Voters had the opportunity to cast ballots in a variety of races during the November 5, 2024 election, including President, US, Senate, US Congress, State Representative and several more.

Polls were open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., and voters had the opportunity to vote early from October 16 – 31 or by absentee ballot.

Below is a PDF of the election results for the November 5, 2024 Election.

Use the up and down arrows at the top and bottom of the PDF to scroll between pages.

0 of 8 Precincts have reported, including early and absentee votes

Both County Mayor Jeff Mason and the Smith County Board of Education have recently released statements about the upcoming vote on the county’s 2024-2025 budget. The commission is set to meet on Monday, August 12 at 7pm to vote on the budget. Live coverage of the meeting can be found on Smith County Insider’s Facebook page.

Below is a statement from Smith County Mayor, Jeff Mason:

I hope you all are enjoying your Friday! As promised, here are my thoughts on the Board of Education Budget that will be discussed and voted on Monday night.

The Budget Committee voted twice to reject the BOE’s budget. The next step is the full commission on Monday night.

I personally support raises for all employees and insurance for non-certified employees. The BOE has the revenues to support them. They have repeatedly stated that they are not asking for anything new from the county. While that is true in principle, I am against the total expenditure they are asking for. In my opinion, the numbers do not add up.

The Board of Education’s final expenditures number for the 23-24 budget year was $30,700,000. Their originally approved 23-24 budget was $32,287,282, which makes expenditures $1.5 million less than the original budget. The board did ask for amendments to the budget in June 2024, and they were approved. This made the final budgeted number $33,294,412. That makes the difference between expenditures and the amended budget at $2.5 million.

A 12% raise was announced and approved in August 2023. The numbers show they already had the money in their budget. They are asking for another 10% raise for all employees and insurance for non-certified employees. The original budget ask in May for the 24-25 fiscal year was for total expenditures in the amount of $40,960,550. That is an 8.5 million dollar increase in requested expenditures from last year’s original budget.

They did come back and cut 1.8 million out of that, so it’s a little less than a 7-million-dollar increase. They took a discussion during a budget meeting and twisted my words. I did say 1.8 was a number to start with but that was inside one salary line. And a commissioner said 37 million dollars was closer to the number and I said I think I can get the votes for something like that. They heard 1.8 in total cuts and ran with it. I know in my heart what I meant when I said it, as do others who were present during the meeting.

If you do simple math and add 10 percent to the total amount expended in fiscal year 23-24, you get somewhere around $33,770,000. Now add the insurance cost, which is around 1.5 million, and you get $35,270,000. Round that up for unseen inflation and extra positions, and let’s call it $36 million total. I think that ask would have been a well-received by the county commission, but they are still asking for 3 million more than this.

I say this to every Board of Education Employee and taxpayer reading this: I am not against raises and insurance, but I am against unnecessary fluff and pad. I have tried to operate off real numbers since I got here 6 years ago. As I stated in a previous post this week, I take spending taxpayer dollars seriously. I have had these same conversations with department heads and elected officials in the past. Does that make me the most liked guy in Smith County government? No, but that’s part of the job! That’s all I would ask the BOE to do: operate on real numbers. Budgets are estimated guesses; I understand that, but what I don’t want to see is a tax increase in a few years.

The Commission can not line item their budget. They can only vote the BOE’s budget up or down. If the elevated amount is approved they can legally spend that amount. Which would be more than current revenues and cause their reserves to be depleted. If this budget is voted down, the BOE can STILL give raises and insurance through the amendment process.

Like the rest of the county government, the BOE is running on a continuing budget until the 24-25 budget is passed.

Thank you for allowing me to be your mayor! I love you all and I love this place! May God Bless You and May God Bless Smith County!

Below is a statement from the Smith County Board of Education:

While it has been the policy of the Board of Education not to engage in online discussions concerning the business of the Smith County School Systems, the time has come to address misinformation and set the record straight regarding the FY25 budget and the future of Smith County Schools.

The Board of Education acknowledges the struggles of many of the county’s departments. We understand and recognize the financial need of the Smith County Sheriff’s Office, Smith County Road Commission, and the Smith County Solid Waste. We support every effort by those and other county departments to obtain their much-needed funds and feel they are long overdue. Fortunately, the Board of Education is not requesting any funding that would divert funds away from those departments.

The Smith County Board of Education has a long-standing record of financial responsibility and excellence. In recent years, the Board of Education has been asked to lend money to Smith County Government due to the poor financial condition of the county. Taxpayers in this county saw an unprecedented property tax increase that we are all still feeling the impact of. Instead of finding other ways to increase revenue for the county, the Mayor and County Commission came directly to the taxpayer. Now, Mayor Jeff Mason wants you to believe that the county is doing well and the fund balance has increased, but in truth, the funds he is touting came right out of local tax payer pockets. And, they will soon be coming back for more. Without increased property taxes, the county would remain in the same poor financial condition it has been in for years.

In stark contrast to the financial condition of the county, the Board of Education has continued to grow their fund balance, secure additional revenue streams through grants and maximization of reimbursement from the State of Tennessee by utilizing credits for Career and Technical Education (CTE) students, and solid budgeting practices. The Board of Education follows a 5-year plan and knows the projected revenues for the Board of Education are going to continue to be a sustainable source of funding for the raises and benefits we have included in the FY25 budget.

We have not asked the county for any additional funds in at least 15 years and despite that, today the Board of Education has a historic fund balance. We have secured an estimated $20M in grant funds which has allowed our system to focus on updating technology, building maintenance, new and upgraded facilities, and better safety and security for our students. Director Smith and the Board of Education is very proud of that. Can you imagine trying to run your household off the same money you earned 15 years ago at today’s prices? The Board of Education is doing just that and will continue to maintain every resource available to us and continue to gather revenue streams to decrease reliance on local funding. In fact, the Board of Education has offered to the assist the county in writing grants and offered other resources, but those offers have gone without response from the county.

In his recent Facebook post, Mayor Jeff Mason attacked the Board of Education stating we should operate on “real numbers” and openly criticized the Board of Education for coming in $2 Million UNDER budget last year. He should be applauding that level of financial responsibility instead of complaining that all the money wasn’t spent. Any money the Board of Education doesn’t spend goes back into the Board of Education’s fund balance; it doesn’t go to the county, which is an often-misunderstood fact by commissioners and tax payers alike. By statue, the county cannot spend or encumber the Board of Education’s money. They simply have the administrative duty of approving the budget. Whether the Board of Education has $2 million, $4 million, or $100 left at the end of the fiscal year, it has no impact on what can be spent by the county.

On May 18, 2023, Gov. Bill Lee signed HB-0329 into law mandating starting teacher pay be no less than $50,000 per year by the 2026-2027 school year. This law was effective July 1, 2023. Additionally, the new law mandated immediate changes to the state salary schedule for teachers and established a base salary that is no less than (1) $42,000 for the 2023-2024 school year; (2) $44,500 for the 2024-2025 school year, (3) $47,000 for the 2025-2026 school year, (4) $50,000 for the 2026-2027 school year.

The salary increases that have been approved by the Board of Education and included in our FY25 budget are a result of this legislation and trying to be ensure that Smith County teachers are not only earning more than the state minimum, but that we remain competitive with the counties around us so that we are not only recruiting new talent, but also retaining our most seasoned educators. The ongoing budget frustrations have caused the school system to lose teachers and non-certified positions, including those much-needed personnel in our Special Education Department and those who care for our special education students.

Mayor Mason and various County Commissioners have repeatedly referred to “fluff” or “padding” in the Board of Education’s budget. This is a patently false statement and demonstrates their general lack of understanding of the Board of Education budget. As a result of the state legislation mentioned above, the Board of Education gave a 12% raise to all employees in August 2023. Those raises were not included in the FY24 Budget salary line item because the legislation that precipitated those raises was not effective at the time the budget was approved by the County Commission. In the FY25 budget, those 12% raises are included, plus an additional raise of 10% for an effective increase of 22%. The “simple math” Mayor Mason references does not work when it he is calculating numbers he doesn’t understand. The “fluff” that has been repeatedly referred to is an estimated $1.298M in the FY24 budget, which means that the Board of Education was 96.1% accurate with their budget projections. The “fluff” is less than 4% of the Board of Education’s total budget.

