Staying true to form, the council voted unanimously for Aikens proposal. Councilmen Eddie Simpson and Jim Shields were absent. However, Aikens said he had somebody poll the two absent councilmen and they said they were OK with whatever the council voted for.

Aikens invited Lenoir City School Board Chairman, Matthew Coleman, to speak before the vote. According to Coleman, not only should Lenoir City schools not lose the 2.5%, he said Lenoir City should be receiving 30% of the ASFT. Aikens gave his opinion. No other discussions took place before the vote. I think we can see the writing on the wall. If the county gives back the 2.5% demanded by Aikens, guess the next time, if we don't give them the 30% they'll just hold the paperwork again. Kind of smacks as government extortion. Give us what we want or else. Or maybe more appropriate, when the kid on the playground says, if you don't play by my rules, I'll take my ball and go home.   

Councilman James Brandon made the motion with Councilman Mike Henline making the second. The other two councilpersons, Jennifer Wampler, Buddy Hines voted yes. Not sure how they knew the details of the issue since there had been no workshop on the matter before they voted. Surely, no one violated the Sunshine Law by discussing it before the meeting.

Days before Monday's vote to give the mayor the authority to direct a city employee to violate state law, Aikens had already taken it on himself to direct that same official to withhold June's paperwork from the county. If he could make that order without the council's support, why was the vote even necessary?

I do agree with one statement Aikens made, he said when two governments sue each other, the tax payers lose. Hopefully a lawsuit will not be necessary. The city is not violating county law, they're violating state law.  I'll share again.

TCA 67-4-2910. Collection of tax.
(a) Any tax levied pursuant to this part shall be collected in the following manner:
 

(1) At the time of application for a building permit for residential development, the municipal or county official issuing the permit shall compute the estimated tax liability for the county school facilities privilege tax, based upon the proposed square footage of the facility to be built and the current rate of the county's school facilities privilege tax. As a condition of receiving the permit, the applicant shall sign a form indicating that the applicant recognizes the liability for the tax. The official shall keep one (1) copy of the form for the official's records and shall provide a copy to the applicant. 

If the permit is issued by a municipal building official, the official shall also forward a copy of the form within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the building permit to the county official or employee who has been designated by the county legislative body to collect the tax. 

It should be the state comptroller or the state's attorney general who addresses state law violations by city officials. Not sure what the next step will be, but the issue will be discussed at the next county workshop.

In all this lofty discussion by all the city officials the one thing was missing, no one has ever mentioned the needs of the county school system. Apparently, county officials are suppose to be more concerned about the city school system than the county school system.