Knox County ethics panel forms subcommittee to review county code; law counsel warns about open‑meetings limits

The Knox County Ethics Committee on a special call voted to form a subcommittee to review the county code of ethics and produce recommended revisions for the County Commission.

Madam chairwoman called the session to order and said the meeting was convened at the request of Commissioner Frasier to "reorganize, we review our ethics policy, and present any recommendations or changes that we would like to do." The committee nominated and approved Michael Biddle to head the reorganization subcommittee.

The move follows a resolution from the Knox County Commission directing the Ethics Committee to undertake a comprehensive review and return suggested revisions within 180 days. "The Knox County Commission hereby formally request that the Knox County Ethics Committee undertake a comprehensive review and provide suggested revisions," a staff summary in the committee packet states; the target timeline given in the meeting materials is 180 days for presenting findings and recommendations to the commission.

Why it matters: the subcommittee will be the body charged with drafting suggested policy language that, if approved by the full ethics committee, will be forwarded to the County Commission — the only body with authority to adopt formal changes. That chain of referral shapes both what the panel can accomplish and the practical effect of its work.

Legal and procedural guardrails: the law department repeatedly cautioned members about open‑meetings constraints and the limits of the ethics committee’s enforcement power. "I see no problem offhand with developing a subcommittee as long as the subcommittee understands that it also is subject to open meetings law," Mr. Sanders of the law department told the committee, emphasizing that meetings must be publicly announced and that deliberations must occur in public. Sanders added the committee cannot itself impose discipline on county officials or employees; complaints are first routed to the law department for merit review and then, as appropriate, to supervisors, the county commission or the district attorney.

Membership, scope and schedule: committee members discussed composition and logistics and settled on a subcommittee composed of five voting members and two nonvoting members (as proposed during roll call and nomination discussion). Biddle asked members to begin by redlining the existing ethics policies and preparing specific questions and suggested edits for the law department to review. He proposed a regular meeting time of 8:30 a.m., and the group discussed potential kickoff dates in October; the committee ultimately canceled a specially called full meeting on Oct. 8 to let the subcommittee work and set a target to reconvene as a full committee on Nov. 12 to review progress. The committee also held Dec. 10 as an available date if additional full‑committee time is needed.

Public engagement and logistics: members explored options for taking input across the county, including satellite listening forums, library rooms and an online public portal. Law counsel warned that holding simultaneous listening forums with multiple members risks inadvertent deliberation not attended by all members, which can violate Sunshine/Open Meetings rules. Sanders and other staff also noted staffing and technical requirements for public access (recording/CCTV, minutes, and published agendas) and urged the subcommittee to coordinate with county staff (Rhonda and law‑department support) to ensure proper notice and accessibility.

Next steps: Mr. Sanders agreed to compile a checklist of compliance items and legal considerations for the subcommittee in the coming days; the subcommittee chair asked members to redline the current policies and be prepared with observations. The committee’s formal role will be to draft recommendations; any recommended changes must then be approved by the full ethics committee and forwarded to the County Commission for final action.

The meeting ended after the committee voted to cancel the Oct. 8 full meeting and adjourned; the subcommittee will meet, work with the law department and report back at the Nov. 12 full committee meeting.