May 19, 2008 250,000 gallons of raw sewage dumped in Cherokee Lake

Power Outage Causes Spill

This was a front-page headline in the Tribune on April 14, 2008.

The "spill" wasn't corn or beans. The spill was untreated sewage---250,000 gallons of raw sewage overflowing into Cherokee Lake from the Morristown wastewater treatment plant.

The sewage overflowed into the lake due to a power outage at the treatment plant caused by a tree that was cut and fell on power lines. The circulating pumps went down as a result of the power outage. When the sewage reached critical mass, it overflowed into the lake.

Just the thought of an overflow and discharge of 250,000 gallons of raw sewage into Cherokee Lake makes you want to, well, puke.

The article by Bob Moore ran on Monday, April 14, 2008. What I found strange was that the article said that power at the wastewater treatment plant was out from 11:10 a.m. to 12:40 p.m. on "Tuesday."

That seems to indicate that this 250,000 gallon "dump" (pun intended) occurred almost a week before it appeared in the newspaper. Did the overflow happen on Tuesday, April 8? Were lake users--particularly those in the vicinity of the treatment plant--informed of the discharge?

Oh, well, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation was not overly concerned. A spokesperson for TDEC was quoted as saying "...we would not expect to see a lingering problem from a one-time event."

Comforting.

May 18, 2008 Sales Tax Vote: All Quiet on the Morristown Front

Yes, there is a citywide sales tax referendum going on. Early voting started last week. Election Day is June 3. The Tribune has been pretty quiet---so far.

There have not been any front-page pictures/headlines/articles quoting all the elected and unelected "leaders" who support the tax. This is quite a contrast to the incessant front-page pro-tax articles/advertisements in the Tribune in the days leading up to the February 5 countywide sales tax referendum that failed.

Maybe the June 3 citywide referendum is going to be a stealth election where the powers-that-be network to make sure that the troops come in and vote for the tax increase, and other than that, mum's the word. Quiet. Don't remind the average taxpayer about the city's June 3 "pick-your-poison" sales tax referendum and early voting.

Bob Moore wrote an article back in March indicating that the City was going to spend $12,000 on this citywide referendum to educate and advocate for passage of the sales tax increase. As of about noon on Thursday, the City had not yet registered with the Hamblen County Election Commission as a "committee" to support the sales tax.

During the last (February 5) referendum, the City of Morristown formed a committee to support the sales tax. This "committee" put up "Vote YES for Sales Tax" signs on city property and at the Courthouse and mailed out letters signed by the City Mayor and all Councilmen encouraging Morristown residents to vote YES for the sales tax increase.

The City donated $3,500.00 tax dollars to this committee. The "committee" spent $3,066.26 of those donated tax dollars to "educate" those voters who might be inclined to vote against a sales tax increase. The City's finance director Dynise Robertson served as treasurer of that committee.

Click on the images above to see the City's donation of $3,500.00 tax dollars to this committee and the itemization of the committee's $3,066.26 in expenditures. [No, I don't know why or who spent tax dollars at an Office Max in Johnson City instead of Office Max in Morristown.]

Most local residents vividly remember the 2002 "pick-your-poison" wheel tax referendum. Tribune headlines provided the education, "Voters Should Pick Poison." (See above). Bob Moore's article quoted the Commission Chair as telling voters it's an "either-or" proposition---either you vote for the wheel tax OR there will be a property tax increase. Voters dutifully "picked" the wheel tax, and County Commission just as dutifully passed a property tax increase just a few short months later.

Now it's the City's turn. They want city voters to "pick" a sales tax increase despite the fact that sales taxes are among the most regressive taxes. They hit everyone, for sure, but they hit the poor and those on fixed incomes the hardest. Despite the disproportionate and heavy burden of sales taxes on the poor, the City spent over $3,000 tax dollars on the last failed sales tax referendum and, according to City Administrator Jim Crumley, the City may spend even more tax dollars ($12,000?) on the current sales tax referendum in order to "educate" voters to vote YES.

The City wants to put the sales tax increase "in-the-revenue-bag" and then property tax increases can resume. Pick one poison (by referendum) and then the property tax poison (that you can't vote on in a referendum) will be just down the road. Just like the county.

The sales tax increase will then be just another eternal tax burden that hits the poor, the elderly, and those on fixed incomes every time they purchase the basic necessities---a loaf of bread, a gallon of milk, shoes, a shirt.

There is already a tremendous sales tax burden (9.5%) on goods purchased in Morristown/ Hamblen County.

Isn't that enough? Aren't people having enough trouble as it is paying for $5/gallon milk, nearly $4/gallon gas, and sky-high food, utility, insurance, and sewer increases?

May 11, 2008 Mother's Day

I received an e-mail from a friend. I forwarded it to others and want to share it as a blog post in honor of mothers everywhere on Mother's Day 2008.

JUST A MOM?

A woman, renewing her driver's license at the County Clerk 's office, was asked by the clerk to state her occupation. She hesitated, uncertain how to classify herself. 'What I mean is,' explained the recorder, 'do you have a job or are you just a ...?'

