Word in the 'hood is that Pinkston is not going to run.

So he'll be campaigning for DeFreese?

Don't like the idea of a Duncan over the trustee office being investigated by the TBI with his father grooming him while himself at the federal level with influence over the TBI.....don't think he would allow his son to fail and very likely would stick his nose in to make sure this does not happen. This would not necessarily be a good thing and he sure did not do anything to step up and help before his son was running. With Duncan senior I suspect we won't know what is going on if his son succeeds in being elected....I just don't like the idea of a Duncan Trustee and for that matter would like to see Duncan opposition at the federal level also.

This goes back to the same fight regarding term limits but in a different way.

Surely there are better, more experienced people out there. We don't need a whole new form of nepotism and the investigation needs to go forward without outside or Duncan senior having a vested interest in it. He had his chance to help and surely knew what was going on.

Fansler's ruling on which Goins bases his opinion is not included in the PDF linked to the KNS article, so it's hard to reach a firm conclusion, but I believe Goins is wrong.
There is no ambiguity in the charter language, and only a tortured distortion of "more than a single term" into "two single terms" supports Goins' opinion. He is introducing an ambiguity that is not there. The charter is worded as it is for a reason, to allow a person to run only once as an incumbent. Pinkston and those similarly situated have already had their opportunity to campaign with the advantage of incumbency. Goins is undermining the language and spirit of the term limits law if he grants anyone a second such campaign.
He is correct about the at-large seats, however. Those are different offices with different constituencies.

Have i got it right?

If this stands, a county commissioner ,elected in '08 for 2 years,
re elected in '10 for 6 years, could be re elected in '16 & serve
4 more years???

I edited this post..I had posted "could be re elected in '14".

I was mistaken...the post should have read "could be
re elected in '16."

Again..I'm asking because I don't the answer.

Anyone know anything about Donald Lamb Land?

Commissioners May Ignore County Charter, State Finds
Pay no attention to that pesky charter," says state election coordinator

From APB reports. KNOXVILLE - In an opinion issued Friday, state election coordinator Mark Goins said that, in regard to constitutional issues, Knox Countians would be better off consulting crystal balls, Ouija boards, Tarot cards, tea leaves or the entrails of dead animals rather than their own county charter. This interpretation paves the way for county commissioners to run for multiple seats simultaneously and to serve unlimited terms and gives explicit permission for county officials to thumb their noses at county residents and say "Nyah, nyah, nyah" to them.

Goins issued his opinion in response to a request from Knox County Administrator of Elections Greg Mackay to help the county get through just one election cycle without another constitutional challenge. Mackay asked for clarification in regard to the term-limits language in the Knox County Charter. The relevant language of the charter reads

...no person shall be eligible to serve in any elected office of Knox County if during the previous two terms of that office the person in question has served more than a single term.
(Knox County Charter 9.17.A)

Specifically, Mackay asked if "more than a single term" actually means "more than a single term." Goins cited a Magic 8-Ball message that read "My sources say 'no'" to interpret that the passage didn't actually mean what it said and thereby to discount partial terms in calculating term limits.

"Based on the Magic 8-Ball's message, clearly, 'more than a single term' does not mean 'more than a single term,' and, in fact, means something entirely different. Therefore, you should disregard that charter passage in its entirety when determining the eligibility of a candidate for County Commission to seek another term as a county commissioner or anything else that shakes his or her groove thing," explained Goins...

Thank you rneal very much for posting this information! I appreciate it very much.

Excellent, with the referenced ruling we can see exactly where Chancellor Fansler erred. It is here: "The absence of a clause or phrase in 8.17(a) addressing partial terms distinguishes this case." Fansler is wrong about this absence. The charter does include a phrase that addresses partial terms; Fansler merely overlooked it. That phrase is "more than a single term."

Here is the charter language: "..if during the previous two terms of that office the person in question has served more than a single term..." The authors of this statute could have written "served both terms," but they chose the phrase "more than a single term" and to define "the previous two terms" as the time frame in which to determine a person's eligibility. This somewhat convoluted sentence construction suggests the opposite of what Fansler concluded. The authors did not fail to address partial terms; they went out of their way to phrase the statute so it would cover the various irregularities of circumstance by which people take office.

Fansler doubles down on his mistake when he goes on to say, "Clearly the service between January 1, 1995 and the election in 1996 is less than an undivided four-year term." Just as clearly, service between January 1, 1995 and the election in 2000 is more than an undivided four-year term. Fansler uses the phrase "less than" while overlooking the statute's "more than."

The Thompson v. Beeler decision plainly constrains the authority of the state election coordinator as it pertains to local offices and home rule. Fansler acknowledged Thompson's authority to offer guidance and opinions, but permitted the county election commission to decide differently, as it did with Beeler's candidacy. The current election commission should act similarly, rejecting Goins' opinion and ruling that a candidate is not eligible for a county office "if during the previous two terms of that office the person in question has served more than a single term."

perhaps it is a simple as how one defines a term /// thank u for posting this information

DeFreese says she won’t run for Knox County Commission

My office failed to note that Cathy Quist has in fact picked up a nominating petition for "Circuit, Civil Sessions & Juvenile Court Clerk."

We will fix this on the chart but it will be next week.

Georgiana Vines has an update on Don Daugherty's filings with an explanation.

This is an open letter to Don Daugherty, who may be seeking residence here in the second district so he can qualify to run for County Commission to represent us as mentioned in this News Sentinel column.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2009/nov/28/daugherty-plans-run-in-county/

Don Daugherty:

Speaking for myself and many here in the second district, please find residence elsewhere in the county. We believe that the representative for our district on County Commission should live in the district NOW and have lived here long enough to know our concerns. A representative should be a part of the community and have attended association meetings BEFORE they decide to campaign for our vote.

This "legal loophole" plan of yours sounds purely political and serves only yourself, not the people of this district. If you want to be on County Commission why not run in the district in which you are currently living?

My husband Mark Harmon and I are proud to support Amy Broyles because of the great job she has done as our current County Commissioner and will continue to do in this next term.

Sincerely,

Becky Harmon

This is an open letter to Don Daugherty, who may be seeking residence in the second district so he can qualify to run for Knox County Commission against Amy Broyles.

Don:

Speaking for myself and many others throughout Knox County please find residence in the 2nd District and run against Amy Broyles.

Knox County cannot afford Ms. Broyles and her expensive, vague, and hazardous social ideology. The constant anti-law enforcement prejudice from Ms. Broyles presents a public safety hazard to citizens across Knox County. Her mandate to push housing for the mentally ill, drug addicted, and alcohol addicted out into rural and suburban areas is counter productive, expensive, and cruel to the people who need this help. These patients need to be close to services. It is ridiculous to create a private on demand bus service to move these patients far out into the county.

What you are doing is both legal and ethical and I wish you God speed and great success.

I firmly believe in not putting the cart before the
horse when it comes to elective office.

Therefore,a candidate must win the nomination before
they can win the general election.

I will support Amy Broyles for the Democratic
nomination in the 2nd County Commission district.

Amy has done a great job.

Bill Young