There are currently 12 users and 283 guests online.
Television and the Commission's Actions
Submitted by Mark Harmon on Fri, 2007/02/02 - 6:48pm.
County Commission's actions certainly will get some TV attention this weekend.
DTV tonight will be a live show. I will be hosting as usual. The program is from 9:30 to 10:30 pm. Sharon Cawood is confirmed as a guest; others are possible. Call-in questions welcome, 215-2288.
WBIR's Inside Tennessee (the station's website indicates it airs at 9:30 a.m. Sunday with likely replays on the Ten News 2 channel). It taped Thursday night. First segment: Commissioners Greg Lambert and R. Larry Smith and former commissioner John Greiss. Second segment: Randy Tyree and Me, as you might expect I blast the process followed by the commission. Third Segment: Sharon Cawood, Sherry Witt.
WATE's Tennessee This Week. The station website indicates Noon airing, and streaming video likely earlier on the station website. Guests include: Commissioners R. Larry Smith and Greg Lambert, as well as Amy Broyles.
Submitted by Patricia on Sat, 2007/02/03 - 8:34am.
Lumpy Lambert on tv?? Wow that is a first. I wonder how he ever has time to know what is going on in his district since he spends all his time finding a camera to jump in front of.
Submitted by R. Neal on Sat, 2007/02/03 - 10:02am.
I just watched the Tennessee This Week, and two things stood out.
One, Lumpy's protestations that this stuff goes on all the time and it's no big deal and it's no different than what goes on in the U.S. Senate (guess he has higher aspirations and sees this as good experience).
George Korda continues this theme, and explains that all legislative bodies including commission break to discuss impasses and try to reach consensus.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that a zoning regulation or a school board budget is one thing. Appointing half of a county government without voter or any kind of public input or participation is quite another. Either should be deliberated out in the open and in the public view, but matters involving citizen representation where the voters aren't given any opportunity to have their voice heard ought to be held to the highest standard of openness.
The second thing that struck me was George Korda's contention that the reason for the big rush to appoint replacements was because, according to Law Director John Owings, the Tennessee Supreme Court "has given us a window of time in which to do something."
Gene should have called him on that. All they said was "those county commissioners and state constitutional officers otherwise precluded from holding the offices to which they were recently elected may continue as de facto officers until their successors are named in accordance with law." I believe the law is Article II of the Tennessee Constitution, which says '[v]acancies in county offices shall be filled by the county legislative body, and any person so appointed shall serve until his successor is elected at the next election occurring after the vacancy is qualified.'
The TSC didn't mandate anything other than the vacancies to be filled according to state law, and state law does not appear to impose any time frame.
Several commissioners called for special elections or preference polling or at least open public forums for candidates. Mayor Ragsdale called for a series of public meetings.
Clearly there was some other agenda at play. Trying to say that the TSC mandated it is a smokescreen.
Submitted by Tamara Shepherd on Sat, 2007/02/03 - 1:26pm.
Randy: "George Korda continues this theme, and explains that all legislative bodies including commission break to discuss impasses and try to reach consensus."
Ya know, Randy, I phoned Demo TV last night to share this observation with Mark:
Our school board meets twice monthly for work sessions, at which the entire board openly deliberates voting issues to arise at their upcoming regular meeting, the voting session. These work sessions are perceived to be the "meat and taters" of the board's work and, as such, they are well-attended. The school board's subsequent voting session is really pretty cut and dried. On-lookers don't feel shut out, though, having already been privy to deliberations of the board as a whole, and neither are school board members "surprised" by issues arising in the voting session.
Our commission, in contrast, does not meet in work sessions comprised of the entire legislative body. Instead, commission relies on splinter meetings of the various committees at which deliberations on upcoming voting issues arise. These committee meetings are *not* well attended (can't say why) and commission's reliance on them as the venue for deliberation sometimes results in the introduction of topics at the voting session that are "surprising" to commissioners not on a given committee. Commission meetings run very long (usually 2 pm to 6 pm, at which time Commission takes up zoning proposals), yet sometimes on-lookers nevertheless leave the voting session troubled that too little open discussion has transpired. It's not surprising, either, that some of that discussion takes place in hallways rather than up on the dais.
My thought for Mark, then, was that maybe Commission could rethink the structure of its meetings, that is, consider using work sessions of the entire body. I'm wondering if doing so might foster greater inclusivity of both the general public and those commissioners outside particular committees.
Just throwing it out there. I'm really gone for the day, now.
The WBIR show is typically not particularly probing from my past observations.
I quit watching them some time ago.
They are sort of like Muzak.
WATE seems a bit more aggressive.
I think John Schmid would be an excellent guest. With a strong host that asks pointed questions.
Lumpy Lambert on tv?? Wow that is a first. I wonder how he ever has time to know what is going on in his district since he spends all his time finding a camera to jump in front of.
The streaming video and podcast are now available.
http://www.tennesseethisweek.com/archives/37
Thanks Jim!
Mark: there's lots of questions and comments on other threads concerning the forum on Monday and the meeting on Wednesday.
Can you help out and answer them in their respective threads?
I just watched the Tennessee This Week, and two things stood out.
One, Lumpy's protestations that this stuff goes on all the time and it's no big deal and it's no different than what goes on in the U.S. Senate (guess he has higher aspirations and sees this as good experience).
George Korda continues this theme, and explains that all legislative bodies including commission break to discuss impasses and try to reach consensus.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that a zoning regulation or a school board budget is one thing. Appointing half of a county government without voter or any kind of public input or participation is quite another. Either should be deliberated out in the open and in the public view, but matters involving citizen representation where the voters aren't given any opportunity to have their voice heard ought to be held to the highest standard of openness.
The second thing that struck me was George Korda's contention that the reason for the big rush to appoint replacements was because, according to Law Director John Owings, the Tennessee Supreme Court "has given us a window of time in which to do something."
Gene should have called him on that. All they said was "those county commissioners and state constitutional officers otherwise precluded from holding the offices to which they were recently elected may continue as de facto officers until their successors are named in accordance with law." I believe the law is Article II of the Tennessee Constitution, which says '[v]acancies in county offices shall be filled by the county legislative body, and any person so appointed shall serve until his successor is elected at the next election occurring after the vacancy is qualified.'
The TSC didn't mandate anything other than the vacancies to be filled according to state law, and state law does not appear to impose any time frame.
Several commissioners called for special elections or preference polling or at least open public forums for candidates. Mayor Ragsdale called for a series of public meetings.
Clearly there was some other agenda at play. Trying to say that the TSC mandated it is a smokescreen.
Randy: "George Korda continues this theme, and explains that all legislative bodies including commission break to discuss impasses and try to reach consensus."
Ya know, Randy, I phoned Demo TV last night to share this observation with Mark:
Our school board meets twice monthly for work sessions, at which the entire board openly deliberates voting issues to arise at their upcoming regular meeting, the voting session. These work sessions are perceived to be the "meat and taters" of the board's work and, as such, they are well-attended. The school board's subsequent voting session is really pretty cut and dried. On-lookers don't feel shut out, though, having already been privy to deliberations of the board as a whole, and neither are school board members "surprised" by issues arising in the voting session.
Our commission, in contrast, does not meet in work sessions comprised of the entire legislative body. Instead, commission relies on splinter meetings of the various committees at which deliberations on upcoming voting issues arise. These committee meetings are *not* well attended (can't say why) and commission's reliance on them as the venue for deliberation sometimes results in the introduction of topics at the voting session that are "surprising" to commissioners not on a given committee. Commission meetings run very long (usually 2 pm to 6 pm, at which time Commission takes up zoning proposals), yet sometimes on-lookers nevertheless leave the voting session troubled that too little open discussion has transpired. It's not surprising, either, that some of that discussion takes place in hallways rather than up on the dais.
My thought for Mark, then, was that maybe Commission could rethink the structure of its meetings, that is, consider using work sessions of the entire body. I'm wondering if doing so might foster greater inclusivity of both the general public and those commissioners outside particular committees.
Just throwing it out there. I'm really gone for the day, now.
Post new comment