Bluff City Officials Attempt To Block Future Recall Efforts
BLUFF CITY, Tenn. – City officials are working to prevent future recall efforts against them through a series of charter changes approved during a special meeting Thursday.
The Board of Mayor and Aldermen voted 4-1 in favor of the changes, which also include a plan to make all city employees at-will employees.
“I don’t think it’s right,” said LonGene Leonard, a former Bluff City Alderman who led an unsuccessful recall effort against four board members in the November election.
Leonard’s effort targeted Malone, Vice Mayor J.C. Gentry, Alderman Don Weaver and Alderwoman Irene Wells. The proposal failed by a 3-to-2 margin when it went before voters Nov. 4.
Gentry, Weaver, Wells and Alderman Mark Weaver voted in favor of the proposed changes. Alderman Melvin Carrier cast the dissenting vote.
To be adopted, the proposed charter changes must pass a vote in both houses of the Tennessee General Assembly and be signed by the state’s governor. Once that happens, two-thirds of the board members must approve the proposed changes at a second meeting before any can go into effect.
“We’ve got a dictatorship and we’re going to have an even worse one if this thing passes the General Assembly,” Leonard said after Thursday’s meeting.
Leonard said he also is troubled by the city’s decision to vote on the changes during a special meeting that did not allow for citizen comments.
The proposed changes also include provisions that would make the city recorder and city police chief at-will employees and do away with their property rights. Those two changes mean the board can hire and fire city employees without a formal cause or public hearing, something the current charter requires. The changes also will allow the board to reappoint each employee when each two-year term starts.
Police Chief David Nelson said neither he nor any of the seven police officers he supervises had any problems with either of these personnel changes.
“They can’t just walk in and fire you,” Nelson said after Thursday’s meeting. “There’s still a policy that they have to follow.”
Bluff City is one of only a few cities in Tennessee that does not operate with an at-will policy, Nelson said, and his officers felt comfortable with their jobs.
While both of these measures will move forward after Thursday’s meeting, one controversial charter change will not see the light of day.
Board members voted 4-1 to remove a section from their proposed changes that would allow the city to charge a hotel-motel tax on any campground, RV Park or bed and breakfast operating within its limits.
Forty-five Tennessee municipalities – including Bristol, Kingsport and Johnson City – charge a hotel tax. The average rate is 5 percent, though some cities charge as much as 7 percent.
Board members last tried to create a city motel tax when they added it to a proposed charter change approved in a February meeting. The General Assembly and Gov. Phil Bredesen signed off on this plan in April. But the proposed hotel tax quickly died when board members failed to ratify it at their May meeting. The hotel tax provision needed support from four board members to go forward, but only garnered three votes.
Carrier voted against the hotel tax in May while Wells abstained. Wells asked the board to pull the hotel tax from Thursday night’s list of proposed changes.
“This is not the time [to add a tax] when all of us are having a problem,” Wells said. “We need to try to work with the few businesses we have.”
The charter changes approved Thursday also include provisions that would: change when and how often board meetings take place; call for a special election if three or more seats on the board are vacated; and remove the mayor and city recorder’s ability to serve as a judge in the city court.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
You think this bothers me?!! You’re just showing me how childish you are. Geez, I am on the side of the BMA! How silly. Anyone reading the last few posts you guys have made here will see how immature you are. LMAO! LUKE-you know you are too!
Hey NORTON, I don’t work for the city, leave my personal life out of it!!!!
Au contraire Luke—it is you who is missing the point. I keep wondering how old you are, how long you have actually lived in this town, if you are denying your kinship to those who use to be in the ‘good old boys club’ in this town? I am sure that Mayor Malone is a wonderful person though I don’t know him personally. The point here is that if you apply a code of living to one, it must be applied to all, if you think that the personal lives of those who work for the city are important to them doing their job. What I am saying, the job that is done is what should be important, if the job is not being done correctly then the person needs to go. Please don’t tell me you are worried about what other people think of the personal lives of those who work in this city! If that were true, those who use to be in the ‘club’ running this city would have already buried this town. And if this truely gets on your nerves it is because you know I am right. Let it be if you think you can’t get through to me. I am entitled to my opinions just as much as you are.
So Luke, you think that Malone should resign? Because he can’t handle his personal business? Because mis-fortune hit him as it has so many in the business world? I don’t think he should, but I guess you think he should since his off duty life is in disarray. I don’t know if this effects the town, if it puts the town in a bad light. Too bad, it seems he was doing a pretty good job as mayor.
