Forum Replies Created
Well ugh: I mean DRU, and cycle……sorry
Please also add to non-consent:
Items #25, 26,28,39,41
No family member is permitted to apply for a Knox County Beer Permit in the same business location that is ( was) held by relative in location that has been revoked by the Knox County Beer Board for a period of one year from date of revocation.
Wording is not good and family needs defining, but you get the idea. I think we are all tired of this being allowed to happen in Knox County.
Please pull 28 from consent.
Yes to test
Courtney, please pull items 12,16 and 26 from consent.
Also asking how “deep in the mud” do we want to go on discussion of any items on zoning during workshop? Would you prefer zoning discussion be held till next week?
Please pull #37 and 38 from consent. Thank you
Please pull #43 from consent. Thanks
I would like to serve, first time, on retirement and pension and continue on rules ( only if slot available, am glad to give others a chance)
Got it, thanks for your work on this.
This was sent to me by a uniformed sheriff’s officer. I believe it deserves consideration. Thanks, Terry.
a. Section 9.5.1 labeled “General” has been removed and a new section, labeled under the new ordinance Sec42-67 Grievances which may be addressed by the Merit System Board. What is interesting is the removal of such terminology and rights for employees such as: “a grievance is defined as any perceived wrong, considered as grounds for complaint arising out of a personnel action” –
b. The new Sec 42-60, labeled Transfers – this section appears to have been closely rewritten, wherein it was added that the Sheriff can transfer employees from one position to another within and between classes of positions. What is interesting, as you refer to the exhibit A provided by Commissioner Jay, is that “as determined by the Sheriff” was added and “only under rules established by the merit system council” –
These two items alone should be alarming to any of you that wish to keep qualified, dedicated deputies employed to protect your constituents. What is being proposed is a total removal of protections of employees from political retaliation, as well as unstable leadership. We have seen in communities around us, Oak Ridge for example, what a leader can do to people’s lives that only signed up to work and protect the community. If you all do not thing more should be added to ensure that in 80 years someone cannot come in and move people, without cause, from positions which they have been trained in (which, mind you, costs taxpayer dollars) please feel free to be transparent so that those that can make changes in their lives can do so.
Please pull items #48 and #49 from consent
Got it…. Thanks!