City leaders are offended when financial responsibility--or their lack thereof--is mentioned. They blame "the economy." Certainly, the overall economic outlook today is not good. However, the city's mismanagement and wasteful spending sprees that have driven it into virtual crisis-mode go back to pre-bailout times.
Some readers may recall a headline in the local paper a few years back about the city's $100 Million dollar "wish list"?
In the upcoming days, there will posts on the city's 2008 audit and discussion of why the word "bankrupt" has been mentioned.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
November 17, 2009 Jack Fishman Recommends Acquiring Additional Land in East Tennessee Progress Center, Eminent Domain Threatened
Industrial Board Chairman Jack Fishman, who is also owner of the Citizen Tribune, appeared at the city council work session yesterday. Fishman wants the city to fund the purchase of 11 pieces of property inside the East Tennessee Progress Center near I-81 and 25-E. Fishman wants the city to purchase the property from willing buyers but, if the buyer is not willing, then Fishman wants the city to take the private property by eminent domain
One of the owners of property on Fishman's list was present and spoke passionately about her desire to live out her life on her 14 acres. Alice Purkey, 86, said her land is "not for sale" and asked simply to be left alone.
While Fishman said he wasn't rushing the council, he made sure that each councilperson was given a resolution (below) to pass in December or at some other time. Fishman's resolution provides for the purchase OR taking of any parcel by eminent domain.
UPDATE 11/18/09: It should be interesting to see the Tribune ace reporter Bobby Moore's article on Fishman's appearance at council. How does the reporter "report" on his boss in a fair and balanced way? Will there be a disclaimer noting that Fishman is the reporter's boss and writes the reporter's paycheck? Just guessing, but I would imagine that the article will concentrate on Fishman implying that the main reasons Morristown lost a Harley-Davidson plant were because the ETPC (East Tennessee Progress Center) looked too "rural" and also because the city does not have "control" of certain parcels of land in and around the Park. The article will imply, as did Fishman, that H-D would have been an almost sure thing if the City had just had these other parcels and had spent millions to improve the ETPC. Hence, Fishman's decree that he/IDB/City obtain control of eleven more parcels within three years. Control by sale from willing owner(s) OR forced control by eminent domain!
November 17, 2009 City Council Makes Cuts, Including Reducing Work Hours of Many City Employees
This afternoon's city council meeting was lengthy. Interim City Administrator Lynn Wampler, who did not have cuts ready for discussion at last Thursday's Finance Committee meeting, today had each department head present cuts to the council today.
The council chambers were full of police, fire, public works, and other city employees. Some employees stood just outside the council chambers while others spilled out into the large rotunda as department heads presented cuts to their 09-10 budgets that were passed a few months ago.
To make up a projected budget shortfall of approximately $900,000, the cuts by various departments included a reducton in hours for many city employees, vacant positions left unfilled or changed to part-time, and the elimination of the positions of two newly-hired firefighters who had just recently been sent for training.
Voting "no" on the cuts were Gene Brooks and Claude Jinks. All others (Bob Garrett, Mayor Barile, Claude Jinks, Doc Rooney, and Frank McGuffin) voted yes.
After the cutting was done, Interim Administrator Wampler asked that the council consider at a future date a number of ways of raising more money for the city. Among the proposals put on the table were raising the hotel-motel tax (which will have to be approved locally, sent to Nashville as part of a private act, and then passed again locally with a 2/3 majority), garbage pick-up charges, and eliminating recycling pick-up and having people deliver their recyclables to convenience centers instead.
I'll have several other separate posts on topics covered at the meeting.
Update: The WVLT report is here. The WBIR report is here. The WATE report is here.
The council chambers were full of police, fire, public works, and other city employees. Some employees stood just outside the council chambers while others spilled out into the large rotunda as department heads presented cuts to their 09-10 budgets that were passed a few months ago.
To make up a projected budget shortfall of approximately $900,000, the cuts by various departments included a reducton in hours for many city employees, vacant positions left unfilled or changed to part-time, and the elimination of the positions of two newly-hired firefighters who had just recently been sent for training.
Voting "no" on the cuts were Gene Brooks and Claude Jinks. All others (Bob Garrett, Mayor Barile, Claude Jinks, Doc Rooney, and Frank McGuffin) voted yes.
After the cutting was done, Interim Administrator Wampler asked that the council consider at a future date a number of ways of raising more money for the city. Among the proposals put on the table were raising the hotel-motel tax (which will have to be approved locally, sent to Nashville as part of a private act, and then passed again locally with a 2/3 majority), garbage pick-up charges, and eliminating recycling pick-up and having people deliver their recyclables to convenience centers instead.
I'll have several other separate posts on topics covered at the meeting.
Update: The WVLT report is here. The WBIR report is here. The WATE report is here.
November 17, 2009 Crumley's Legacy Begins to Unfold. Where Was Council's System of Checks and Balances?
Morristown City Council meets today at 4:00 pm. [At their last meeting, they refused to move the meeting time to a taxpayer-friendly 5:00.] Most councilmembers are happy with 4:00 and especially with the fact that 4:00 makes it inconvenient or impossible for working taxpayers to attend and actually watch what is being done with THEIR money.
I predict that some of Crumley's legacy of mismanagement along with council's failure to act as a check and balance on the administrator's power may begin to officially unfold today. The word is out. It may take a long time for the full extent of mismanagement by Crumley and cohorts to make it out into the public domain. In fact, some of the mismanagement and/or illegalities may never be uncovered. In government circles, one level of power protects the other.
One of the most egregious acts of Crumley was the illegal transfer of $2.5 million dollars from the City sewer fund to the general fund in FY 2008 in order to conceal or prop up the "poor" cash situation of the general fund.
According to the city auditors, Crumley suggested the entry and authorized the entry in a meeting with the city's "independent" and "objective" auditor Tom Jones and Finance Director Dynise Robertson.
The transfer was then recorded by Jones in the 2008 audit as a "loan."
After the illegality of this transfer was discovered, all those involved went into protection mode. The auditors said, yes, we were in the meeting where the journal entry was authorized but we didn't actually make the entry ourselves (we just knew about it). Just a couple of weeks ago, somebody transferred the $2.5 million back from the general fund to the sewer fund---again no passage by the council, no mention in the paper. I guess two wrongs in the city make a right--especially if it's all conveniently handled in-house with no public acknowledgment or explanation.
[I expect some response and a brief explanation by the city pretty soon. It will probably one of those "spin" statements saying that it was just Crumley who did this. No one else had a part in it. No one knew it was illegal. No one asked any questions. Move on! And for Pete's sake don't expect us to hold anyone accountable. Well, spindoctors, consider this. If the auditors had pointed out this illegality when they prepared the 2008 audit or when they presented the 2008 audit to the council in May 2009, it could have saved the city taxpayers over $145,000.
Did the auditors really not know that a loan from the sewer fund to the general fund requires local approval and state approval? Was auditor objectivity lost because of their presence in the meeting with Crumley where this transfer/loan was authorized? Was auditor independence compromised by being part of the financial process? With $2.5 Million being shifted around, wouldn't an independent auditor ask or check to see that proper documentation and legal procedures were followed? After all is said and done, auditors have the last call. If only they had blown the whistle on this illegality, if only someone on council had actually looked at the audit and asked about this, Crumley could have been fired without the fancy retirement party and the huge severance package PAID FOR BY CITY TAXPAYERS.]
And the auditors are stating that most of that money (the $2.5 million that was illegally transferred) has now been transferred back to the sewer fund BUT it will have to be transferred back to the general fund againt pretty soon because, you guessed it, the general government fund is still in "poor" condition. Robbing Peter (sewer fund) to pay Paul (operate general government)?
Crumley is gone, but certainly not forgotten. His fiscal mismanagement and illegal actions are just starting to unravel. The council needs to do a complete and thorough audit of all city funds and departments before a new administrator comes in. The council also needs to set up a system of financial reporting along with a set of checks and balances before a new administrator comes in.
The city taxpayers should not be left holding the bag. Higher property taxes, higher sales taxes, red light cameras, debt and more debt, and on and on. Lack of accountability put the City in the position it is today. Now, the procedures, regulations, and reporting need to change. And then the council and department heads and others must ensure that the new procedures, regulations, and reporting are monitored and enforced. No more sleight of hand. Transparency and accountability are needed. Not cover-ups.
If things don't change in a big way, Morristown will simply have a new set of names but the same old waste, fraud, and abuse.
I predict that some of Crumley's legacy of mismanagement along with council's failure to act as a check and balance on the administrator's power may begin to officially unfold today. The word is out. It may take a long time for the full extent of mismanagement by Crumley and cohorts to make it out into the public domain. In fact, some of the mismanagement and/or illegalities may never be uncovered. In government circles, one level of power protects the other.
One of the most egregious acts of Crumley was the illegal transfer of $2.5 million dollars from the City sewer fund to the general fund in FY 2008 in order to conceal or prop up the "poor" cash situation of the general fund.
According to the city auditors, Crumley suggested the entry and authorized the entry in a meeting with the city's "independent" and "objective" auditor Tom Jones and Finance Director Dynise Robertson.
The transfer was then recorded by Jones in the 2008 audit as a "loan."
After the illegality of this transfer was discovered, all those involved went into protection mode. The auditors said, yes, we were in the meeting where the journal entry was authorized but we didn't actually make the entry ourselves (we just knew about it). Just a couple of weeks ago, somebody transferred the $2.5 million back from the general fund to the sewer fund---again no passage by the council, no mention in the paper. I guess two wrongs in the city make a right--especially if it's all conveniently handled in-house with no public acknowledgment or explanation.
[I expect some response and a brief explanation by the city pretty soon. It will probably one of those "spin" statements saying that it was just Crumley who did this. No one else had a part in it. No one knew it was illegal. No one asked any questions. Move on! And for Pete's sake don't expect us to hold anyone accountable. Well, spindoctors, consider this. If the auditors had pointed out this illegality when they prepared the 2008 audit or when they presented the 2008 audit to the council in May 2009, it could have saved the city taxpayers over $145,000.
Did the auditors really not know that a loan from the sewer fund to the general fund requires local approval and state approval? Was auditor objectivity lost because of their presence in the meeting with Crumley where this transfer/loan was authorized? Was auditor independence compromised by being part of the financial process? With $2.5 Million being shifted around, wouldn't an independent auditor ask or check to see that proper documentation and legal procedures were followed? After all is said and done, auditors have the last call. If only they had blown the whistle on this illegality, if only someone on council had actually looked at the audit and asked about this, Crumley could have been fired without the fancy retirement party and the huge severance package PAID FOR BY CITY TAXPAYERS.]
And the auditors are stating that most of that money (the $2.5 million that was illegally transferred) has now been transferred back to the sewer fund BUT it will have to be transferred back to the general fund againt pretty soon because, you guessed it, the general government fund is still in "poor" condition. Robbing Peter (sewer fund) to pay Paul (operate general government)?
Crumley is gone, but certainly not forgotten. His fiscal mismanagement and illegal actions are just starting to unravel. The council needs to do a complete and thorough audit of all city funds and departments before a new administrator comes in. The council also needs to set up a system of financial reporting along with a set of checks and balances before a new administrator comes in.
The city taxpayers should not be left holding the bag. Higher property taxes, higher sales taxes, red light cameras, debt and more debt, and on and on. Lack of accountability put the City in the position it is today. Now, the procedures, regulations, and reporting need to change. And then the council and department heads and others must ensure that the new procedures, regulations, and reporting are monitored and enforced. No more sleight of hand. Transparency and accountability are needed. Not cover-ups.
If things don't change in a big way, Morristown will simply have a new set of names but the same old waste, fraud, and abuse.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
November 14, 2009 City Finance Meeting: New Administrator and Sewer Mess
This 'n that:
SELECTION OF NEW CITY ADMINISTRATOR:
Interim Administrator Lynn Wampler went over the qualifications of the four candidates for city administrator. He stated that he and MTAS representative Pat Hardy did phone interviews during the previous week. Wampler said that the four on the final list are "all qualified people." Wampler expects that after the candidates complete one-on-one interviews with councilmembers, the council will be able to find a candidate who is a good match for the city and who is up to the task of putting the city on the path to financial stability.
The four include candidates, none of whom are from Morristown, are: Jody Baltz, Angie Carrier, Anthony Cox, and James Payne.
One of the local candidates who was interviewed, Rusty Smith, was present at the Finance meeting. During the discussion of the candidates, former councilmember Rick Trent asked that the council put city employee Jay Moore's name back into consideration and interview him. There were several favorable comments about Mr. Moore's performance as a department head, but in the end the council decided only to interview the four as selected by Wampler and Hardy.
CITY SEWER
The sewer situation (another city mess) and the fines and mandate that TDEC has put to the city to straighten out overflows and numerous other problems came up. The cost is going to be enormous. Brian Fowler, who is over the city sewer system, was not present at the Finance meeting.
Fowler and city employee Lester Turner have proposed that city employees handle much of the work that has to be done, including the work that TDEC has mandated. Councilmember Bob Garrett questioned (1) whether the city employees could actually do the work cheaper than a contractor who is experienced in the work and (2) whether city employees could complete all the mandated work within the time frames set by the state.
Turner pointed out that city workers have gradually become more proficient in using the required equipment and performing the work themselves.
Garrett added that if city workers do the work, the state will come in and audit the records (perhaps monthly) to verify that it is really cheaper for city employees to handle the work.
Previously, Turner and perhaps Fowler as well did not realize that they had to include city benefits (insurance costs, retirement costs, matching social security, etc.) in the city's costs for city employees to do the work. As Garrett said, the city's true and full costs have to be included so that these costs can be accurately compared to the costs that would be incurred by hiring a contractor to do the work. Of concern to Garrett is that even if the costs are slightly lower for city employees to perform the work, he does not think that city employees can get all the work done by the state-mandated deadlines.
Fowler was not at the meeting to discuss the sewer issue. Fowler testified this week in federal court in Greeneville in the case brought by residents of Witt and Roe Junction against Koch Foods over sewer odors that began in early 2005 at the same time that the Koch Foods plant in the East Tennessee Progress Center opened. The City was brought into the suit as an additional defendant after the lawsuit was initially filed.
Lamar Dunn, the city's consultant on sewer system problems and sewer rates, has also testified at the federal trial.
David Wilds of Koch Foods has testified. Cindy Krebs, who works for Veolia, has testified. Barry Calfee, who used to work for Veolia but who now works for Koch Foods, has testified. Veolia is the company with whom the City has contracted for management and operation of the city's wastewater treatment plant.
Several of the area residents have testified, including County Commissioner Guy Collins.
Except for one article that announced that the trial was starting, the Tribune has had no reports about the trial or testimony from any of the witnesses. The trial has been going on for two weeks now and is expected to wind up next week.