It has also been suggested if this budget fails, that the Board of Education should come back next month and ask for the raises and the benefits as a budget amendment. Whether we ask now or a month from now, the money the Board of Education would be spending is the same money requested in the FY25 budget. To pretend otherwise is very deceptive to our community.

The Mayor also told taxpayers the County Commission cannot “line item” the Board of Education’s budget, but then gives a protracted explanation that does just that. He has made similar line itemizations statements in budget meetings. In an email to Smith County Schools Chief Financial Officer, Norma Mitchell, on July 10, 2024, Mayor Mason stated, “Now during the budget meeting on June 17th it was discussed cutting 1.8 million dollars out of the salary line 71100.” In that same email to Ms. Mitchell, stated he was not motivated by what Director Smith thinks and shamefully referred to budget discussions as a “pissing contest.”

The Board of Education has made every effort to include the County Commissioners and Mayor Mason in every budget meeting and work session the Board of Education has had on our budget. Mayor Mason hasn’t attended any of those meetings and less than five (5) of the twenty-four (24) County Commissioners have attended. We applaud those Commissioners who have come to the meetings, asked questions, and made phone calls. We sincerely appreciate their interest and efforts to understand the Board’s position and they should be commended for the time they have spent with the Board of Education.

Another important part of the FY25 Budget is health insurance benefits for full-time, non-certified employees. Those employees are currently eligible for coverage, but for most employees it is cost prohibitive. Often their salaries fall short of the cost of the coverage each month. In some cases, it has taken an employee’s entire earnings to pay for those benefits. In 2014, due the unaffordability of the benefits, the Board made the difficult decision to pay the penalty assessed as a part of the Affordable Care Act rather than absorbing the cost of the benefits. This has resulted in a finding each year against the Board of Education by the comptroller’s office. In a special committee meeting with Mayor Mason and other commissioners, Director Smith was asked to eliminate all comptroller findings. At an estimated annual cost of $1.6M, those benefits were added to the FY25 budget.

Our track record of financial responsibility is without reproach. We have been excellent stewards of federal, state, and local dollars. This is a similar budget to those presented to the County Commission for the last ten (10) years or more, aside from adjustments for capital outlay, cost of living increases, and inflation. The only notable difference in this year’s budget is the salary increases and benefits for full-time, non-certified employees. It is disappointing we have had to reach this level of advocacy to get a budget approved that doesn’t ask the county for anything but a basic understanding of our budget.

The following statement was released by the Smith County Schools Information Team:

With the 2023 audit report for the Office of Director of Schools being released on March 19, 2024, the General Purpose fund balance was not mentioned in the posts shared on social media. For the sake of full transparency, the audit reported our General Purpose Fund Balance as of June 30, 2023, at $10,937,297.  

In response to audit finding 2023-001 DEFICIENCIES WERE NOTED IN AMOUNTS REPORTED AS COMPENSATION FOR THE DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS TO THE TENNESSEE CONSOLIDATED RETIREMENT SYSTEM, we contacted TCRS as instructed, received guidance, and have moved forward with their recommendation.

In response to audit finding 2023-002 THE SCHOOL DEPARTMENT WAS ASSESSED A PENALTY OF $59,509 BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.  In 2014, the Board met in a special-called meeting to discuss the Affordable Care Act. A significant study was conducted and all budgetary items were considered. The Board, at that time, decided that they could not feasibly expand medical coverage for all employees without asking for a tax increase and amended the budget to cover potential costs for the assessment of the penalty.  In order to be in compliance with the Affordable Care Act and remove the finding, The Board of Education will discuss providing medical insurance for full-time, non-certified employees at the April board meeting with an estimated cost of $1,600,000 annually.

In response to audit finding 2023-003 MATERIAL AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS WERE REQUIRED FOR PROPER FINANCIAL STATEMENT PRESENTATION, $714,481 was referenced in the finding, with specific mention to property tax receivables.  All property tax revenue was fully and completely posted in our books for 2023; however, audit did ask that the balance sheet be updated to classify the revenue in parts as property tax receivables, allowance for uncollectible taxes, deferred current taxes, deferred delinquent taxes, and current property tax.  Moving forward property tax receivables will be classified as instructed in order to be in compliance with audit.

