Dead on. Thanks Rikki.

This petition stuff is the wolf of top-down government trying to wear the sheep's clothing of 'public' input and public good. It's a small group of people, most all of which live inside the City of Knoxville, driving an effort to change county government.

And, I'm tired of hearing 'we should just let people vote on it'. If I circulated a petition to bar red-headed people from holding public office, should 'we let the people vote on it'? No, it's a stupid law.

If an amendment is bad, it shouldn't be on the ballot. And, as Rikki capably points out, there are bad ones within these carefully put together groups. Start an orange thread and a white thread and let KnoxViewers comment on the amendments therein.

SAY NO TO THE PETITIONS!

I have to agree, at least on the bundling part. Bad move. They should be on the ballot as individual items or not at all.

Cheers to Rikki. I personally love the "Nothing says “accountable” like changing your name thrice in a year."

You know it is bad when rikki and I agree. What are the odds?

Combining the Charter Amendments is voter disenfranchisement. No one should endorse this.

In order to get a Charter Amendment you want you may have to choke down a Charter Amendment you despise.

Brilliant. Simply genius. This special interest group has mangled this beyond comprehension.

The two key Charter Amendments, Mayor King and Feudalism Now were never going to be put up as stand alone Amendments. The medicine was too bitter. They had to be wrapped in sugar, the Nepotism, Conflict of Interest, and Inspector General Amendments.

These KCP people might think we have to be treated like children.

The hucksters who are collecting signatures for Knox Charter Petition/Knox Unaccountable have a pitch sheet just like magazine sellsmen. When you walk up they say, “Do you want to stop Nepotism?”

I replied at the Fresh Market to the huckster, “Are you aware the Nepotism ordinance is on the books? It was passed last week in second reading. It is the law of the land. Are you aware Conflict of Interest is already in the County Charter? All this does is make the office of County Mayor more powerful. Why would anyone in their right mind want that?”

The paid signature gatherer look puzzled and then said, “The Inspector General will solve all those problems”.

A man who just signed the petitions looked at the huckster and asked, “Is that true”?

It gets sad at this point. The huckster replied, “I am not really up on politics but we have to have the Inspector General”. Poor huckster, doesn't understand the difference between politics and government. This country made a huge mistake when we stopped requiring civics and debate be taught in high school.

For some reason the huckster is not at the Fresh Market collecting signatures.

Colorado and California can tell you how "putting the vote to the people" with propositions, etc. can be devestating.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson

A big shout out to an unlikely pair, Rikki, and Knox County Focus's Steve Hunley in last week's Focus, for calling these petitions and this group what they are!! The name changes, the voting in clumps, the top down atmosphere, I have a bad feeling about it all. Those folks-kids making 15-20$ an hour, were everywhere at the 4th celebration last week, asking people to sign their "petition against nepotism" without much explanation.

It's good that we're finally seeing some unbiased coverage of this issue. "Let the people vote" doesn't make a lot of sense if they're voting on flawed changes.

But what we really need is a true grass roots effort to educate the public and counteract the paid petition seekers, privately funded "concerned citizens group" and free ads from the News-Sentinel. I'm going to start talking to people about this. Anyone interested?

My point is not that city residents shouldn't have a say. But, should they have all the say? Look at the One Question committee. How many live outside the city limits?

How would you feel about an organized effort of folks who all live in Halls and Farragut proposing a set of measures which would govern where homeless shelters could be located? I think the same idea applies if most of the folks in One Question live in two city zip codes.

There was no personal attack. No names were mentioned. Only geography.

As Commissioner M. Harmon knows, County Commission decides many issues which apply only to the County. If I saw an effort from grass roots people in all parts of the City and County, I might have a different opinion on the way this has been brought forward. But, it's not and I don't.

Also, I have heard Commissioner Elaine Davis say that under the fee office appointment amendment that the Mayor would also have the ability to remove the appointed fee office holders without cause. That is, both Commission and the Mayor can remove these appointed officeholders. Commissioner M. Harmon, is the above the entire text of the proposed amendment? Did I misunderstand Commissioner Davis? It could be. I'm just asking.

I maybe wrong & please correct me if I am,Mark.

Under the proposed changes,if passed,in the 1st county commission district(where I live)a candidate elected in 2010 would serve till 2016 & if that incumbent is re-elected they would serve till 2020?

Digit, shouldn't you be filing an ethics complaint with Scripps against me? I contributed something of value to a political cause just like Jack McElroy did. You're not going to discriminate against me just because the dollar amount is a fraction of what he can manage, are you?

Also, I think you have the channeling thing backwards. This is not the first time I objected to the bundling of amendments. You got that from me.

Steve, thanks for the clarification.

No one (not even Commissioner M. Harmon when citing the amendments on the petitions) mentions that the Mayor not only nominates the heads of the fee offices, the County Mayor can also fire those fee office heads without cause and without Commission approval. It's easy for me to see why no one talks about it. I mean, it might look like we were giving the County Mayor a huge amount of authority to run all of county government.

I'm not opposed to more oversight of the fee offices, but giving the County Mayor the right to pick and fire these officeholders without cause is too much power in one position. The fee offices should withstand public scrutiny, but should not be subject to the political or other agenda of whoever holds the position of County Mayor.

You'll also note the County Mayor can fire the Law Director without cause. But, we're not taking away your right to vote. No really, we're not.

Dubious appointments and the appointment process itself, both by the mayor and CC, have caused a real mess.
Breaking apart the appointment mechanism completely and rebuilding would seem to be prudent. I assume there are some appointment mechanisms somewhere on the planet that have a better approach.

When are the MPC commission appointments coming out this year? Have they all been completed for 2008?

Mark,I can not support the proposed charter amendment to reduce county commission from a 19 member body to a 11 member body for the following reasons.

1.Steve has answered that indeed in the 1st county commission district,as well as in other districts,a commissioner could serve 10 years.

I knew that if the Supreme Court ruled in favor of term limits in the Shelby County case it could mean term limits in Knox County.The Supreme Court ruled term limits valid in Shelby County in March of '06.The Chancery Court decision that the Knox County charter was flawed delayed term limits until the Supreme Court ruling in Jan of '07.

It has been a slow & frustrating process but we are seeing the light of day with the county general election that begins with early voting next Friday.Indeed another twist in this long & winding road reared up this week as to when county commission candidates that are elected will be sworn in.

So after all thats happened we are being ask to sign a petitition to put on the presidential ballot a proposed charter amendment that provides for a SIX YEAR TERM for some county commissioners & the prospect that if those commissioners are re-elected they would serve for TEN YEARS?

When I voted for term limits the key word was limits not term.I can not support a charter amendment that could allow a commissioner to serve for a decade.

Strike One.

2.Staggered terms,for county commission,is a tool of the establishment presented to the voters as stability.It is a comfort to the status que to know that with staggerd terms there is no way that a voter revolution can upset the apple cart.

I can not support a charter amendment that includes staggered terms because it favors the establishment over the voter.

Strike two.

3.I have not heard a satisfactory answer to this question.

If the proposed 11 member body charter amendment is approved would the result be a reduction in minority representation?

If so would the US Justice Department pursue a civil rights action?

Strike three

The Orange Petition is out.

Mark,I hope I have focused on the policy not the personal.