SELECTION OF NEW CITY ADMINISTRATOR:
Interim Administrator Lynn Wampler went over the qualifications of the four candidates for city administrator. He stated that he and MTAS representative Pat Hardy did phone interviews during the previous week. Wampler said that the four on the final list are "all qualified people." Wampler expects that after the candidates complete one-on-one interviews with councilmembers, the council will be able to find a candidate who is a good match for the city and who is up to the task of putting the city on the path to financial stability.
The four include candidates, none of whom are from Morristown, are: Jody Baltz, Angie Carrier, Anthony Cox, and James Payne.
One of the local candidates who was interviewed, Rusty Smith, was present at the Finance meeting. During the discussion of the candidates, former councilmember Rick Trent asked that the council put city employee Jay Moore's name back into consideration and interview him. There were several favorable comments about Mr. Moore's performance as a department head, but in the end the council decided only to interview the four as selected by Wampler and Hardy.
CITY SEWER
The sewer situation (another city mess) and the fines and mandate that TDEC has put to the city to straighten out overflows and numerous other problems came up. The cost is going to be enormous. Brian Fowler, who is over the city sewer system, was not present at the Finance meeting.
Fowler and city employee Lester Turner have proposed that city employees handle much of the work that has to be done, including the work that TDEC has mandated. Councilmember Bob Garrett questioned (1) whether the city employees could actually do the work cheaper than a contractor who is experienced in the work and (2) whether city employees could complete all the mandated work within the time frames set by the state.
Turner pointed out that city workers have gradually become more proficient in using the required equipment and performing the work themselves.
Garrett added that if city workers do the work, the state will come in and audit the records (perhaps monthly) to verify that it is really cheaper for city employees to handle the work.
Previously, Turner and perhaps Fowler as well did not realize that they had to include city benefits (insurance costs, retirement costs, matching social security, etc.) in the city's costs for city employees to do the work. As Garrett said, the city's true and full costs have to be included so that these costs can be accurately compared to the costs that would be incurred by hiring a contractor to do the work. Of concern to Garrett is that even if the costs are slightly lower for city employees to perform the work, he does not think that city employees can get all the work done by the state-mandated deadlines.
Fowler was not at the meeting to discuss the sewer issue. Fowler testified this week in federal court in Greeneville in the case brought by residents of Witt and Roe Junction against Koch Foods over sewer odors that began in early 2005 at the same time that the Koch Foods plant in the East Tennessee Progress Center opened. The City was brought into the suit as an additional defendant after the lawsuit was initially filed.
Lamar Dunn, the city's consultant on sewer system problems and sewer rates, has also testified at the federal trial.
David Wilds of Koch Foods has testified. Cindy Krebs, who works for Veolia, has testified. Barry Calfee, who used to work for Veolia but who now works for Koch Foods, has testified. Veolia is the company with whom the City has contracted for management and operation of the city's wastewater treatment plant.
Several of the area residents have testified, including County Commissioner Guy Collins.
Except for one article that announced that the trial was starting, the Tribune has had no reports about the trial or testimony from any of the witnesses. The trial has been going on for two weeks now and is expected to wind up next week.
November 14, 2009 City Finance Committee Meeting and the Farmers Market Site
The Farmers Market site on West Morris Boulevard was a topic of lengthy discussion at the 11/12/09 City Finance Committee meeting.
While the discussion was always civil, there are obvious differences of opinion.
Gene Brooks, who was appointed chair of the Farmers Market Task Force, expressed concern about the current lack of enforcement of codes and regulations. Brooks said that the regulations say "no permanent structures" and that set-up is to be daily on a first-come, first-served basis and then the vendors are to clean and leave in the evening. [Gene added that he had been appointed chairman of the Farmers Market Task Force, but he was not allowed to appoint members of the Task Force.]
Claude Jinks mentioned health concerns.
Mayor Barile agreed that the area needs to be "cleaned up." Some people who were mentioned as being involved in the Task Force discussions are the Mayor, Alan Hartman, Todd Morgan, Stacy Hayes, and Darrell Williams of the DMA (Downtown Merchants Association).
Brooks pointed out that one individual has set up on seven places and that many are not farmers at all.
Mentioned several times was possible interest by CVS for a pharmacy at that location. [We all know that wherever there is a Walgreens, a CVS will try to locate nearby. And wherever there is a CVS, a Walgreens will try to locate nearby.]
Someone mentioned that Darrell Williams (DMA) had said there would never be a CVS there. Mayor Barile said that the DMA is afraid of losing parking to a CVS if one were built there. Claude Jinks took exception to Mr. Williams' alleged remark and said that the council will decide what happens to the property.
At this time, the city is apparently only considering the proposal of developer Shawn Wilmeth (sp?). McGuffin has talked to Wilmeth and explained that Wilmeth wants a one-year free-look at the property, with no earnest money put down.
Kay Senter suggested perhaps giving Wilmeth a one-year right of first refusal but not tying up this city property for a full year without any compensation.
McGuffin then asked if the council would consider "squaring up" the property and selling it to Wilmeth and having Wilmeth put up an entrance sign where the fountain currently is. There was also discussion about whether a new, updated appraisal is needed.
