Same Rules Apply?
| So at Monday's Election Commission meeting, four of
the five commissioners voted to remove Earlena Maples name from from the
ballot for the November Lenoir City council election. Their reasoning
was that even though Ms. Maples works for LCUB, she is considered a city
employee. Tennessee law, 7-51-1501 does state that a city employee can
not run for city council. Whether Earlena Maples is truly a "city"
employee or not is open for debate but the election commission made the
determination for their reason that she is and thus removed her from the
ballot. After Maples' removal, she file a like petition, as was filed for her removal by Lenoir City officials, to have the four candidates, Mike Henline, Buddy Hines, Jim Shields and Jennifer Wampler who are running for re-election, removed from the ballot because they are also LCUB employees and thus are also city employees and ineligible to run for city council again. Lenoir City council persons automatically become Utility Board members. As utility board members they are paid $4,800 per year plus health, life and dental insurance and are given a travel allowance up $3,500.00 per year. Total annual compensation can range from around $16,000 up to $25,000.00. All utility board members compensation is considered as payroll and reported on a W2 form for IRS purposes with all proper withholding made. From the IRS website:
Obviously, LCUB board members are employees of the utility just as Ms. Maples. So if Ms. Maples was deemed ineligible to run for council, shouldn't the same standard apply to LCUB board members? How could it not? This conflict could have been avoided if when the Tennessee law, 7-51-1501, was written back in 1996, city and utility officials had adjusted their board member policies to account for the new law. However, they did not. Board members could serve without compensation and be considered volunteer board members, but they are not or at the very least be paid as 1099 contractors as are most non profit board members if they're paid at all but they are not. The Loudon County Election Commission has now set the precedent that a utility employee is in fact a city employee as in Ms. Maples case. How could they now take a different position on the other utility employees on the ballot? We'll find out next week. The Loudon County Election Commission will hold a hearing next Tuesday, September 4th ay 6:30 pm, to consider the other utility board members who are candidates, eligibility to remain on the ballot. |
BACK
8/29/18