There has been some public comment about the management’s lack of response to the audit report. According to audit regulations, a management’s response is not mandatory.  We were required and did submit a Corrective Action Plan detailing a plan to correct any findings.

Mr. Smith and the Board of Education share the same financial plan:  manage spending so that we are financially prepared to support the district’s strategic plan.  This approach ensures that financial resources are allocated in a manner that best serves the needs and objectives of our system and are used efficiently to benefit students, staff, and the community as a whole, all while not asking the County for any tax increase.

If you have any further questions, feel free to reach out to our CFO, Norma Mitchell  at mitchelln@smithcoedu.net.

The state has released its audit report on the basic financial statements of Smith County as of and for the year ended June 30, 2023.

According to the report from the Tennessee Comptroller’s Office, “Our audit resulted in four findings and recommendations, which we have reviewed with Smith County management. Detailed findings, recommendations, and management’s responses are included in the Single Audit section of this report.”

To see the full annual financial report visit: https://comptroller.tn.gov/content/dam/cot/la/documents/county/2023/FY23SmithAFR.pdf

The following are summaries of the audit findings:

OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTS AND BUDGETS

FINDING 2023-001: THE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FUND HAD A DEFICIT IN UNRESTRICTED NET POSITION
(Internal Control – Significant Deficiency Under Government Auditing Standards)
The Solid Waste Disposal Fund had a deficit of $15,384,533 in unrestricted net position at
June 30, 2023. This deficit resulted from the recognition of a liability of $20,798,473 in the
financial statements for costs associated with closing the county’s landfill and monitoring the landfill for 30 years after its closure. Generally accepted accounting principles and state statutes require that such costs be reflected in the financial statements. This deficiency is the result of management’s failure to correct the findings reported in prior-year audit reports.
RECOMMENDATION
County officials should develop and implement a plan that would fund the deficit in
unrestricted net position.
MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSE – DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTS AND BUDGETS
I concur with this finding. The Solid Waste Disposal Fund is a proprietary fund that has a
liability for the closure, post-closure and monitoring costs for 30 years after its closure. Smith County does some of the closure and post-closure work ourselves to cut down on costs. The closure and post-closure cost will be spread out over several years as each cell meets its full capacity. After the closure of the landfill, money left in the Solid Waste Fund will pay for the 30-year monitoring cost. If and when that money is depleted, the Smith County Tax Base will assume the costs of monitoring. With favorable conditions, it is Smith County’s goal to reduce the deficit through contracts and cell management.

OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS

FINDING 2023-002: DEFICIENCIES WERE NOTED IN AMOUNTS REPORTED AS COMPENSATION FOR THE DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS TO THE TENNESSEE CONSOLIDATED RETIREMENT SYSTEM
(Noncompliance Under Government Auditing Standards)
Deficiencies were noted in amounts reported as compensation for the director of schools
(director) to the Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS). The director’s contract provides that the board of education shall pay the director annual compensation as follows:
a. The base BEP Allocation Director’s Salary from the State of Tennessee;
b. The Medicare withholding;
c. The Social Security withholding;
d. The family health care plan premium; and
e. Dental and vision insurance.
The contract also states, “The cumulative amounts shown above shall be the base salary for purposes of TCRS Retirement Benefits.” Section 8-34-101(14)(A), Tennessee Code Annotated, states, “Earnable compensation means the compensation payable to a member for services rendered to an employer.” Auditors asked TCRS to review the director’s contract to determine if all amounts reported met the definition of earnable compensation. TCRS advised that the base BEP allocation salary from the state is the only amount that constitutes “earnable compensation” for retirement purposes. The amounts for subsections (b) – (e) of the director’s contract do NOT constitute “earnable compensation” for retirement purposes. This deficiency is the result of a lack of management oversight. As a result of this deficiency, amounts reported to TCRS for the director have been overstated and could potentially inflate future retirement benefits. We have reported this finding to TCRS.
RECOMMENDATION
Only earnable compensation should be reported to TCRS. The school department should contact TCRS to find out what steps should be taken to correct this deficiency.
MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSE – DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS
No formal management response was submitted. An explanation to the finding is included in the Corrective Action Plan.