McGuffin said he thought it was a phenomenal piece or property until he found out about all the utility easements that lie underneath and cross the property. Because of the utility easements, Bob Garrett said that's "dead property" there.
Buddy Fielder said that the city might be able to relocate the utilities to make it possible to build on the property.
Claude Jinks said maybe it should be left as a parking lot since there is so little parking available for businesses downtown.
This is not the first time that the Farmer's Market property has been discussed for lease, sale, parking, etc. If city councilmembers are considering and discussing a ground lease or outright sale of this property, why are they not again advertising and requesting proposals from ALL who might be interested in the property? See my previous post.
The current discussion by at least some members of the council gives the appearance that this is a closed process for consideration of just one proposal.
While the discussion was always civil, there are obvious differences of opinion.
Gene Brooks, who was appointed chair of the Farmers Market Task Force, expressed concern about the current lack of enforcement of codes and regulations. Brooks said that the regulations say "no permanent structures" and that set-up is to be daily on a first-come, first-served basis and then the vendors are to clean and leave in the evening. [Gene added that he had been appointed chairman of the Farmers Market Task Force, but he was not allowed to appoint members of the Task Force.]
Claude Jinks mentioned health concerns.
Mayor Barile agreed that the area needs to be "cleaned up." Some people who were mentioned as being involved in the Task Force discussions are the Mayor, Alan Hartman, Todd Morgan, Stacy Hayes, and Darrell Williams of the DMA (Downtown Merchants Association).
Brooks pointed out that one individual has set up on seven places and that many are not farmers at all.
Mentioned several times was possible interest by CVS for a pharmacy at that location. [We all know that wherever there is a Walgreens, a CVS will try to locate nearby. And wherever there is a CVS, a Walgreens will try to locate nearby.]
Someone mentioned that Darrell Williams (DMA) had said there would never be a CVS there. Mayor Barile said that the DMA is afraid of losing parking to a CVS if one were built there. Claude Jinks took exception to Mr. Williams' alleged remark and said that the council will decide what happens to the property.
At this time, the city is apparently only considering the proposal of developer Shawn Wilmeth (sp?). McGuffin has talked to Wilmeth and explained that Wilmeth wants a one-year free-look at the property, with no earnest money put down.
Kay Senter suggested perhaps giving Wilmeth a one-year right of first refusal but not tying up this city property for a full year without any compensation.
McGuffin then asked if the council would consider "squaring up" the property and selling it to Wilmeth and having Wilmeth put up an entrance sign where the fountain currently is. There was also discussion about whether a new, updated appraisal is needed.
McGuffin said he thought it was a phenomenal piece or property until he found out about all the utility easements that lie underneath and cross the property. Because of the utility easements, Bob Garrett said that's "dead property" there.
Buddy Fielder said that the city might be able to relocate the utilities to make it possible to build on the property.
Claude Jinks said maybe it should be left as a parking lot since there is so little parking available for businesses downtown.
This is not the first time that the Farmer's Market property has been discussed for lease, sale, parking, etc. If city councilmembers are considering and discussing a ground lease or outright sale of this property, why are they not again advertising and requesting proposals from ALL who might be interested in the property? See my previous post.
The current discussion by at least some members of the council gives the appearance that this is a closed process for consideration of just one proposal.
Friday, November 13, 2009
November 13, 2009 City upset at WATE-TV questions regarding finances
Yesterday's City Finance Committee meeting was long. I will go into more detail this weekend.
Although it was not on the agenda, there were several comments about calls that councilmembers had received from WATE-TV in Knoxville about the financial condition of the city. The WATE website report is here. I heard that WATE also discussed the city's financial situation during its evening news report yesterday.
Apparently, the WATE reporter had been told of the city's financial situation (not good at all) and was planning to come to the Finance Committee meeting if cuts were to be discussed.
Mr. Wampler spoke to the reporter and told her that proposed cuts had not been prepared and would not be discussed at yesterday's meeting, so WATE didn't come.
While the Mayor and councilmembers are trying to calm everybody down about the city's finances, they are also considering selling some city property (off Sulphur Springs Road) to raise money for the general fund.
Yesterday, there was also discussion about a TIF agreement (tax increment financing) in which the City will more or less give up collecting real and personal property taxes for a lengthy period of time and instead will allow tax money to be used for development of property along E. Morris Boulevard between S. Liberty Hill Road and Montvue. The Industrial Board is working this out and the proposal to give up taxes for a period of time will be pitched to the city and to the county.
The owner or developer of the property, according to Finance Chair Frank McGuffin, is All Star Construction. McGuffin expects that city sales tax revenue would increase with the proposed largely retail development. And after the TIF ends (maybe 15 years or so), the real estate and personal property taxes on the land and equipment would then be available to the city for the general fund.
[Tax Increment Financing typically dedicates tax increments (increased tax revenues) within a certain defined district to finance the debt that was issued to pay for infrastructure and other improvements.]
