| The Rhea County News Paper |
| "Rhea County's REAL Information Source" |
The latest assault on amending, or should I say “watering down,” current Tennessee
Sunshine Law provisions has me wondering. Just why do our politicians see the need to
meet in secret? Why the attempt to shut the public out? And why do our elected
representatives fail to remember just who elected them to “serve” the public in the first
place?
The recent 7-2 state subcommittee vote recommends amending the current law to allow
a quorum of a public body to meet in private. This should make taxpayers and
concerned citizens alike very nervous — or downright angry.
Let’s see, the Knox County Commission loses their recent court case for violating the
Open Meetings Law, and now Tennessee politicians suddenly see the need to amend it.
The ink on the court judgment isn’t dry and we have some bozos challenging it.
Anyone wonder who besides The News Sentinel would have taken legal action against
this illegal activity? Do you think one of the local radio stations would? TV? The
Internet bloggers?
Who says daily newspapers are irrelevant in today’s society?
It was refreshing to see state Sen. Randy McNally of Oak Ridge and Oak Ridge Mayor
Tom Beehan both go on record opposing amendment changes to the current Sunshine
Law. This is relevant because Beehan is in line to chair the Tennessee Municipal League,
which conversely is seeking to remove “deliberation” from the list of acts currently
prohibited in private meetings.
And as for McNally, the Open Government Committee he chairs will likely hear the
subcommittee’s recommendation sometime this month.
This is big folks. The Knoxville case involving exchanging votes illustrated the outright
contempt some elected officials have for the “common folks” who elected them. These
are political hacks concerned more about filling vacancies with family and friends and
staying in office (or should I say in power) than they are about legislating responsibly.
We must be wary of politicians attempting to avoid public scrutiny and those attempting
to close the door to its citizenry. Whether it is City Council, County Commission, school
boards or any other public boards doing the work of the people, meetings need to be
open.
I often hear politicians complain about the Sunshine Law. “It’s too restrictive,” some
contend.
“It makes it cumbersome to conduct business when I can’t discuss issues with fellow
legislators,” another commented.
My response? Too damn bad.
If you don’t want to legislate by the rules, then don’t run for office. Taxpayers pay your
salary and anything else government requires to carry out the work for the people. Stop
complaining and please don’t attempt to rationalize why any meeting needs to be
conducted in private.
Frank Gibson, executive director of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government, was
too kind when he stated the quorum standard would encourage “too much mischief,” as
he put it in a recent article in The Oak Ridger.
Mischief? More like corruption.
The quorum standard would allow secret meetings when anything less than a quorum of
the voting body is present. Up to eight members of the County Commission, for
example, would be allowed to meet behind closed doors and wheel and deal. Anyone find
that comforting?
David Conner, executive director of the Tennessee County Commissioners Association,
supports more secrecy in government. He’s having difficulty understanding the
definition of conversation and deliberation and believes amending the Sunshine Law
would improve this.
It’s really rather easy, Dave. Let’s say Legislator "A" meets Legislator “B” at the dessert
table of the local charity auction and says, “How’s your wife? Has she recovered from
brain surgery?”
That’s defined as conversation.
Under the same circumstance, imagine Legislator “A” meets with Legislator “B” and
says, “Hey Bubba, how are you going to vote on Claxton annexation?”
That’s defined as deliberation.
Conner suggested any change to the Sunshine Law could be paired with penalties. Oh
boy! If those penalties are anything like our current DUI penalties, watch out; that
would surely prevent anyone from breaking the law.
Here’s a better suggestion that would put an end to any secret dealings real quick. Let’s
pass a law that would expel any politician from office if convicted of violating the
Sunshine Law. No $50 fines, no hand spanking, no free passes, and no second chances —
you’re gone, period.
Bet this would help clarify the definition between deliberation and conversation and
make legislators think twice about meeting in secret. And this would include mail,
telephone, Blackberry, e-mail, smoke signals, or the late night visit by one politician
appearing at the doorstep of another saying: “Don’t say a word; just look at what’s in this
envelope.”
It’s worrisome enough when two or more politicians are observed conversing over a cup
of coffee at public events. Can you imagine what would happen if they’re actually
allowed to convene legally in the shadows of the backroom to negotiate public business?
Fortunately, we have two local politicians willing to stand up for open government and
oppose attempts at weakening the Sunshine Law.
We welcome anyone else willing to weigh in and tell us how they feel about this
important matter.
The public needs to know if the light shining through the window of government is truly
“sunshine” or just the dim glare from the bulb burning in the backroom.
Sunshine Law provisions has me wondering. Just why do our politicians see the need to
meet in secret? Why the attempt to shut the public out? And why do our elected
representatives fail to remember just who elected them to “serve” the public in the first
place?
The recent 7-2 state subcommittee vote recommends amending the current law to allow
a quorum of a public body to meet in private. This should make taxpayers and
concerned citizens alike very nervous — or downright angry.
Let’s see, the Knox County Commission loses their recent court case for violating the
Open Meetings Law, and now Tennessee politicians suddenly see the need to amend it.
The ink on the court judgment isn’t dry and we have some bozos challenging it.
Anyone wonder who besides The News Sentinel would have taken legal action against
this illegal activity? Do you think one of the local radio stations would? TV? The
Internet bloggers?
Who says daily newspapers are irrelevant in today’s society?
It was refreshing to see state Sen. Randy McNally of Oak Ridge and Oak Ridge Mayor
Tom Beehan both go on record opposing amendment changes to the current Sunshine
Law. This is relevant because Beehan is in line to chair the Tennessee Municipal League,
which conversely is seeking to remove “deliberation” from the list of acts currently
prohibited in private meetings.
And as for McNally, the Open Government Committee he chairs will likely hear the
subcommittee’s recommendation sometime this month.
This is big folks. The Knoxville case involving exchanging votes illustrated the outright
contempt some elected officials have for the “common folks” who elected them. These
are political hacks concerned more about filling vacancies with family and friends and
staying in office (or should I say in power) than they are about legislating responsibly.
We must be wary of politicians attempting to avoid public scrutiny and those attempting
to close the door to its citizenry. Whether it is City Council, County Commission, school
boards or any other public boards doing the work of the people, meetings need to be
open.
I often hear politicians complain about the Sunshine Law. “It’s too restrictive,” some
contend.
“It makes it cumbersome to conduct business when I can’t discuss issues with fellow
legislators,” another commented.
My response? Too damn bad.
If you don’t want to legislate by the rules, then don’t run for office. Taxpayers pay your
salary and anything else government requires to carry out the work for the people. Stop
complaining and please don’t attempt to rationalize why any meeting needs to be
conducted in private.
Frank Gibson, executive director of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government, was
too kind when he stated the quorum standard would encourage “too much mischief,” as
he put it in a recent article in The Oak Ridger.
Mischief? More like corruption.
The quorum standard would allow secret meetings when anything less than a quorum of
the voting body is present. Up to eight members of the County Commission, for
example, would be allowed to meet behind closed doors and wheel and deal. Anyone find
that comforting?
David Conner, executive director of the Tennessee County Commissioners Association,
supports more secrecy in government. He’s having difficulty understanding the
definition of conversation and deliberation and believes amending the Sunshine Law
would improve this.
It’s really rather easy, Dave. Let’s say Legislator "A" meets Legislator “B” at the dessert
table of the local charity auction and says, “How’s your wife? Has she recovered from
brain surgery?”
That’s defined as conversation.
Under the same circumstance, imagine Legislator “A” meets with Legislator “B” and
says, “Hey Bubba, how are you going to vote on Claxton annexation?”
That’s defined as deliberation.
Conner suggested any change to the Sunshine Law could be paired with penalties. Oh
boy! If those penalties are anything like our current DUI penalties, watch out; that
would surely prevent anyone from breaking the law.
Here’s a better suggestion that would put an end to any secret dealings real quick. Let’s
pass a law that would expel any politician from office if convicted of violating the
Sunshine Law. No $50 fines, no hand spanking, no free passes, and no second chances —
you’re gone, period.
Bet this would help clarify the definition between deliberation and conversation and
make legislators think twice about meeting in secret. And this would include mail,
telephone, Blackberry, e-mail, smoke signals, or the late night visit by one politician
appearing at the doorstep of another saying: “Don’t say a word; just look at what’s in this
envelope.”
It’s worrisome enough when two or more politicians are observed conversing over a cup
of coffee at public events. Can you imagine what would happen if they’re actually
allowed to convene legally in the shadows of the backroom to negotiate public business?
Fortunately, we have two local politicians willing to stand up for open government and
oppose attempts at weakening the Sunshine Law.
We welcome anyone else willing to weigh in and tell us how they feel about this
important matter.
The public needs to know if the light shining through the window of government is truly
“sunshine” or just the dim glare from the bulb burning in the backroom.
| Mistaking 'Mischief' For Corruption By: Richard B. Esposito Publisher The Oak Ridger |
| Editor's Commentary Once again, our attempts to get some sort of quote from Dayton Mayor Bob Vincent was like farting into a windstorm -- State Rep. Jim Cobb seems even just as evasive on this issue, as well as every other issue we have tried to communicate to him. Obviously, Jim Cobb and Mayor Bob Vincent do not enjoy what we print. We print things as we see them which usually coincides with how every other person sees it, except for the select few. One good thing, the "select few" are shrinking. The resignation (retirement) of Herald-News publisher Ed Emens tells us a lot. The meeting that the Dayton City Council had on January 30, 2008 was a direct violation of the Tennessee Open Meetings law, in my opinion. We have written articles on this, attempted to get some sort of response from these clowns about the alleged illegal meeting but they even hide from that. The situation appears rather straight forward and simple... Vice Mayor Jim Barnes dies while sitting on the Dayton Council... Bob Vincent freaks out treating the death as something that the council just can't handle, being what the charter simply says for them to do in the event of a vacancy on the council -- vote for someone to replace them, period. Graysville recently had a similar problem that dayton has except Graysville's problem involved TWO vacancies. Instead of the existing commission for Graysville having to appoint one member to replace one that resigned, they had to replace two!!! Did the Graysville commissioners try to pull a fast open opening up their charter to change the way the vacant seats were to be filled in addition to using it as an excuse to allow more people to sign checks as well as GIVE THEMSELVES money? Heck no they didn't... Graysville commissioners put aside their personal ambitions and voted in two new commissioners as replacements. Problem solved. What does the Dayton City council do when they are faced with nothing more than agreeing to pick someone to replace Jim Barnes? These blunderers couldn't even do that. These dudes can sure as heck vote and agree to buy a new fire truck that isn't really needed... slam former fire chief Jack Arnold and increasing the NEW fire chief's salary to a whopping $49,000 a year. They also can agree to let Frank Welch give a police chief position to a totally under-educated fellow (his nephew) who apparently can't even get his story straight on a job application. The Dayton council sure seems free hearted with money that isn't theirs to be free hearted with but ironically, the council doesn't seem to care too much about the average everyday city employees. Where are their pay raises? Does Mayor Vincent think of average hard working people as some sort of low life not worthy of a pay raise? Is this dude that far out it Dildoland? Why not put a new fire truck that the city taxpayers can not afford on hold for a while and give the city employees a pay raise or something? I just can't understand this way of thinking, or should I say NOT thinking... As long as the First Amendment exists we can sure blab our mouth's off about Mayor Bob Vincent, exposing every little detail. In any event, absent any elected official having the go-nads to speak up, then we accept their silence as them "willfully hiding from the truth". It isn't a matter as to whether or not these dudes like it or not, they must deal with it. Hey, I have dealt with lots of crap that I didn't like so F____'em... Did you know that on Sept. 22, a five-question survey was mailed to more than 180 candidates for the Tennessee General Assembly, including many who are unopposed in the Nov. 7 general election. The 104th General Assembly created an 18-member study committee of lawmakers, citizens and news media professionals to look at whether the state’s open government laws need to be changed and perhaps improved. The survey sought ideas to improve Tennessee’s open meetings and public records laws. Some of the information gathered in the survey will be provided to the committee, which held its first meeting on Monday, Oct. 16. All candidates were asked to respond by Oct. 11. Below are responses received as of Oct. 17. They are searchable by county, legislative district and by candidate name. Some counties have multiple districts. All candidates were informed their answers would be posted on www.tcog.info. Out of this survey, can you guess which Representative had his survey returned by the United States Postal Service as "undeliverable"? Click here and see for yourself... Well folks, the Dayton charter has been sabotaged and done so in what sure appears to be illegal acts on the part of every councilman. Remember, they say you cannot fight city hall and win. We say that city hall is nothing more than a compilation of people elected or appointed to specific positions of authority, that's all. Once people see and begin to understand this concept of divide and conquer co-mingled with that always reliant self preservation demon that we all have inside us, we will see more and more resignations, retirements (whatever they want to call it) and just as old Ed Emens did, they will jump ship. This is human nature and not rocket science folks... |
| BEND OVER BOYS.... |