If you apply this charter page to the prior employee others were dishing dirt on, shouldn’t it apply to all?
My focus is on the enlightened leadership demonstrated by Irene Wells and the city commission by removing the hotel/motel tax section from the resolution. In a time when the US Government is making available $800,000,000,000 to financial institutions and $17,400,000,000 to auto companies, government entities need to help businesses survive and succeed. Lakeview RV Park is wonderful addition to the Bluff City community. I am glad to see city council support it’s success by not putting it in jeapordy with additional taxation.
Not long ago, when posters were airing the personal life of a city employee, I also said that personal business didn’t have anything to do with the performance of a city job. This isn’t true with the career choices of say a president, teacher, preacher, etc. who are usually regarded as role models and whose lives are in the public but pertains only to normal everyday working stiffs. When I made this statement, I was bombarded with some pretty mean remarks. I believe what Uniden was trying to say is that everyone has something going on in their personal lives. What is fair for the goose is fair for the gander. But does this personal business concerning Malone make any difference to me? Not any more than the other personal business of the other city employee does. BECAUSE I don’t think it has anything to do with the job he is doing for the city. If you were against Malone and for the other city employee whose personal life was revealed, you would be right on top of this wouldn’t you Luke? That is the point. I am only playing devils advocate here, I think the board is great and trying to do their best in an area long known for the silliness that has been going on for some time in this sweet little town.
Dictatorship wow Mr. Leonard what a way to put it, but since you insinuated it well I guess yes the Dictatorship is stating to come to an end. The board has finally realized where the problem is an they are going to fix it. A certain individual is finding out that she does not rule the roost anymore. Instead of working with people this person has worked against the board called them names and acts like everybody is stupid. It’s a funny thing when this recall was going thru certain employees jobs were going to lose there jobs and its funny at that time they didn’t care about there property rights. Boy its funny what you hear when you eat at a certain place and hear only 2 names mention about property rights but like always there’s only 2 people that actually does any work in this city according to Mr. Leonard. I commend this board for taking this step, for what’s right for this city instead of being dictated by former angry board members. I guess the message is “ Do your job and work with people instead causing trouble. I have talked to a lot of city workers and they are tired of being treated bad and disrespected by this individual and this board will have the power to deal with it instead being threatened with lawyers. Dictatorship is coming to an end.
I AM GLAD TO SEE THE BOARD TAKING PROACTIVE MEASURES! The days of wasting time being reactive to the likes of Dulaney, Carrier, Leonard, etc ARE FINALLY OVER!
And look who has showed up in the media again…Leonard took some time off and refused to talk to the media after his recalls all failed, which was a waste of the citizens’ time & money, but Leonard has once again appeared to complain about the board AGAIN.
Think of all that could have been done in the past year if it wasn’t for the distractions from Leonard’s MULTIPLE recall drives.
Think of all the tax money that could have been used in a better way to help Bluff City instead of throwing it away on the Leonard’s personal attacks/recalls. LEONARD SHOULD HAVE TO PAY ALL FEES RELATED TO THE RECALL to the election commission, not the Bluff City residents. The city should sue him and collect the recall fees from him for slander/personal attacks/harrassment because all of Leonard’s petitions were full of lies!
Even without a recall provision in the charter, if a board member is no longer worthy of being on the board; they can either quit on their own OR be voted off by other board members. Which brings up this point…
It is time for the board to remove the disrespectful, threatening & overall poor excuse for citizen much less a board member…Melvin Carrier!
I think everyone seems to be missing the point…“at-will” employees can be fired AT-WILL. Everyone will become an at will employee and there is nothing to stop the current board or future boards from firing current employees and bringing in anyone they so choose to. This goes for all employees. That means no job security for anyone. Yes, it can be fought through the courts - but chances are - those who have been fired aren’t going to have the means to fight it unlesss some philanthropist comes along and funds their cause. Do you want to be the one who has put in 4 years working hard at your job only to have it given to the next Alderman’s neighbor or friend? I wouldn’t.
Additionally, the need for no recall may apply to the current board and the statement “they can get elected any time, any place” - people die, people become disabled - people become daft! That recall protects the citizens of Bluff City from those down the road who may not be as upstanding as those currently serving. There are no guarantees in life other than death.
My opinion is that both of these issues are self-serving to those who have drafted and voted for the ratification of such.
There is still alot of approval coming. It hasn’t been approved by the houses of the General Assembly nor the Governor yet. I hope we can all come back here and opinionate again when the process is finished…whether it was given a yeah or a neah.
Advertisement