FINDING 2023-003: THE SCHOOL DEPARTMENT WAS ASSESSED A PENALTY OF $59,509 BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT
(Noncompliance Under Government Auditing Standards)
During the year, the school department paid a penalty of $59,509 to the Internal Revenue
Service for failure to comply with the Affordable Care Act for 2020. The school department
provides health insurance coverage to its employees; however, this coverage was not in
compliance with federal regulations for certain employees. This deficiency resulted from a
management decision and failure to correct the prior-year finding.
RECOMMENDATION
The school department should ensure the health insurance coverage provided to its employees complies with the Affordable Care Act.
MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSE – DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS
No formal management response was submitted. An explanation to the finding is included in the Corrective Action Plan.

FINDING 2023-004: MATERIAL AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS WERE REQUIRED FOR PROPER FINANCIAL STATEMENT PRESENTATION
(Internal Control – Material Weakness Under Government Auditing Standards)
At June 30, 2023, certain general ledger account balances in the General Purpose School
Fund were not materially correct, and audit adjustments totaling $714,481 were required for the financial statements to be materially correct at year-end. Generally accepted accounting principles require Smith County to have adequate internal controls over the maintenance of its accounting records. Material audit adjustments were required because the department’s financial reporting system did not prevent, detect, or correct potential misstatements in the accounting records. It is a strong indicator of a material weakness in internal controls if the county has ineffective controls over the maintenance of its accounting records, which are used to prepare the financial statements, including the related notes to the financial statements. This deficiency is the result of a lack of management oversight. We presented audit adjustments to management that they approved and posted to properly present the financial statements in this report.
RECOMMENDATION
Smith County should have appropriate processes in place to ensure its general ledgers are materially correct.
MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSE – DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS
No formal management response was submitted. An explanation to the finding is included in the Corrective Action Plan.

Voters had the opportunity to cast ballots in a variety of races during the March 5, 2024 Presidential Preference Primary & Smith County Republican Primary, including President, Delegates At-Large, County Commission, School Board, Tax Assessor, Road Superintendent, and several more.

Polls were open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., and voters had the opportunity to vote early from February 14 – 27 or by absentee ballot.

Below is a PDF of the election results for the March 5, 2024 Election.

Use the up and down arrows at the top and bottom of the PDF to scroll between pages.

8 of 8 Precincts have reported, including early and absentee votes

The presidential field is set in Tennessee for the March 5, 2024, Super Tuesday Presidential Preference Primary and County Primary Election. On Super Tuesday, 15 other states will join Tennessee in helping decide each party’s presidential nominee.

The following candidates will be on Tennessee’s March 5, 2024, ballot:

Republican Primary Ballot:

• Ryan Binkley
• Chris Christie
• Ron DeSantis
• Nikki Haley
• Asa Hutchinson
• Vivek Ramaswamy
• David Stuckenberg
• Donald J. Trump

Democratic Primary Ballot: 

• Joseph R. Biden

Republican candidate Doug Burgum withdrew from the ballot after suspending his campaign. Democratic candidate Dean Phillips did not satisfy the requirements to gain ballot access via the petition process.

“We are expecting strong voter turnout for the presidential election cycle next year,” said Secretary Hargett. “I encourage all Tennesseans who need to register to vote or update their voter registration address do so now by using our convenient online voter registration system at GoVoteTN.gov.”

Click HERE to view a list of all of the polling locations in Smith County.

For more information about early voting and other election information, visit GoVoteTN.gov or contact the Smith County Election Commission at smithcountyelection.com or call 615-735-8241.

See Sample Ballot Below:

The Tennessee Secretary of State’s office and Smith County Election Commission, want to remind all Smith County voters that they can take advantage of the convenience and flexibility of the upcoming early voting period to cast their ballot for the March 5 Presidential Preference Primary and Republican County Primary.

“Early voting is an easy way for all eligible voters to cast their ballots and let their voices be heard before Super Tuesday,” said Yvonne Gibbs, Administrator of Elections.

Early voting begins on Feb. 14 and runs through Feb 27. Smith County residents can find hours, polling locations, view sample ballots, and much more on www.smithcountyelection.com, or by downloading the Secretary of State’s free GoVoteTN app. A PDF of the sample ballot is below.

“We want all eligible Tennessee voters to cast their ballot, and early voting provides them with the flexibility and convenience to do so before Election Day,” said Secretary of State Tre Hargett. 

All voters should be proud that the Heritage Foundation ranks Tennessee number one in the nation for election integrity, and the Secretary of State’s office is Tennessee’s trusted source for all election information — including the GoVoteTN app.

For more information about early voting and other election information, visit GoVoteTN.gov or contact the Smith County Election Commission at smithcountyelection.com or call 615-735-8241.

The Financial Management Committee will meet on Thursday, February 8, 2024, at 5:00 PM at the Smith County Chamber of Commerce. The agenda for the meeting can be seen below.

Any Smith County citizen wishing to speak during the Public Comment section must sign in with the chairman no later than 15 minutes before the scheduled start time of the meeting. All comments must be related to an item on the agenda.

The meeting will be streamed live on Smith County Insider’s Facebook Page.

Three local government meetings originally slated for tonight, January 16, 2024, have been rescheduled and are now set to take place on Tuesday, January 23, 2024 due to inclement weather.

The Smith County Board of Education is scheduled to convene its regularly scheduled monthly meeting at 5 pm on January 23, 2024.

Following the Board of Education meeting, the Smith County Commission will host a special-called meeting at 6:30 pm on the same day at the Smith County Ag Center.

The Smith County Financial Management Committee will commence its session immediately following the conclusion of the 6:30 pm Commission Meeting.

All three meetings are set to be streamed live on Smith County Insider’s Facebook page.

I, David McDonald, am excited to announce my candidacy for the Smith County Board representing the South Carthage District.  I am a lifelong resident of South Carthage and served this county for almost 35 years as a dentist.  My wife, Lorrie, and I live on the family farm that was settled in 1796.  My parents, Cordell and Lois McDonald, taught in the county school system for over 50 years.  I am a graduate of Smith County High School (1974), the University of Georgia (1978), and the University of Tennessee Dental College (1982).  After graduating Dental School, I couldn’t think of a better place to serve than my hometown of Smith County.  Now that I am retired, I would like to serve my county once again as a School Board member.

I believe we are all called to be good stewards.  I also believe in accountability.  I am concerned by recent events, including the School Board’s filing of a lawsuit against the county.  I believe the taxpayer money should be going to our teachers and students, not spent on litigation. As a dentist, I was accountable to my patients and their families.  As a School Board Member, I will be accountable to the people of Smith County.  Let’s spend our taxpayer dollars on education, not lawsuits!

The school system is the largest employer in our county. As a business owner, I learned how to work with employees and manage a budget.  For years I have invested in the youth of Smith County, including as a volunteer youth coach in three sports. Now I would like to serve our youth once again by working to give the educators of Smith County the means to do the most important and difficult job there is, teaching our children to become successful adults!

I humbly ask for your support and your vote for Smith County School Board.  I have decades of experience serving the county I love.  I ask for the opportunity to once again serve my Smith County friends and family on the School Board.

You can follow Dr. McDonald’s campaign on Facebook at David McDonald for Smith County School Board.

Updated on December 8, 2023.

On Thursday, November 30, the Smith County Commission filed a brief in support of their motion to dissolve the temporary restraining order obtained without mandatory notice by the Board of Education. (SEE PDF BELOW)

Within the 29-page brief, the County states that “This lawsuit was improvidently (and apparently illegally) brought, and is a (double) waste of taxpayer funds by the Board of Education, which most certainly has unclean hands… The lawsuit is also substantively meritless.”

The brief is broken into three main sections:

1. The Plaintiff’s Complaint is substantively meritless. The County Commission engaged in lengthy public deliberation, following extensive public comment on this very subject, following input by members of the Board of Education, the Director of Schools, and even the BOE attorney, and even a presentation by the Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury personally, as well as the Comptroller’s staff, and voted in a regular public meeting by a supermajority to adopt the 1981 Act.
2. The Board of Education lacks standing, and further has unclean hands by violating the Open Meetings Act in filing this lawsuit.
3. The Court should never have issued an ex parte restraining order, and the Board of Education intentionally violated the law by seeking it.

See the full brief below.

The first hearing for the case was held on Friday, December 1 in chancery court. At the hearing on Friday, Chancellor C.K. Smith ruled that the Financial Management Committee could resume meetings and partially lifted the temporary restraining order filed by the Board of Education.

The next time the case is set to appear in court is on December 28-29, 2023 in Lebanon.

The next meeting of the of the Financial Management Committee will be held at the Smith County Chamber of Commerce on December 14, 2023 at 5:00pm.

Following the court appearance, Smith County Jeff Mason released the following statement:

“We are pleased that Chancellor Smith allowed us to move forward with the December 14^th meeting of the Financial Management Committee created as part of the implementation of the Financial Management Act of 1981. We believe that attorneys Danny Rader and Jeremy Hassler presented a firm case that no wrongdoing was done by the Smith County Commission and that the Commission acted well within their rights to vote to implement the 1981 Act at its October 9^th meeting. This suit is a waste of taxpayer dollars and the need to defend the commission for doing the job that the people of Smith County elected them to do will create more unnecessary spending. We look forward to this being behind us soon and moving forward with the plan to bring more transparency, efficiency and effectiveness to Smith County Government.”

Smith County Insider contacted the Board of Education on Tuesday evening, December 5, for comment. They responded at 8am on Friday, December 8, at 8am. Director of Schools, Barry Smith and the Board of Education released the following statement:

Director Barry H. Smith and the Smith County Board of Education are pleased that the Court agreed with the Board of Education that an open meetings act violation likely occurred depriving the parents, taxpayers, and Board of Education employees the opportunity to know the facts and ramifications of what was being done behind closed doors.  The granting of an injunction preventing the County from moving forward with the new taxpayer funded position of finance director is the first step to allow voters and taxpayers to have input on this important decision.  This injunction would also give the commissioners the opportunity to do the right thing and present this issue to the taxpayers and voters by referendum as allowed by law instead of county government forcing it upon the citizens. 

A special-called meeting of the Smith County Commission will take place on Monday, November 27, 2023, at 7:30 pm at the Smith County Chamber of Commerce.

LIVE Coverage of the meeting will be available on Smith County Insider’s Facebook page.

See a copy of the agenda below:

On November 17, the Smith County Board of Education filed a lawsuit and temporary restraining order against the Smith County Board of Commissioners, Smith County Mayor Jeff Mason, and Smith County, TN. The lawsuit follows the recent adoption of the Financial Management Act 1981 by the County Commission on October 9, 2023.

The Smith County Director of Schools, Barry Smith, and several members of the Board of Education attended the October 9, 2023 meeting of the Smith County Commission to voice concerns about adopting the Financial Management Act 1981. Click here to view the full meeting.

According to the lawsuit, the Board of Education alleges that the county violated the Open Meetings Act by not giving proper public notice of meetings and that certain members of the county commission met and/or deliberated privately regarding the county finance structure and the adoption of the Financial Management Act of 1981.

The restraining order filed by the Board of Education against the County and Commissioners temporarily prevents the county from proceeding with the establishment of the County Department of Finance and taking further action in implementing the vote taken on 10/9/23 in relation to the Financial Management Act of 1981.

See below a copy of the full lawsuit and the restraining order:

The Smith County Financial Management Committee met on November 2nd, 2023. Over 20 members of the community including board of education members attended the meeting. 

The Financial Management Committee includes the following: Jeff Mason, Barry Smith, Mickey Barrett, Greta Kirby, Erika Ebel, Cordell Smith, and Justin Mauldin. The first order of business at the meeting was assigning positions within the committee.

The meeting began with public comments.

The committee elected Justin Mauldin as chairman of the board. Cordell Smith was elected as vice-chairman. Staci Bush was appointed as interim secretary until the financial director can take over.

The committee discussed the requirements and review process to decide on a financial director. It was decided at the meeting to table the above so the committee can research further.

The next meeting will take place on November 16th at 5:00pm in the small meeting room of the Smith County Ag Center.