Although it was not on the agenda, there were several comments about calls that councilmembers had received from WATE-TV in Knoxville about the financial condition of the city. The WATE website report is here. I heard that WATE also discussed the city's financial situation during its evening news report yesterday.
Apparently, the WATE reporter had been told of the city's financial situation (not good at all) and was planning to come to the Finance Committee meeting if cuts were to be discussed.
Mr. Wampler spoke to the reporter and told her that proposed cuts had not been prepared and would not be discussed at yesterday's meeting, so WATE didn't come.
While the Mayor and councilmembers are trying to calm everybody down about the city's finances, they are also considering selling some city property (off Sulphur Springs Road) to raise money for the general fund.
Yesterday, there was also discussion about a TIF agreement (tax increment financing) in which the City will more or less give up collecting real and personal property taxes for a lengthy period of time and instead will allow tax money to be used for development of property along E. Morris Boulevard between S. Liberty Hill Road and Montvue. The Industrial Board is working this out and the proposal to give up taxes for a period of time will be pitched to the city and to the county.
The owner or developer of the property, according to Finance Chair Frank McGuffin, is All Star Construction. McGuffin expects that city sales tax revenue would increase with the proposed largely retail development. And after the TIF ends (maybe 15 years or so), the real estate and personal property taxes on the land and equipment would then be available to the city for the general fund.
[Tax Increment Financing typically dedicates tax increments (increased tax revenues) within a certain defined district to finance the debt that was issued to pay for infrastructure and other improvements.]
Thursday, November 12, 2009
November 12, 2009 Lawyer: Red Light Cameras Must Have a Private Investigator License
There are a lot of people in Morristown who don't like the red light cameras. And that sentiment is shared by many people across the state.
An attorney in Clarksville claims that the cameras are "private investigators" for the company (Redflex) that operates them. The attorney represents several clients, all of whom have been "pictured" running red lights. Now, the attorney may file a motion with the court asking that all of the city's "evidence" (pictures) be thrown out of court because the cameras do not have a private investigator's license! Click this link to the story.
You can bet that many Morristown motorists will be watching for the outcome of these trials.
An attorney in Clarksville claims that the cameras are "private investigators" for the company (Redflex) that operates them. The attorney represents several clients, all of whom have been "pictured" running red lights. Now, the attorney may file a motion with the court asking that all of the city's "evidence" (pictures) be thrown out of court because the cameras do not have a private investigator's license! Click this link to the story.
You can bet that many Morristown motorists will be watching for the outcome of these trials.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
November 11, 2009 Veterans Day
Freedom isn't free.
As Americans, we owe a special debt to all veterans of all branches of the armed forces. Our freedom has been bought with their sweat and blood. Many have given the ultimate sacrifice for their country. Freedom isn't free.
Links to the words and patriotic music associated with the following branches of the armed forces can be heard by clicking on each link below:
Army: As Those Caissons Go Rolling Along
Navy: Anchors Aweigh
Marine: Marine Hymn
Air Force: Off We Go Into the Wild Blue Yonder
Coast Guard: Semper Paratus
My father served in the Navy during World War II. My husband served in the Army in Vietnam.
To all who have served in the past and to all who serve today...Thank you for your service and may God bless you and your families.
Links to the words and patriotic music associated with the following branches of the armed forces can be heard by clicking on each link below:
Army: As Those Caissons Go Rolling Along
Navy: Anchors Aweigh
Marine: Marine Hymn
Air Force: Off We Go Into the Wild Blue Yonder
Coast Guard: Semper Paratus
My father served in the Navy during World War II. My husband served in the Army in Vietnam.
To all who have served in the past and to all who serve today...Thank you for your service and may God bless you and your families.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
November 4, 2009 City Council Sticks with 4:00 Meeting Time
Despite pleas from at least three individuals, the Morristown City Council in a 5-2 vote refused to move its meeting time from 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM.
Gene Brooks made the motion to move the time to 5:00 to make it more convenient for citizens and taxpayers and the public to attend these "public" meetings. Kay Senter seconded the motion. Both Gene and Kay commented on the proposal before the vote was taken, and both Gene and Kay voted "yes."
The other five members of the council did not comment or explain their opposition to a later, more citizen and taxpayer-friendly meeting time. Voting "no" were Bob Garrett, Claude Jinks, Frank McGuffin, Doc Rooney, and Mayor Barile.
The City is in a financial mess and doesn't want a lot of info coming out. The city's mess may partly explain the vote to stick with an early meeting time in order to exclude or make it as difficult as possible for the average working person to attend. Many of the financial problems that have been discussed by council were generated and orchestrated by former City Administrator Jim Crumley with a big assist from a "no-questions asked" Mayor and Council.
It's time for everything to be brought out, acknowledged, and then cleaned up, but that's a very hard thing to get any elected body to do. The refrain from the Mayor and Council will be "forget the past." They will also use the old stand-by "we just need to move on"---without holding anyone accountable, of course!
Well, if you just "forget the past" and "move on" without changing your procedures to provide for more oversight and accountability NOW, then you will be doomed to repeat the multiple financial mistakes, money shifting, interest-only debt payments, and finagling of the last years--albeit with new names and faces.
