September 18, 2007
COUNTY ATTORNEY IMPLICATED IN COVER-UP
Last Night the Benton County Commission held its regular schedule monthly meeting. I ask County Attorney John Whitworth if he had advised the Mayor on the issue concerning the Benton County Electric System. He said yes. I ask if he thought this was a conflict of interest considering he is also the attorney of record for the Electric Board. No reply.
I believe that Mr. Whitworth was the Brainchild behind the County Commission reversing its vote to hold a public hearing and that it was very self serving.
According to T.C.A. 8-18-107 Oaths of office may be administered by the County Mayor, County Clerk, General Sessions Judge or a Judge from any Court of record in the county including those Judges that are retired. This law has been completely ignored. In fact, this Board has not been duly sworn in and technically all their actions have been illegal. The present county Attorney John Whitworth and Keith Arnold the current Chairman of the Electric Board have administered the oaths of office in direct violation of this law. In addition, these bogus records are not on file with the County Clerk office which is another violation of the law. A quick look at the minutes will give you some insight on this matter.
- August 1995: Mr. Truman Phifer, new Board member, was given the oath of office by John Whitworth.
- September 1998: Mr. Allen Webb new member of the board takes oath. (Whitworth)
- March 1999: Keith Jones new member given Oath of Office by (Whitworth)
- July 2000: Nothing in the minutes about oath being given to Sam Long.
- October 2000: No record in minutes of oath given to Jackie Oatsvall.
- September 26, 2006: No mention of Sam Rainwaters coming on the Electric Board. I ask Mr. Rainwaters who administered the oath to him. He stated: “Chairman of the Board Keith Arnold.”
- July 2007: New board member Shane King sworn in by? Is there any mention in the minutes of him coming on the Electric Board?
According to a report Sponsored by the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Professional Discipline dated August 2003 “The Supreme Court of Tennessee possesses the exclusive and inherent authority to regulate the legal profession in the State. The Court exercises this authority through its disciplinary agency. The disciplinary agency consists of: (1) the Board of Professional Responsibility; (2) the Office of Disciplinary Counsel; and (3) the Hearing Committees. Also, the Tennessee Circuit/Chancery Courts (the trial courts) hear disciplinary cases on appeal from the Hearing Committees. The Court’s rules relating to the operation and funding of the lawyer disciplinary system are contained in Rule 9 of the Rules of the Tennessee Supreme Court, entitled “Disciplinary Enforcement” (hereinafter Rule 9).”
I believe that in light of this information County Attorney John Whitworth should have excused himself from advising the County Commission and the Electric Board. I will send a letter of complaint to the Board of Professional Responsibility.
Henry Berry