MURFREESBORO – A sharp divide has emerged between Rutherford County Mayor Joe Carr and the County Commission following the Mayor’s decision to veto a resolution aimed at restructuring the county’s Ethics Committee... Mayor Carr officially issued the veto on February 20, 2026, characterizing the measure as an "unlawful" attempt by the Commission to bypass state law and appoint its own members to the committee. What may become a significant legal and political tug-of-war in Rutherford County revolves around the boundaries of appointment power and the interpretation of state law versus local "home rule." Evidently, the conflict between the Steering Committee and the County Mayor was created in early February 2026. The disagreement centers on who has the authority to appoint members to the Ethics Committee and who is allowed to serve.
The conflict stems from a resolution first approved by the Steering, Legislative, and Governmental Committee on February 2, which sought to add two alternate members to the Ethics Committee. Under the proposal, these alternates would be selected by the Commission and could include sitting County Commissioners or Constitutional Officers. The full Commission subsequently passed the resolution with a unanimous 21-0 vote on February 12.
Mayor Carr argues that the resolution violates T.C.A. § 5-6-106 (c), which stipulates that the county mayor holds the authority to appoint members of county boards and commissions, subject to Commission confirmation. "I will not knowingly sign an unlawful resolution," Carr stated, noting that legal research from his Chief of Staff and County Attorney Nick Christiansen confirmed the Commission's error.
Mayor Carr suggested...
Steering Committee Chairman Craig Harris defended the resolution in a statement on February 27, 2026, arguing that the Ethics Committee is a locally created advisory body rather than a board mandated by state statute. Harris contended the move was a "good-faith effort" to ensure the committee can function during recusals and that the disagreement is a matter of "legal interpretation rather than a violation of law."
Statement Released by Steering Committee Chairman Craig Harris:
The Ethics Committee was created by resolution of the County Commission as part of the County’s locally adopted ethics policy. It is not a board mandated or structured by state statute, and its size and composition have historically been determined at the local level. There is no controlling Tennessee statute or court decision that directly addresses the structure of a locally established ethics committee in this context. Because of that, this issue is properly viewed as a matter of legal interpretation rather than a violation of law.
The recent resolution did not remove any existing appointment authority of the Mayor. It simply added alternate members to ensure continuity when recusals or absences occur so that the committee can function efficiently. The resolution moved through the committee process and was adopted by the full Commission. After adoption, the Mayor reviewed the measure and raised a question regarding appointment structure, which led to the veto.
It is important for the public to understand that this was not an attempt to pass an “unlawful” resolution. It was a good-faith effort to improve the operation of a locally created advisory committee. Where legal interpretation questions arise, the appropriate course is to address them through the legislative process, and I intend to do exactly that.
The political tension between the two offices was evident as Mayor Carr described the situation as "another instance of the Steering Committee Chairman playing politics". This marks Carr's second veto in less than three years, following his 2024 rejection of a building rename in Kittrell.
Chairman Harris indicated that he intends to address the legal questions through the legislative process moving forward.
