The Review Process
When attempting to understand the law, it is important to keep three questions in mind:
Who is the ultimate authority on this specific issue?
What are the relevant laws, rules, and regulations in this case?
Is there any judicial precedent that may impact our interpretation?
So, let’s start by investigating the ultimate authority on the specific issue of this election-altering resolution. We know from Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution (often referred to as the “Elections Clause”), that states have the authority to determine the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives.” While this particular resolution has nothing to do with congressional elections, the Constitution does point us in the right direction, as the federal government cedes nearly all authority in legislating elections to the states.
Next, we must look at any relevant Tennessee laws, rules, and regulations regarding the elections of school board members, specifically. County Commissioner Henri Brooks, both in committees last week and in full commission this week, made reference to Article XI, Section 9 of the Tennessee constitution, which states that the “General Assembly has no power to pass a special, local, or private act that would remove an incumbent from any municipal or county office, change the term of office, or alter the salary of the office until the end of the current term.” But, if we take a look at the language of the state law (SB1336/HB1383) in question, which passed in April of this year in the General Assembly, we see that it is simply allowing counties with a charter form of government to willingly adopt an amendment to the existing state law which governs school board elections. If the County Commission does nothing, the General Assembly cannot force these changes on our elections, as per the state constitution..
So, let’s take a look at the existing statute which was amended by the General Assembly in April. Specifically, we are looking at Title 49 of the Tennessee Code, which governs education. Chapter 2 of Title 49 deals with Local Administration of education, and Part 2 within that chapter pertains to Boards of Education. We found this specific part by reading the law that passed this year, which details that it is amending “Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-2-201.” The 201 subsection specifically details the law surrounding the election or appointment of school board members. We have now found the most relevant law for our purposes.
Section 49-2-201 states, in part, that school board members will be elected to four-year terms on a staggered basis in an August election, as is the current practice in Shelby County. But, the amendment to the law adds a new subsection (f) to the existing law, which authorizes the local legislative body for a county with a charter form of government (like Shelby County) to require that school board elections be held at the same time and on the same election cycle as elections for the county’s legislative body, as well as implement the same term limits as those by which the county’s legislators must abide. You may consider this a power granted to Shelby County from the state, which reserves ultimate authority over school board elections in Tennessee. Again, Shelby County is not required to adopt this measure, and the state cannot currently force the changes onto the county, as that would run afoul of the clause in the state constitution which Commissioner Brooks cited.
Now that we have established that the relevant authority and laws suggest that the County Commission may enact this resolution, let’s consider some legal precedent, just in case. In Bailey v. County of Shelby (2006), the Tennessee Supreme Court upheld a term limit of two consecutive four-year terms for Shelby County elected officials. This change was originally made through an amendment to the county charter, which is permissible under Tennessee code Title 5, which grants charter counties with the authority to set any “qualification for holding office” at the county level. Term limits were deemed by the TN Supreme Court to be a “qualification for holding office,” hence the decision which remains to this day. The ruling, however, did not extend to school board elections, as it was preempted by the aforementioned section of state law (Section 49-2-201), which has now been amended.
You can see how this specific case, in which the state had previously granted conditional authority to Shelby County to legislate new measures related to local elections, is practically identical to the situation in which we find ourselves today. With the amended state law in question, the state is granting additional limited authority to the county to amend the method by which school board members are elected, in line with the state’s authority.
