it's OK for the faction to vote to cover their asses against future scandals they might participate in.

How do you expect functional government if you don't hold your own people to any kind of standard.

Factionalism is wrong and incompatible with a functional government.

Speaking of which- who is Karen Smith? What are her qualifications and what makes her ideal for the Ethics board? Or was that another factional vote (for faction scandal insurance)? Why didn't Commission even briefly talk to the candidates to find out which one is the best fit? (and yes, I will equally criticize those in Districts 1-4 for not asking to talk to Karen Smith, even though she didn't even bother to come to the meeting).

Many people talk about how bad factionalism is, but very few want to do anything about it. The Board-boot proposal would have been a good step to show Knox County that we take scandal seriously.

Which apparently, we don't.

thank you