State to Bush: No conflict on budget vote

The following letter was sent by Cannon County Executive Brent Bush to State Officials and County Commissioners following the passage of the 2019-2020 county budget last week.

"August 30, 2019

To: State Officials and County Commissioners

I am sending this issue to all involved. I know this is Labor Day weekend and I hope to have guidance by Tuesday, September 3rd. At this point, I am concerned about signing checks, hiring, or even attempting to proceed running Cannon County government. I appreciate all the input, advice
and hard work of all involved over the past year concerning the budget. However, I do think we may have a violation concerning the budget and I recognize that the legislative body, of which I fully respect the process, with the final vote of 6 for, and 3 against, and 1 commissioner absent, would be an approval and allow us to move Cannon County forward this year. However, there are several points that I think could be violations.

My understanding of CTAS -625 and TCA 5-5 102, is that if an individual monetarily benefits from the budget they should not vote on it. Notice the word should. For example, as chairman of the commission, I break the tie. If forced to break a tie, my own personal salary would increase and although that did not happen, I believe I would have had to decline to vote, due to my understanding of benefitting from the increase. The state mandated raises put me in an ethical violation. For instance, last year as an incumbent to the office, I was a sitting former commissioner. I declined to vote on the budget, because I believed it was unethical. This year we have commissioners that find themselves in that dilemma. If you benefit monetarily, do you vote? From the action of the legislative body themselves directly or by being employed by the organizations that got the increases or if their direct family members are employed by county government or if they benefit, then they find themselves in an ethical dilemma.

To continue, there are specific instances in the budget that had monetary increases. I, they, or their family member would benefit from those increases. I consider that an ethical violation. I am very familiar with CTAS -625 and TCA 5-5 102 and the change in 2016 Public Chapter 1072 effective May 20, 2016. My interpretation, and it may be more in the strictest sense of the law, if l benefit monetarily then I should not vote for it.

Also, I am concerned over the perception that the commission did not follow proper procedures for voting on the appropriation and a tax rate separately. During the legislative process I was not sure on how to handle the constant changes to the budget. The legislative body was at the proverbial 11th hour. I expressed my concern over the process. However, they felt the need to get the budget passed.

The appropriation and tax levy resolutions were presented to the commission along with all budget documents at their regular meeting August 1, 2019 with the exception of the Board of Education budget. The appropriation resolution and tax levy resolution reflected current numbers as of that date. It is the responsibility of the commissioners to bring those documents to each recessed meeting.

There were constant changes to the budget and my office was doing the best we could to ensure that we kept up with the legislative adjustments to the budget and the back and forth changes in the budget tax levy. That in turn affects the appropriation resolution that was previously presented. My office did the best we could to capture those changes and pass those changes as correctly as possible to the Comptroller's office. I believe that was done, but I can't guarantee it was done error free. I was very specific that they were required to vote on appropriations and a tax levy separately.

I respect the process of the legislative body and its role as it pertains to the three basic functions of government. As the representative of the executive role of government, I do believe that I am required to report these concerns in the best interest of the government as honestly and respectfully to all persons involved. I have emailed all that I know are involved in this process and will stand by for guidance on Tuesday, September 3, 2019.

I just want to ensure that any action taken next week from a fiduciary standpoint is not in violation of the law, which was expressed specifically by Deputy Comptroller Mumpower. I hope you consider this email with gravest concern. I have concerns over the pending operations of the county following Labor Day weekend.

Respectfully, Brent Bush"

State Deputy Comptroller Jason Mumpower responded to Bush's letter in an email:

"Thank you very much.

We have taken a quick look at the statute, public chapter, and CTAS guidance he references in your letter. The statute is clear in subsection (b):

(a) No member of the legislative body of a county who is also an employee of the same county or whose spouse is an employee of the same county may vote on matters in which such member has a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest is created under this section when a member is voting on a matter which, if approved by the legislative body, would increase the pay or benefits of that member or that member's spouse. The vote of any member having a conflict of interest shall be void if challenged in a timely manner. As used in this subsection (a), "timely manner" means during the same meeting at which the vote was cast and prior to the transaction of any further business by the body.

(b) Subsection (a) shall not prohibit a member of a local governing body of a county from voting on the budget, appropriation resolution, or tax rate resolution, or amendments thereto, unless the vote is on a specific amendment to the budget or a specific appropriation or resolution in which the member has a conflict of interest.

We think subsection (b) addresses your concern and there is no conflict."

Thank you,

Jason Mumpower
Deputy Comptroller