More during the next few days.
Gene Brooks made the motion to move the time to 5:00 to make it more convenient for citizens and taxpayers and the public to attend these "public" meetings. Kay Senter seconded the motion. Both Gene and Kay commented on the proposal before the vote was taken, and both Gene and Kay voted "yes."
The other five members of the council did not comment or explain their opposition to a later, more citizen and taxpayer-friendly meeting time. Voting "no" were Bob Garrett, Claude Jinks, Frank McGuffin, Doc Rooney, and Mayor Barile.
The City is in a financial mess and doesn't want a lot of info coming out. The city's mess may partly explain the vote to stick with an early meeting time in order to exclude or make it as difficult as possible for the average working person to attend. Many of the financial problems that have been discussed by council were generated and orchestrated by former City Administrator Jim Crumley with a big assist from a "no-questions asked" Mayor and Council.
It's time for everything to be brought out, acknowledged, and then cleaned up, but that's a very hard thing to get any elected body to do. The refrain from the Mayor and Council will be "forget the past." They will also use the old stand-by "we just need to move on"---without holding anyone accountable, of course!
Well, if you just "forget the past" and "move on" without changing your procedures to provide for more oversight and accountability NOW, then you will be doomed to repeat the multiple financial mistakes, money shifting, interest-only debt payments, and finagling of the last years--albeit with new names and faces.
More during the next few days.
Monday, November 02, 2009
November 2, 2009 City Council Has Later Meeting Time on Tomorrow's Agenda
Tomorrow's agenda for the Morristown City Council includes an Ordinance to change its meeting time from 4:00 pm to 5:00 pm. This is a request made by Charles Cook several weeks ago and discussed at the council's last work session.
The full agenda is on the city's website. Click here for the website or here for just the agenda.
Currently, council meets at 4:00 and then goes into work session discussion after the regular meeting is adjourned. The new schedule would simply put the work session first and then the regular meeting would begin at 5:00. [IF for any reason the work session had not concluded before 5:00, the council would finish the work session after adjournment of the regular meeting].
There is little doubt that 5:00 is a more taxpayer-friendly meeting time.
However, at least one councilman is adamantly opposed to such a change. During discussion of the time change, Doc Rooney commented that if the people really want to be there because of an issue they are concerned about, they'll come no matter what time the meeting is. Of course, Doc, like several other members of the city council, is one of those who doesn't have to clock in to get a paycheck and doesn't have to take off work and lose pay to attend 4:00 meetings of council.
Hopefully, there will be a vote on this matter. There is no perfect meeting time, but a later meeting would no doubt be more convenient for most working taxpayers.
Of course, another complementary idea would be to tape all meetings and air them on the city's website so that ALL taxpayers---those who can attend at 4 or 5 and those who can't attend then or are sick and shut-in---can see what the council is discussing and how each councilmember votes. I requested the taping and airing of meetings back in September. It would be nice to see a public discussion and vote on this issue at some time in the future.
The full agenda is on the city's website. Click here for the website or here for just the agenda.
Currently, council meets at 4:00 and then goes into work session discussion after the regular meeting is adjourned. The new schedule would simply put the work session first and then the regular meeting would begin at 5:00. [IF for any reason the work session had not concluded before 5:00, the council would finish the work session after adjournment of the regular meeting].
There is little doubt that 5:00 is a more taxpayer-friendly meeting time.
However, at least one councilman is adamantly opposed to such a change. During discussion of the time change, Doc Rooney commented that if the people really want to be there because of an issue they are concerned about, they'll come no matter what time the meeting is. Of course, Doc, like several other members of the city council, is one of those who doesn't have to clock in to get a paycheck and doesn't have to take off work and lose pay to attend 4:00 meetings of council.
Hopefully, there will be a vote on this matter. There is no perfect meeting time, but a later meeting would no doubt be more convenient for most working taxpayers.
Of course, another complementary idea would be to tape all meetings and air them on the city's website so that ALL taxpayers---those who can attend at 4 or 5 and those who can't attend then or are sick and shut-in---can see what the council is discussing and how each councilmember votes. I requested the taping and airing of meetings back in September. It would be nice to see a public discussion and vote on this issue at some time in the future.
Friday, October 30, 2009
October 30, 2009 Expect a Slow Revelation of Crumley's Handling and Mishandling of City Finances
The City of Morristown is in a financial mess--even more so than was previously admitted or known.
At least some of former City Administrator Jim Crumley's handling and MIShandling of city accounts is gradually coming out. The Mayor and Council may be looking at budget cuts and postponing projects as the true magnitude of the problems with the city's general government fund and sewer fund comes out.
The Trib will probably provide part of the story today.
Mayor Barile, Jim Crumley's staunchest supporter, was concerned in July that Crumley was "railroaded" out of his job, but she voted to "retire" him. Click here.
Councilman Doc Rooney also supported Crumley until it became apparent that the votes were there to "retire" him.
Frank McGuffin supported Crumley even at the end of Crumley's reign, casting the lone vote not to accept Crumley's offer to "retire."
