Commission votes 13-8 to block $59,350 school budget line change after debate on procedure and oversight

Lincoln County Board of Commissioners members voted 13-8, with three absent, on March 18 to concur with the budget committee’s recommendation and decline a $59,350 amendment to the 1-41 general purpose school fund that would have moved money within the school budget to pay overlapping superintendent salaries.

The vote followed extended discussion about whether denying the amendment would prevent payment, what audit findings might follow and whether the school board had violated the Tennessee Open Meetings Act (sunshine law). Finance Director Jason Nicks, speaking to the commission, said denying the amendment would not stop the payment and would likely become an audit finding: “I just want to make it clear to everyone on the commission that what you’re not approving is just to move money within a budget that’s already been approved…In other words, if you’re voting to not approve this thing and it’s going to stop the payment … that money will still get spent. What’s gonna happen will be a finding that’ll land on the county.”

The disagreement centered on the school board’s decision to reallocate funds from vacant teacher salary lines into the superintendent salary line so the incoming superintendent could be paid while the outgoing superintendent’s contract overlapped. Commissioners expressing concern said the reallocation created poor optics and potential accountability issues. Commissioner Hambrick said the transfer raised procedural concerns and alleged a sunshine-law violation, telling colleagues, “My issue is we have an alleged violation of sunshine law. If we approve this, then our name is saying that we’re good with what they done.”

The budget committee had recommended not approving the $59,350 amendment; the full commission then voted to concur with that recommendation in a roll-call vote. The clerk recorded 13 “yes” votes to block the amendment, 8 “no” votes in favor of allowing it, and 3 absences. The chair confirmed the motion passed as proposed by the budget committee.

The commission’s discussion clarified several procedural points cited by speakers: the county legislative body can approve or disapprove a school budget as submitted, but it cannot selectively edit individual line items for the school system; the school board — an elected body — holds primary authority over school personnel and budgetary choices within its approved appropriation. Commissioners also noted that state maintenance-of-effort rules limit how much the county can change school appropriations year to year.

No formal remedy for the alleged sunshine-law issue was adopted during the meeting; a budget-committee-level recommendation to ask the school superintendent’s attorney for more information was discussed but not moved as a formal county-commission motion at this session.

Votes and immediate next steps focused on finalizing the budget items on the agenda; any audit finding arising from the school board’s reallocation would be resolved through the audit process.