'Of course I have a job,' snapped the woman. 'I'm a Mom.' 'We don't list 'Mom' as an occupation,
'housewife' covers it,' said the recorder emphatically. I forgot all about her story until one day I found myself in the same situation, this time at our own Town Hall.

The Clerk was obviously a career woman, poised, efficient, and possessed of a high sounding title like, 'Official Interrogator' or 'Town Registrar.' 'What is your occupation?' she probed. What made me say it? I do not know. The words simply popped out. 'I'm a Research Associate in the field of Child Development and Human Relations.'

The clerk paused, ball-point pen frozen in midair, and looked up as though she had not heard right. I repeated the title slowly emphasizing the most significant words. Then I stared with wonder as my pronouncement was written, in bold, black ink on the official questionnaire.

'Might I ask,' said the clerk with new interest,'just what you do in your field?' Coolly, without any trace of fluster in my voice, I heard myself reply, 'I have a continuing program of research, (what mother doesn't) In the laboratory and in the field, (normally I would have said indoors and out).

I'm working on my Masters (first the Lord and then the whole family) and already have four credits (all daughters). Of course, the job is one of the most demanding in the humanities, (any mother care to disagree?) and I often work 14 hours a day (24 is more like it). But the job is more challenging than most run-of-the-mill careers, and the rewards are more of a satisfaction rather than just money.'

There was an increasing note of respect in the clerk's voice as she completed the form, stood up, and personally ushered me to the door.

As I drove into our driveway, buoyed up by my glamorous new career, I was greeted by my lab assistants -- ages 13, 7, and 3. Upstairs I could hear our new experimental model (a 6 month old baby) in the child development program, testing out a new vocal pattern. I felt I had scored a beat on bureaucracy! And I had gone on the official records as someone more distinguished and indispensable to mankind than 'just another Mom.'

Motherhood! What a glorious career! Especially when there's a title on the door. Does this make grandmothers 'Senior Research associates in the field of Child Development and Human Relations' And great grandmothers 'Executive Senior Research Associates?' I think so! I also think it makes Aunts 'Associate Research Assistants.' Please send this to another Mom, Grandmother, Aunt, and other friends you know.

May your troubles be less,
Your blessings be more,
And nothing but happiness come through your door!
AMEN!!

May 6, 2008 Swan Song for the Tennessee Waltz Corruption Investigation

Ben Cunningham at Taxing Tennessee notes that the FBI's Tennessee Waltz corruption investigation is officially over.


The feds ended up 12 for 12.


The list.

May 4, 2008 Hamblen County Audit 2007 Is Available

The most recent audit of Hamblen County Government can be accessed at the State Comptroller's website. If you don't want to maneuver through the Comptroller's website, here is the direct link to the Hamblen County audit.

Good news in one major area.

Hamblen County Government's unreserved General Fund balance is up to just over $2,300,000. This is a major improvement from the unreserved General Fund balance of $83,000 FY 2003. A healthy Fund Balance is extremely important. It is sometimes called the county's "rainy day fund" or "savings account" for emergency needs.

There is a lot of history behind the Fund Balance reaching a low point in 2003 and then gradually increasing over the next four years. Explaining how the county ended up with a dangerously low FY 03 fund balance is simple. The county was spending more than it took in and doing so by pulling from its find balance/savings account.

When I took office on September 1, 2002, the previous commission had already approved the FY 03 budget.

My first major proposal to the new (2002-2006) commission was to have state auditors come in and perform Hamblen County's annual audit. This proposal passed in October 2002.

The reasoning behind this proposal was two-fold. First, the state auditors would charge approximately $13,000 for the annual audits where the private auditors had been charging $31,000. That meant an immediate $18,000/year savings! Over the past five audits (2003-2007) this one change has resulted in a savings of $90,000 to the county.

Second, I felt a fresh set of eyes should go over the books. I had observed that the county had been spending down its fund balance over a 10-year period, and I had also noticed several questionable financial transactions in previous audits.

The state auditors first audit of Hamblen County involved FY 2003. When the 2003 audit was presented to the audit committee and county commission in the spring of 2004, there were 29 findings of irregularities and/or violations of state law--more than any other county in the state.

In addition to the findings, one of the most distressing revelations in the FY 03 audit was that more money was spent out of the general fund than was taken in (again). This time the problem was so serious that money from other funds and sources had to be dumped into the county's general fund just to keep the general fund afloat and to keep it from being declared officially "broke."

The public was never officially informed of this dire situation because the auditors had allowed the county to switch the money around and close out certain funds and dump that money into the general fund to keep it from ending in the red.

Even with all the dumping of money into the general fund in FY 03, the unreserved/ available general fund balance as of June 30, 2003, was at its lowest point in recent history--a dangerously low $83,000.

That is why I was always pushing to build up the fund balance and to encourage commissioners to think about the long-term consequences of various spending proposals during the four years that I served.

It was a slow 4-year climb out of a low-point of $83,000 (2003) to a fund balance of over $2,3 M (2007). Hopefully, the new commissioners will keep their budgets on an even-keel and maintain healthy fund balances.

Next, a bit of bad news.

After 10 years, nothing has been paid toward the principal of the $40 million debt on the
1998 School Construction bonds. Of course, this is not a surprise for regular readers of this blog.
The 1998 School Construction debt was set up for a lengthy period of "interest-only payments." Now 10 years and many millions of interest-only payments later, the county taxpayers still owe the whole $40 million principal and will still be paying out lots more interest for many more years!

The Audit Committee of the Hamblen County Commission will meet to review the audit.

April 27, 2008 A Request for More Openness and Taxpayer-Friendly Meeting Times

In an earlier post, I discussed the April 24 Hamblen County Commission Meeting.

I did not mention in the earlier post two suggestions that I made to the commission during the public comments portion of the meeting. In my remarks, I asked the Commissioners to consider (1) making budget data and documents for the upcoming budget process available online and (2) setting committee meetings at more "taxpayer-friendly" times.

The following is what I submitted for consideration:

1. I asked the commissioners to have budget data and documents for the upcoming 08-09 budget placed on the county's website. http://www.hamblencountygovernment.us/

The county has the capability to do this. The County Clerk has commission minutes on the county's website, and the Purchasing Department has bids and RFP's (Requests for Proposals) on the county's website. The technology is there.

With the county budget process for the 08-09 fiscal year (July 1, 2008-June 20, 2009) beginning in early May, this is the time to put the entire budget out there for the taxpayers. For those who come to budget meetings as well as for those who can not attend budget meetings, the budget documents should be accessible online.

This is an easy way to let interested citizens--who may or may not be able to attend all the budget meetings in person--see the details of where the money is coming from and where it is going.

2. Next, I asked that the commission move its committee meetings to the late afternoon. Committee meetings currently begin at 11:30 A.M. on the second Monday of each month. The purpose of moving the meetings to a much later time would be to set these meetings at a time that provides the greatest opportunity for interested citizens and taxpayers to attend.

Committee meetings are where the real discussion, if there is any, takes place. Committee meetings are a little more open to informal discussion and even letting a citizen speak up if he or she has an idea. Commission meetings are dominated by button-pushing.

The current commission which took office in September 2006 moved the starting time for committee meetings to 11:30 A.M.

When I inquired about this change, Commission Chair Stancil Ford told me that the committee times were moved to allow people to attend on their "lunch hour." I told Mr. Ford then, and I repeated on Thursday, that I don't think 11:30 A.M. meetings are for the convenience of working taxpayers or average citizens. Let's be honest. Mid-day meetings times exclude the average working citizen/taxpayer.

First of all, there really aren't that many working taxpayers who have a "lunch hour." And even if a taxpayer had a job with a "lunch hour," an 11:30 A.M. meeting would probably require at least 15 minutes travel to the Courthouse and 15 minutes back to work--and those times assume that the citizen/taxpayer works fairly close to the Courthouse.

Second, since the taxpayer would probably also want to use some of his "lunch hour" to eat lunch, he wouldn't have much time left for the committee meetings anyway.

Finally, surely commissioners realize that one's lunch break--no matter how long--would seldom coincide with the committee meeting times. In fact, only one committee has a "set" meeting time. That is the Finance Committee which begins at 11:30 A.M.

If you want to attend the Public Services Committee meeting, you still have to get there around 11:30 A.M. because Public Services has no set meeting time--it simply starts whenever the Finance Committee adjourns --and that could be 11:40 A.M. or 12:30 P.M.

In the spirit of serving the public, I hope that the commission will discuss moving committee meetings to the late afternoon hours that are convenient for most working taxpayers.

The previous commission had a policy of referring public comments issues to a committee for consideration and then either taking action or issuing a report of some kind. No commissioner said a word about either suggestion, so I don't know if these proposals will be discussed in May committee meetings during the working taxpayers' "lunch hour" or not.

April 25, 2008 Hamblen County Commission Meeting

Yesterday's meeting of the Hamblen County Commission was very routine.

Thirteen of the fourteen commissioners were present. Commissioner Frank Parker, the subject of a TBI investigation that is scheduled to be forwarded to the local grand jury in May, was absent.

Sheriff Esco Jarnagin addressed commissioners at the end of the meeting about employee turnover in his department and about the TBI investigation mentioned above.

During the regular meeting, there was actual discussion on one item before the vote was taken! The issue that prompted two commissioners to speak and four to vote "no" was whether to purchase some hand mowers and have a few low-risk inmates mow the courthouse lawn.

Commissioner Paul Lebel was first to speak. He was adamantly opposed to having inmates mow the courthouse lawn. Lebel said he was concerned that the inmates might meet their girlfriends or family members. Commissioner Joe Swann joined with Lebel and expressed concern over liability issues.

When the vote was taken, there were 9 in favor and 4 opposed to having inmates mow the courthouse lawn. Commissioners voting "yes" were Baker, Bruce, Collins, Ford, Harville, Phillips, Sexton, Spoone, and Wampler. Voting "no" were Fullington, Lebel, Massey, and Swann.

Currently, low-risk inmates are allowed out to work on the "can truck" picking up litter. Low-risk inmates are also allowed out to work for Central Services and other non-profit groups when requested and when proof of insurance is provided.

Commissioners apparently haven't raised liability issues over 4-5 low-risk inmates out in the community picking up litter. However, one or two low-risk inmates mowing the courthouse lawn causes concern.

During the discussion of this issue, Sheriff Jarnagin pointed out that while there are some violent criminals in the jail, the ones who would be allowed out to mow the courthouse lawn would not be rapists and murderers--instead, they would be the same low-risk inmates who work on the can truck or go to Central Services to help out occasionally. There is no guarantee that there will never be a problem, but do you treat the person who wrote a bad check like the rapist or murderer?

Sheriff Jarnagin spoke again at the end of the meeting on two other issues. He began his remarks by saying that at least one commissioner as well as some other people had been claiming that he had fired numerous employees (anywhere from 50-60) since taking office in September 2006.

Jarnagin acknowledged that there had been a large employment turnover, but he explained that some of the departures were the result of voluntary quits, one employee was arrested by the FBI, another was arrested by the TBI, there were discharges due to various types of misconduct, some employees would find that they could not handle the stress, and some employees were let go during the probationary period when the sheriff determined that the employee was not suited for employment in the jail or in other areas of the sheriff's office.

Jarnagin then said that he also wanted to answer a question that was raised but left unanswered at the last county commission meeting about a $750 charge to get a car out of the sheriff's impound lot. Jarnagin said he wanted to make it clear that the Sheriff's Office did not charge anyone $750 to get a car out of impound.

At the March meeting, Commission Chairman Stancil Ford had refused to discuss the $750 charge, saying that the matter of a $750 impound charge was under investigation. Later D.A. Berkeley Bell reported that the TBI had indeed investigated the matter and that the TBI would take the case--allegedly involving Commissioner Frank Parker and perhaps others-- to the grand jury next month.

Then--almost like clockwork--Commissioner Guy Collins moved to adjourn the meeting. OK?

April 21, 2008 Residents' Suit Against City of Morristown

After having provided the required 60-day notice of intent to sue, Roe Junction and Witt residents filed a lawsuit against the City of Morristown on March 27, 2008, regarding Koch Foods' continuing discharge into the city sewer system of wastewater that has been inadequately pretreated.

The first three pages of the suit, listing the resident plaintiffs and describing the "Nature of the Case," are shown above. You can enlarge each page by clicking on the image.

Other pages of the 24-page Complaint describe general allegations regarding Koch Foods' discharge of wastewater into the city's sewer system and the City's violation of the Clean Water Act and other standards.

The wastewater that has been inadequately pretreated is wastewater that has been "used for the cleanup of blood, chicken guts, and other offal" prior to its discharge into the sewer system. The City is alleged to have "failed to force Koch Foods to remediate the underlying problem."

Several claims are made in the suit such as (1) Violation of Pretreatment Standards; (2) Discharging without a Permit in Violation of the Clean Water Act; (3) Nuisance; (3) Trespass; and (5) Inverse Condemnation.

Residents of these two areas previously filed a lawsuit against Koch Foods over many of the same issues that are noted in the residents' suit against the City of Morristown. The problems are alleged to have begun around February 2005 when the deboning factory opened in the East Tennessee Progress Center.

April 17, 2008 Eric Boyd: Guilty

I, like many other people, have followed with overwhelming sadness the horrific carjacking and brutal torture, rape, and murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom as reported in the Knoxville News-Sentinel.

Yesterday, I happened to be handling civil cases in Knox County General Sessions court on the day that the jury verdict in the trial of Eric Boyd was announced.

Boyd was charged with two federal crimes--accessory to carjacking and failing to report a felony. Boyd was the first to be tried in connection with the Christian-Newsom case. The other four individuals--who face murder charges--will be tried in state court in 2009.

Before I went back to my office, I went into the federal courtroom to see and hear the jury verdict in person.

The federal courtroom is huge but with very little seating. Yesterday, one side of the courtroom was filled with the Christian and Newsom families and friends. The other side had a row of reporters and courthouse employees and others who came in just to hear the verdict. There were a number of law enforcement officials there as well---some of whom had participated in the investigation.

In the early afternoon, the Judge considered a question raised by the jury regarding a difference in the wording of the indictment and the statute under which Boyd charge. You can read the N-S story for a full explanation. The short version is this: the jury wanted to know if the indictment that used the word "and" or the statute that used the word "or" should guide their deliberations.
The Judge brought the jury in and advised that the indictment is just a charging instrument. He then read the statute.

They jury went back out for a short time and then returned with a guilty verdict.

News-Sentinel reporter Jamie Satterfield has provided extensive coverage of the trial of Boyd over the past 1-1/2 weeks. Her article on yesterday's verdict is online. There are also links to other information that can be pulled up.

April 15, 2008 Income Tax Deadline!

Is income tax preparation painful?

Taxing Tennessee thinks so. Ben Cunningham has a cartoon on his website.

April 10, 2008 Is Crumley on the Way Out?

It looks like Morristown City Administrator Jim Crumley has been or soon will be given two options: Resign or be fired.

The rumor going around is that at least four city councilpersons have signed on to the ultimatum. It sure shows what a difference a year can make! It was not that long ago that the council was upset and totally devastated at the thought that Crumley might leave for an administrator job in another city.

There was wailing and gnashing of teeth. Cries of pay Crumley more, give Crumley more benefits, do whatever it takes to keep Crumley directing the city.

Now the reports are coming out on how Crumley has led the city into a financial disaster during the past several years. With Crumley about to depart, mismanagement, overspending, and the horrific accumulation of debt over the past several years are being exposed.

Crumley--now or in the very near future--will get the boot. The Mayor and City Council will use him as a convenient scapegoat for the overspending and debt that has marked the city's recent financial "management."

While Crumley will be blamed, the Mayor and City Council are just as culpable for the overspending and outrageous debt that plagues the city. Crumley can not and did not get the City into the current financial mess all by himself.

When city councilpersons do not ask questions, they are not doing their job for the taxpayers.

When city councilpersons blindly vote for more spending, they are not doing their job for the taxpayers.

When city councilpersons are oblivious and unaware of a pending financial disaster, they are not doing their job.

Crumley bears a great deal of responsibility for the city's financial debacle. But the Mayor and City Council sat there silently and let it happen!

Questions + Checks and balances + Responsibility= Accountability.

Let's hope that the council members now realize that no person, no city administrator, should be given free rein. Council members must PAY ATTENTION and ASK QUESTIONS.

Trust, yes. But always verify! No matter who is in charge.

April 4, 2008 TBI Will Take Case Involving Commissioner Frank Parker to Grand Jury

The Tribune is reporting today that D.A. Berkeley Bell says that the TBI will take the case involving Commissioner Frank Parker and Constable Paul King to the Hamblen County grand jury in May.

[Check the story out quickly! The link to the article will only be good for a short period of time as the Tribune deactivates links after just a few days]

Two weeks ago, I reported that a commissioner was visibly upset at the March 20 Commission meeting when a gentleman walked forward to speak during the public comments portion of the meeting.

That commissioner was Frank Parker.

The gentleman Frank did not want to be allowed to speak was Albert Walker.

Now it is clear why Frank Parker was upset by the sight of Mr. Walker walking up to speak to the full County Commission.

Frank was upset because he apparently knew that Mr. Walker would be asking why he had had to pay $750.00 (to Frank) to get his car out of the sheriff's impound lot.

That's a good question. Why would anyone have to pay $750.00 to Frank Parker when, according to Sheriff Esco Jarnagin, there were NO impound charges due for Walker's car--zero, zip, nada!

Jarnagin apparently thinks that Walker is "credible" and points out that Walker has a receipt for the $750.00 "impound charge" he gave to Parker.

The TBI investigation is complete, and the findings will be presented to the grand jury in May.

April 2, 2008 Witt-Roe Junction Residents Sue City of Morristown

After sending a 60-day notice of intent to sue, several residents of the Witt-Roe Junction area have filed a lawsuit naming the City of Morristown as Defendant in connection with sewer odors in the Witt-Roe Junction area.

These residents previously filed suit against Koch Foods claiming various damages due to persistent sewer odors.

If you sign up for PACER, you can view the court documents for a charge of .08/page. But if you can wait a few days, you can save your money. I'll post more specifics--including the suit--in the next few days.

March 31, 2008 Jailer Lynn Wolfe Sues Sheriff Esco Jarnigan

What can public documents tells you that no public official will tell you? Plenty. What can public documents tell you that no newspaper will tell you? Plenty.

Lynn Wolfe filed a lawsuit against Sheriff Esco Jarnigan in federal court in January 2008 because Sheriff Jarnigan would not promote him to road deputy. Click on the first images above to read the 5-page complaint.

Wolfe was Hamblen County's chief detective under former Sheriff Otto Purkey. Chief Detective Wolfe was driving a county cruiser in December 2000 returning home from an out-of-county "party" when he totaled the county's 1999 Ford Crown Vic in a one-vehicle accident.

According to reports, a blood test was administered at M-H Hospital showing that Mr. Wolfe was legally drunk at the time of the accident. Wolfe resigned after the accident and received a severance package that was agreed to by County Mayor David Purkey (former Sheriff Otto Purkey's brother). Click on the Feb. 2, 2001, letter above.

According to several individuals, including one who talked to Mr. Wolfe several months ago, Mr. Wolfe is related to both Purkeys.

What actually happened in December 2000 and afterwards? Did Wolfe make restitution to the county for the vehicle he wrecked while DWI?

Hamblen County filed suit against Lynn Wolfe in 2001 to recover the costs of the cruiser that was totaled in December 2000 when he was DWI. An August 29, 2002, Agreed Order provided that Wolfe was to pay the county $6,250.00 for the 1999 Crown Vic.

The terms of the agreement were that Mr. Wolfe could pay $6,250.00 cash or he could work the payment off performing community service at $6.00/hour. Click on the Agreed Order above.

According to County Trustee Bill Brittain, Wolfe chose the community service option. Did Wolfe really "pay" for the cruiser through community service?

Or did the taxpayers pay for the car, pay for the lawsuit, get an Agreed Order requiring that Lynn Wolfe make restitution to the county, and then have all this ignored by Lynn Wolfe, Mayor David Purkey, and several others who saw or prepared the paperwork and were in the know?

Three community service "time sheets" that Wolfe filled out and that were turned in to Mayor David Purkey are shown above. Two of them are signed by Gary Templin. Look at these time sheets and see how many hours of "community service" were performed as restitution. These time sheets are public records that are kept in the County Mayor's office.

The three time sheets do NOT show even one hour of time worked. Instead, they show that Mr. Wolfe somehow pre-listed about 130 dates, signed his name beside each date, and then had his community service "supervisor" Gary Templin sign and turn in the time sheets even though the "time" sheets had NO TIME on them.

Who is Gary Templin? Gary was Assistant Director of County Maintenance on the dates shown. But there's more! Gary's boss was Director of County Maintenance Harold Wolfe, Lynn Wolfe's father.

It will be interesting to see if other community service time sheets are suddenly found somewhere in the Mayor's Office or elsewhere when it comes time to determine if Mr. Wolfe actually made restitution to the county as stated on Page 2 of his complaint. The time sheets that the Mayor has provided thus far don't show any restitution.

How could anyone--Mayor Purkey or even Lynn Wolfe himself--have known when Lynn had "worked off" the $6,250.00 judgment when the only time sheets the Mayor's office has show ZERO TIME WORKED?

Who was supposed to see that restitution was made? Who knew that "timeless" time sheets were being handed in? Who ignored the "timeless" time sheets? Why?

The kinships and resulting conflicts of interest are obvious. Even Mayor Purkey and the Wolfes knew there would be a stink with Lynn Wolfe supposedly working off his judgment by working for his dad's County Maintenance Department.

No problem. Mayor Purkey sent Harold Wolfe a note telling Harold Wolfe what to say about Lynn Wolfe making court-ordered restitution by working for his father's maintenance department.

Purkey's note of 9/13/02 (click on above memo) says:

"Harold, If anyone asks, Lynn is being supervised by Gary Templin. Gary can see me for the details. Thanks, D"

Why would the County Mayor have to tell Harold Wolfe that Lynn Wolfe is being supervised by Gary Templin? Didn't Harold, Director of County Maintenance, already know that his assistant was supervising his son?

Did Gary really supervise Lynn Wolfe or did he just dutifully sign time sheets for his boss's son--time sheets that didn't even have one hour of time on them?

The details of Templin's supervision of his boss's (Harold Wolfe's) son (Lynn Wolfe) are found in the public documents shown above and others.

Conflicts of interest. Sweetheart deals by your kinfolk. Turning in blank community service time sheets to your kinfolk that list lots of dates and that are signed by your "supervisor" (your dad's assistant) but show NOT ONE HOUR OF TIME WORKED.

Being re-hired by your kinfolk Otto Purkey. Purkey loses the election and there's no longer kinfolk to promote you to road deputy.

File a civil service complaint against the new Sheriff because he won't promote you to a road deputy position for which you are not eligible because you are not POST-certified as a result of your DWI.

And now a civil rights lawsuit against the new Sheriff because he won't request a POST-certification waiver so Lynn Wolfe can somehow get back "on the road again."

Nepotism at its worst. Conflicts of interest all over the place. Public documents tell the tale.

Now what does the county do about it? What, if anything, will be done to make sure that restitution is made and that lack of oversight and ignoring "timeless" time sheets never occur again?

Who watches the watchers? Who protects county tax dollars?

March 21, 2008 Stancil Ford: There Is An Inquiry Going On

Yesterday's Hamblen County Commission meeting was over almost as soon as it began. Votes were quickly taken. There was little or no discussion.

About the only time you heard anyone speak --other than Chairman Ford--was during the public comment portion of the meeting.

There was one public comment. It was made by an individual who identified himself as Mr. Walker.

When Mr. Walker started to approach the microphone, one county commissioner began squirming and turned to Chairman Ford and asked the Chairman not to let Mr. Walker speak.

Chairman Ford, however, wisely chose to allow Mr. Walker to speak during the part of the meeting that is open for public comments.

Mr. Walker asked why he had to pay $750 to get a vehicle out of impound. At that point, Chairman Ford told Mr. Walker that there was an ongoing "inquiry" about the $750 that he had had to pay to get his vehicle.

Apparently, Chairman Ford, the commissioners, the press, and many others in and around the Courthouse are aware of the issue that sparked Mr. Walker's question and are also aware of the reason that one particular commissioner did not want Mr. Walker to be allowed to speak at all.

After Mr. Walker's question and Chairman Ford's response, no other official said a word.

March 20, 2008 Four for Four: Batting 1.000

I'm batting 1.000! See my predictions in my March 15 post.

According to yesterday's page 8 Tribune article, the City of Morristown is moving ahead with plans to hold a city-wide referendum after the narrow failure of the February 5th countywide sales tax referendum.

Nothing surprising about that. In every pre-February 5th front-page tax-promotion article in the Tribune, the City repeatedly stated that it would hold a city only sales tax referendum if the February 5th countywide referendum failed.

Where I'm 4 for 4 and batting 1.000 is in predicting the City's four plans for spending the $2 Million dollars that the City estimates it will take in if its city-wide referendum passes.

My March 15th predictions in blue and the City's March 18th intentions in red:

1. The City will reduce last year's historic $0.37 property tax increase by $0.15.
The City will reduce last year's historic $0.37 property tax increase by $0.15.

2. The City will give some of the increase to the schools.
The City will give some of the increase to the schools.

3. The City will use some of the increase to build up its fund balance that has been drained.
The City will use some of the increase to build up its fund balance that has been drained.

4. The City will use some of the increase for capital expenditures.
The City will use some of the increase for capital expenditures.

Four-for-four!

The article adds that the City will probably hold a special election instead of just placing the referendum on the ballot for the already-scheduled August or November election.

This means that the City taxpayers will have to pay roughly $8,000 for costs of the special election where there would be no cost to City taxpayers if the measure were placed on the August or November ballot.

In addition to the $8,000 in costs for a special election, the City is apparently planning to spend another $12,000 of taxpayer dollars for, as the paper reports, "public education and advocacy."

[NOTE: During the last referendum, the City was reported as planning to spend $4,000 for public education and advocacy via letters and signs to promote the sales tax. Looks like the City's ante has tripled.]

It's time for another prediction.

If it ever looks like the city special sales tax referendum won't pass---even with free front-page Tribune advertising/articles and even with the spending of $12,000 taxpayer dollars for "public education and advocacy"--- then the City will spend even more and do whatever it takes to educate and advocate for the passage of this referendum.

Cut spending? No. Live within your (the taxpayers') means? No.

March 15, 2008 Another Sales Tax Referendum?

Same song (More Taxes); Second Verse (Another Sales Tax Referendum)

The City of Morristown is going to discuss a City-wide Sales Tax Increase Referendum at its March 18 meeting.

Click here to see the entire City Council Agenda for March 18. The last page lists items for the Council's Work Session on that day.

Item #1 Discussion of City-wide Local Option Sales Tax Referendum.
Item #2 Budget Review.

Wonder if anyone at the Council will add an item to the Work Session agenda?

Item #3 How to Live Within a Budget (Like the Citizens Do) by Making Painful Cuts (Like the Citizens Do) and Eliminating $100 Million Dollar Wish Lists.

Locals are aware that a countywide sales tax increase referendum was on the February 5 ballot and was narrowly defeated.

The countywide referendum was defeated despite the efforts of the City in using tax dollars to put up Vote YES signs and to send out mass mailings to Morristown residents urging them to Vote YES; despite County Mayor David Purkey and Commission Chair Stancil Ford (with help from the P-16 Council and the Tennessee Technology Center) sending out letters to county residents urging support for the referendum; despite the School Board's support; despite the Chamber of Commerce's support; and despite the unending free daily front-page advertising/articles in the Citizen-Tribune telling everyone how truly GREAT a sales tax increase would be.

When will the government decide it has enough of our money?

The current 9.5% sales tax is already HUGE and hits lower and fixed-income individuals with a vengeance.

Shortly after I paid our property taxes (February 29!), I ran into an acquaintance and we started talking about taxes. He, like so many others, is sick of taxes, taxes, and more taxes; fees, fees, and more fees. Then he said something that I've heard before but it bears repeating.

The government taxes us when we earn money and then taxes us again when we spend what little we have left!

Apparently, the City of Morristown is determined to increase the current 9.5% sales tax. With the failure of the first (countywide) referendum, my guess is that the City will schedule a citywide sales tax referendum and will say that if the increase passes: (1) they will reduce last year's city property tax increase by 15-cents; (2) they will give some of the increase to the schools even though not required to do so; (3) they will use some of the money to build up the city's reserves that have been drained by years of uncontrolled spending and borrowing; and (4) they will use some of the money for capital projects.

Now if I were a city resident, I would have a question about this. With the February 5 countywide referendum, the city expected to get $1 Million new sales tax dollars and said that it would use the $1 Million to reduce the city property tax rate by 15 cents.

With a proposed citywide referendum, the city expects to take in about $2 Million new sales tax dollars. If I were a city property taxpayer, I would expect that $2 Million to translate into nearly a 30-cent city property tax reduction!

This is nothing more than a desperation tax to cover years of uncontrolled spending, outlandish borrowing, and living high on the taxpayer's dollar.

And you can bet that the Citizen-Tribune will be behind this tax increase all the way with constant free front-page (advertising) articles and pictures---just like it did in pushing for the countywide tax increase.

I think I can even tell you in advance how this tax increase will be "sold" to city voters. The theme of the tax increase will be that out-of-towners will pay most of the new taxes.

Tax yourself so you can tax others at the same time.

But out-of-towners don't have to come here to shop any more. Major retailers have opened stores in surrounding cities. And with the price of gas, an out-of-towner would certainly think twice before traveling anywhere to shop.

So will an added tax really mean more revenue or will it just be a negative that discourages people from driving to Morristown to shop?

February 29, 2008 Knox P-card Audit Is Public

When reporters start investigating and when auditors come in and look for fraud, waste, and abuse in government at the local level, it's not a pretty sight. The News-Sentinel has the Knox County government story.

The initial draft of the special audit of Knox County purchasing card (P-card) use is available online.

Follow-up stories are already coming out as a Mayor's aide says receipts may have been turned in and then lost OR maybe newspaper reporters lost them!

If Knox County Commission had been acting as a check and balance on the Knox County Mayor's Office, a lot of the fraud and waste of taxpayer dollars would not have occurred.

If the citizens of Knox County had realized that regular annual audits are little more than a cursory review of the figures that are provided and that there is only an examination of a few sample charges, then they would have demanded real accountability long ago from both the Mayor's Office and the Commission.

Regular audits do NOT look for fraud, waste, and abuse.

Our State Comptroller, who directs all county audits, has stated this.

"Trust, but verify" is the key to true government accountability.

Newspapers--when they choose to investigate and report--are vital in ensuring government accountability.

Local officials and citizens---not a state auditor who just peeks at a few transactions--are important in seeing that fraud, waste, and abuse does not continue and escalate to the level seen in Knox County.

Knox County's cleansing started with a newspaper that began to report and investigate what was going on in government offices and that challenged a power structure that openly violated the open meetings law.

Knox County's cleansing has been pushed along by talk-radio that allows the public to listen and actively participate in discussions about government actions as well as other local concerns.

Knox County's cleansing has been spurred by several citizens--former accountant Lewis Cosby is among the most prominent--who were so incensed by the waste of THEIR tax dollars that they took action. Lewis Cosby went to the Mayor's office, reviewed and copied documents, and started a detailed examination of invoices, payments, slush funds, and the like.

As Mr. Cosby began to detail the outrageous lack of fiscal control in the Mayor's office, Knox County Mayor Mike Ragsdale called Mr. Cosby a showboat at a public meeting! Name-calling instead of addressing the issue--a typical response from a politician.

Mr. Cosby was not a showboat. Mr. Cosby was a citizen who was indignant about waste of taxpayer dollars--his own and those of others.

Now, it looks like Mr. Cosby was right all along about fraud, waste, and abuse in Knox County government.

The question is, 'what happens next?'

A lot of commenters at the end of the News-Sentinel article are asking for restitution, firings, criminal charges, and/or ouster suits for elected officials.

Tthe officials and employees will submit their responses to the audit, and only then will it be crunch time.

Who enforces the law against the lawmakers? Who watches and prosecutes government corruption?

February 29, 2008 Former State Sen. John Ford Must Report to Prison; Former State Sen. Kathryn Bowers Sentenced

Former State Sen. John Ford must report to federal prison within 60 days to begin serving a 5-1/2 year sentence in connection with his conviction for taking bribes in the Tennessee Waltz scandal that rocked Capitol Hill in Nashville in 2005.

Ford also still faces a June 2008 trial in Nashville for concealing large amounts of money received from TennCare contractors.

In another Tennessee Waltz case, former State Sen. Kathryn Bowers was sentenced a few weeks ago to 16 months in prison and 2 years of supervised probation for taking $11,500 in bribes in the FBI's E-cycle sting operation.

February 20, 2008 Knox Audits Prove It: Regular Audits Do NOT Look for Fraud, Waste, and Abuse

I have not blogged in-depth about Knox County conflicts of interest, open meeting violations, p-card abuse (purchasing cards), and audits.

The outrageous and illegal actions of Knox officials and employees have been headline news in the Knox News-Sentinel, on Knox talk radio, and on internet sites for over a year and will likely continue at a hot clip for at least another year.


The audits of vehicle usage, P-cards (county credit cards), the hospitality slush fund, community grants and grant awards, and several others are set to be released at long last.

One pre-audit casualty is Cynthia Finch, the Mayor's long-time aide. What the regular audits missed (fraud, waste, and abuse), special audits found (fraud, waste, and abuse found).

Now it's a waiting game to find out who and how much and whether the abusers just resign with a hefty severance package or whether they are truly held accountable for their actions.

Knoxville is fortunate to have a paper that has decided to do true investigative reporting (here and here) instead of government press release reporting. Morristown and Hamblen County are not so fortunate. Part I Part II Part III Part IV

Knoxville is fortunate to have a paper that stood up for open meetings and joined in a suit that exposed backroom deals and deliberations made outside of the public eye. Morristown and Hamblen County are not so fortunate.

Knoxville is fortunate that their major talk radio stations are not owned/partly owned by the same individuals who own the only newspaper. Morristown and Hamblen County are not so fortunate.


If you wonder what would happen if anyone investigated what happens in Morristown and Hamblen County, just take a look at the Knox County audits, the coverups, the lawsuits that it has taken to start the clean-up process, and the multiple resignations of which Cynthia Finch is only the latest.

Many Knoxvillians who were apathetic or who assumed everything was OK are now aware of the widespread conflicts, corruption, fraud, waste, and abuse that are at the core of their government. With INFORMATION provided by the News-Sentinel and talk radio, Knoxvillians came out on February 5th and started the clean-up process.