LACIE SILVA
Editor
The Marion County Commissioners board voted against adopting the proposed resolution, “A resolution of the board of county commissioners of Marion County, Tennessee to adopt rules of procedure.” This decision came after significant public interest, with many commissioners providing explanations for their votes.
Sherry Lighty, a member of the Rules Committee, shared the extensive work she and the commissioners put into the proposed rules, which were based on 37 recommendations from Charlie Curtis of the County Technical Extension Service (CTAS). County Attorney Gouger was also present during these meetings, which focused on refining the rules for the commission’s consideration. Lighty urged the commissioners to vote in favor, believing it would benefit both the citizens and the commission.
David Thompson echoed Lighty’s sentiments, emphasizing the importance of the vote and the hard work that went into drafting the rules. He stressed the high level of community involvement in the process, with multiple well-attended meetings. Thompson commended Attorney Gouger’s work and expressed hope that the vote would pass unanimously. However, he respected any negative votes as long as commissioners explained their reasoning, which he saw as a leadership duty.
“I hope I see who the true leaders of Marion are.” Thompson concluded.
Commissioner Brandt, chairman of the Rules Committee, provided a detailed report on the journey of creating the proposed rules, thanking his fellow commissioners, Attorney Gouger, and Charlie Curtis for their contributions. He urged the board to adopt the rules, highlighting the importance of transparency, accountability, and efficient governance.
Despite these strong endorsements, several commissioners opposed the resolution, favoring the continued use of Robert’s Rules of Order. Commissioner Thompson opposed the new rules, stating that Robert’s Rules had stood the test of time and were sufficient. Commissioners Rollins, Morrison, Holland, Hargis, Blansett, Adkins, and Abbott also voted against the resolution, each expressing reservations about the necessity or content of the proposed rules. Many cited their preference for Robert’s Rules, with some arguing that the changes were unnecessary or that the current system had worked well for Marion County.
On the other hand, Commissioners Schafer, Nunley, Franklin, Cantrell, Campbell, and Brandt voted in favor. Schafer and Franklin highlighted the clarity and modernization the new rules would bring, while others believed the rules formalized what was already in practice and provided a framework for future improvements.
Ultimately, the resolution failed to pass, with six commissioners voting yes and eight voting no, preventing the implementation of the proposed rules.