Bob Garrett, Gene Brooks, Kay Senter, and Claude Jinks led the effort to fire Crumley and in the end they accepted Crumley's offer to "retire" with a nice going away package ($145,000+) from the taxpayers.
The Mayor and Council, regardless of their feelings about Crumley and regardless of what has happened in the past, need to look in the mirror and then look at the taxpayers and say never again. Then the Mayor and Council need to take action to lead the city toward true transparency and accountability and FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.
Forget the smoke and mirrors. Forget the spin.
Crumley was given way too much power to spend the city TAXPAYERS' money however he wanted to. Crumley was given way too much power to shift money around with little or no control and often without even having to make a report as to what he was doing or had already done. There was way too little oversight over his actions. The lack of checks and balances in city government is absurd.
Sure, it's efficient and easy to set a tax rate and then turn over the taxpayers' money to a city administrator. Sure, it's efficient and easy for the Mayor and Council to come to three or four meetings a month and act as a rubber-stamp for a city administrator. Now, we find that this efficient, easy, and laissez-faire style of governance leads to abuse, waste, out-of-control debt, perks for the "good old boys," interest-only payments, and, ultimately, financial disaster.
Mayor Barile was always concerned that asking questions or trying to actually take part in the management of the city's finance would be seen as "micro-managing"! Click here. So instead of asking pertinent questions and following through, the Mayor and councilmembers are just now finding out what a financial mess the City is in.
The system needs to change, so that this situation doesn't repeat itself with a new cast of characters. Policies and procedures should be tightened. A system of checks and balances needs to be put in place.
Strict and accurate financial reporting to the Mayor and Council by the Finance Director, Budget Director, and City Administrator needs to be provided on a monthly basis.
Questions need to be asked about all financial reports, revenue, debt, expenditures. And the Mayor and Council need to insist on answers--not namby-pamby, everything's OK answers, but answers that are backed up by financial reports that are provided to the council monthly and that are put on the city's website for the citizens and taxpayers, too.
You can bet that when there are financial problems, the Mayor and councilmembers will NOT be ponying up their own personal money to pay off the debt or to buy this property or that property or to clean up the sewer debacle. No, the Mayor and councilmembers will turn to others--taxpayers and ratepayers--for the money to take care of the city's finances.
Just since 2007, property taxes in the city have increased 25 cents. Sales taxes have increased by 1/4 cent. Sewer fees have gone up AGAIN. And red-light cameras have been installed to generate even more "revenue."
What happened?
Jim Crumley in 2006 said everything was fine. Click here for his glowing 2006 statement.
Then in 2007 (well BEFORE any national financial problems) Crumley and the council were saying there's a huge problem---a structural deficit in the city's finances. That's when property taxes went sky high. Click here.
Sales taxes went up the next year (mid-2008) as the City used taxpayer-money to help finance a political campaign to encourage city taxpayers to vote for the sales tax increase. In its political campaign to get a YES vote on the sales tax increase, the City used a little bit of what some would call tax "bribery" as the city promised to reduce the previous year's huge 40-cent property tax increase down to "only" a 25-cent increase if people would vote YES in the sales tax referendum. Click here to see the taxpayer-funded vote YES political campaign letters. For more info, click here and here.
The city took the county's "pick-your-poison" wheel tax referendum of years ago to a new level by giving city taxpayers the choice of just one big poison (40-cent property tax increase) or two smaller poisons (25-cent property tax increase plus a 1/4 cent sales increase)!
Of course, red-light cameras were also put up to enhance city coffers---and make an out-of-town company rich, too!
In 2009, sewer fees went up dramatically. Click here.
Where has all this additional revenue gone? When will someone step in and ask for a real, detailed audit of the city finances? The cursory sampling of financial transactions in the yearly audit has limited usefulness. Someone needs to get in there and find out what's really going on.
At least some of former City Administrator Jim Crumley's handling and MIShandling of city accounts is gradually coming out. The Mayor and Council may be looking at budget cuts and postponing projects as the true magnitude of the problems with the city's general government fund and sewer fund comes out.
The Trib will probably provide part of the story today.
Mayor Barile, Jim Crumley's staunchest supporter, was concerned in July that Crumley was "railroaded" out of his job, but she voted to "retire" him. Click here.
Councilman Doc Rooney also supported Crumley until it became apparent that the votes were there to "retire" him.
Frank McGuffin supported Crumley even at the end of Crumley's reign, casting the lone vote not to accept Crumley's offer to "retire."
Bob Garrett, Gene Brooks, Kay Senter, and Claude Jinks led the effort to fire Crumley and in the end they accepted Crumley's offer to "retire" with a nice going away package ($145,000+) from the taxpayers.
The Mayor and Council, regardless of their feelings about Crumley and regardless of what has happened in the past, need to look in the mirror and then look at the taxpayers and say never again. Then the Mayor and Council need to take action to lead the city toward true transparency and accountability and FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.
Forget the smoke and mirrors. Forget the spin.
Crumley was given way too much power to spend the city TAXPAYERS' money however he wanted to. