Story Published:
Apr 28, 2011 at 12:25 AM CDT
Story Updated:
Apr 26, 2011 at 9:38 AM CDT
Cover photo: Newly re-appointed Administrator Debbi Stiedl
Court findings last week could lay to rest questions of legal fee responsibility related to the suit naming three members of the Election Commission. However, Administrator of Elections Debbie Stiedl is questioning whether the court finding will be sufficient to move the matter forward with the County Commission and is concerned about the mounting fees and impact on taxpayers in the absence of resolution.
“Though the county pays our monthly legal fees now, the resentment is loud and somewhat abusive. Obviously this County is not willing to represent us.” Administrator of Elections Debbie Stiedl articulated her concern that the County seems poised for inaction – or continued court contest -- related to the aging Election Commission lawsuit related to former Putnam County Administrator of Elections, Nancy Boman.
In the original suit, Boman sued the three Republican members of the Putnam County Election Commission alleging they had “determined not to reappoint her because of her affiliation with the Democratic Party.” Further complications arose around determination of responsibility for legal fees related to the matter. Was it the County’s responsibility to cover the fees or the state’s responsibility or the individuals themselves?
As of last week, several of those questions have been answered. The Chancery Court decision was that Putnam County “is responsible not only for the defense costs in the federal case but also for any damages that may be awarded in that case as well as the costs of bringing the chancery action itself” according to attorney John Harris.
The court agreed with County Executive Blaylock’s and Putnam County’s assertion that the Election Commission and the Putnam County Administrator of Elections are state employees. However, the court also cited a Tennessee Code provision stating “except as otherwise provided by law, it is the responsibility to fund the operations of the election commission.”
Similarly, Tennessee Code provides that where legal proceedings are brought against members of the county election commission, the municipality is to provide legal representation.
Signed on April 20 by Donald Harris, Senior Judge sitting by designation of the Tennessee Supreme Court, the Memorandum seems to point toward resolution of the matter of legal fees and county responsibility.
But Administrator Stiedl is concerned that the Election Commission and county may have more court battles ahead. Stiedl posed the question to the Election Commission this morning, “So it comes to this: Do we protect ourselves as our lawyer says and put money in our budget for Insurance and Legal fees? We have to know that could lead to going back to Chancery Court with this County. I do not want that. But we must handle practical matters judiciously.”
Stating that she is “unwelcome in the necessary office,” Stiedl referenced what she views as an adversarial relationship with the office of County Executive, held by Kim Blaylock.
“For the first time in twenty years I really know what combat budget really means.” Stating that consideration of a return to Chancery Court and an anticipated County appeal would increase the budget dramatically, Stiedl asked the commission to consider whether it needed an additional $50,000 line item under Insurance for deductible.
Administrator of elections Debbie Stiedl believes that the County Commission’s failure to discuss and make a determination on the matter of the fees related to the lawsuit against the Election Committee could impact tax payers with an increase of as much as 3 cents to cover related costs.
You have indicated this comment should be removed.
The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .