Commission approved two of five of Mayor’s appointments
Tennessee state statute specifies that the county mayor “appoints” and the county commission “approves” appointments of citizens and elected officials to the county’s five-member conservation board, the board which oversees the county’s park system.
During the regular scheduled Anderson County Commission meeting on July 17, commission voted to approve only two of County Mayor Terry Frank’s five conservation board nominations.
Frank nominated Brenda Currier, Earl Cagle, Christopher Silver, Commissioner Chuck Fritts, and Christine Dixon to serve on the board.
Of those five nominees, only Brenda Currier and Earl Cagle, both of which currently serve on the conservation board, were approved by commission.
According to Anderson County Mayor Terry Frank, county officials had, for several years, not been following the proper procedures for nominating conservation board members. For years, the county had been going through county commission’s nominating committee to make the appointments, with the nominating committee recommending appointments to commission and commission making the final decision to confirm or not confirm the appointments.
Under state law, however, it is the mayor who makes the appointments, and the county commission’s responsibility to confirm those appointments, Frank told commissioners during the commission meeting last Monday.
“All [current conservation board members] were not appointed properly, so there are five vacancies on the committee,” Frank said.
Members who were appointed by commission to serve on the board prior to Frank’s assertion that the appointments were not legally constituted were: Brenda Currier, Earl Cagle, Terry Brown, and Phil Warfield. With four members instead of five serving on the then current board, there was already a vacancy on the board to fill, but, according to Frank, because the county did not use the proper appointment process, using the mayor’s office to make the appointments and commission to confirm them, none of the appointments were legal, which means the board is, in effect, non existent.
Frank addressed commissioners by asserting that her appointments did not hinge on pursuing an animal shelter “on any of the county-owned property that’s currently designated as a park.”
“If you think that’s part of the issue, I assure you that has nothing to do with it and you have my commitment that is not where I intend to put it,” Frank stated.
Commissioner Phil Warfield, Dist. 3, made the motion that commission vote on the mayor’s appointments on an individual basis instead of as a group. Commissioners voiced their concerns about the mayor “removing” some of the current members of the board — members they said were doing an excellent job — and replacing them with individuals who had not previously served on the conservation board.
“Let’s be clear, I don’t think there was anything done underhanded. Nobody [on the conservation board] tried to do anything illegal. You may have found something, which was TCA code, which you’re pretty good at,” said Commissioner Tracy Wandell, Dist. 1, to Frank. “I’m a big proponent of when folks are doing things properly, there’s no reason to change the water, but I’m certainly going to consider your recommendations. Obviously, you have some qualified candidates.”
Though state statute does not require a commissioner to serve on the conservation board, Frank said she thought it was “productive” to have one serve, which was her justification for nominating Fritts to the board.
Commissioners were also puzzled as to why Frank was choosing to replace Warfield, current chairman of the board, with Fritts.
“I want to give my support for Commissioner Warfield. He’s done an excellent job. I would ask the mayor, if she would, to consider putting two commissioners on the board,” said Commissioner Tim Isbel, Dist. 4.
Commission Chair Steve Emert, Dist. 3, asked Warfield if commission chose to appoint the mayor’s five appointments would he be replaced as a member of the board, to which Warfield replied, “yes,” he would be replaced.
“If Commissioner Warfield isn’t on there, I’ve got some serious issues. He’s done a heck of a job on the committee,” stated Wandell.
In a particularly contentious point of the discussion, Frank asserted that Warfield had “declared himself chairman” instead of having been elected chairman of the board.
“That’s not true, Mayor,” Warfield countered.
Frank further alleged that conservation board members — after being apprised last year by the mayor that the appointment process was not being properly handled according to state law — went against state law by trying to change the bylaws “in direct contradiction to state law to maintain the appointment process by commission.”
“For nearly a year, I tried to handle this with tact, with grace, and with diligence,” continued Frank. “Those bylaw changes were actually brought to this body [Commission] and voted on, knowing that state law is that the mayor appoints and commission confirms.”
Commissioners were also concerned about the current status of the conservation board, if it is currently a functioning board or non-existent.
“Do we have a conservation board that can act now?” asked Commissioner Robert McKamey, Dist. 5, to law director Jay Yeager.
“That’s a good question. Off the cuff I’d say, ‘no.’ Those bylaws will not trump state law. I can do some research on that and give you a definitive answer. You’d need three people for a quorum to have that board in operating capacity,” replied Yeager. “Mayor, you’re saying the board now, as it sits, is not legally constituted?”
“Yes, sir,” responded Frank.
Yeager told commissioners he would research how to proceed with the process and provide officials with a legal opinion clarifying what the county should do in this situation in order to be compliant with state law.
Commission voted 14 to 1 to vote on the appointments on an individual basis instead of as a group, with the lone “no” vote coming from Fritts.
The votes to approve or not approve the mayor’s nominees were as follows: commission approved Cagle with 13 “yes” votes and two “no” votes; Currier was approved unanimously with all 15 commissioners voting “yes” for approval; Silver received 13 “no” votes and 2 “yes” votes; Fritts had 10 “no” votes and 5 “yes”; and Dixon had 10 “no” votes and 5 “yes.”
Commissioner Jerry Creasey, Dist. 7, suggested that the mayor replace conservation board members as their terms expire instead of replacing them all at one time.
“You should be showing that you’re willing to work with us and showing a respect for county commission,” Creasey told Frank.
“I think the action by the board tonight was not very respectful of the office of the mayor. It is a respect of the office of the mayor and a separation of powers and there should be an effort to work together,” said Frank.
“I hope we can work in that direction. We need to all work together. We do have a mayor that’s well prepared, that can lead and show good leadership and we have a great county commission with the same merits. We could do a lot by working together and I hope we can move in that direction,” continued Creasey.
Commissioner Chuck Fritts, Dist. 1, who had, up until this moment in the meeting, not uttered a word on the subject of the conservation board appointments, said, on being “denied by commission” to serve on the board: “this is an insult, and trust me, I’ll remember.”
“In my 15 years on commission, this is the first time I’ve seen a commissioner denied serving on a committee. Now this is getting ridiculous,” he argued.
