Rutherford County ethics panel hears allegations from activist Jason Bennett; forwards some claims to prosecutors

Jason Bennett, the complainant, urged the Rutherford County Ethics Committee to refer multiple allegations of improper conduct and conflicts of interest to outside prosecutors and auditors, calling the current oversight process "theater" without impartial review. "Oversight must be impartial," Bennett said in his 10-minute presentation, arguing that the committee and related actors were too entangled to investigate themselves.

Bennett's complaint raised several claims including: alleged efforts by county officials to use their positions for political advantage, instances he described as misuse of county property, and what he said were editorialized or cropped email exhibits submitted with his complaint. He urged the committee to refer the matter to District Attorney Jennings Jones and to the state controller for independent review.

Mayor Carr responded to Bennett's allegations and denied wrongdoing. On the question of selling jars of honey from his office, the mayor said he does not use the office as a retail operation and described the transactions as "pre-arranged" pick-ups: "I do not use my office as a retail store room to sell honey," he told the committee, adding that he had checked with the county controller's office about staff involvement.

The committee considered Bennett's five claims in order. After discussion, the body voted to take no action on several allegations, including the claim concerning a meeting between the mayor and Commissioner P and the complaint about souvenir alcohol on display. On the most contested claim — that emails and exhibits had been altered or that complainants faced retaliation — the committee voted to forward Bennett's complaint and attachments to the District Attorney and to the state controller for further investigation. The roll-call vote on that referral recorded four in favor and one abstention.

The committee's actions distinguished between matters it judged outside its jurisdiction under the county ethics policy and items it believed warranted external investigation. Chairman Tab (Ted) Batty and committee counsel framed the votes around whether the conduct alleged met the formal elements of the county's ethics code (which is focused on disclosure of personal interest and acceptance of gifts tied to county duties).

The panel closed the Bennett portion of the agenda without imposing sanctions; several claims were logged as "no action" under the committee's procedural interpretation, while the committee referred the contested evidence and retaliation allegations to prosecutorial and controller review. The committee then recessed for a short break before taking up a separate complaint filed by Assessor Rob Mitchell.

The committee will await any external findings from the District Attorney's office and the state controller before taking further county-level action on the referred allegations.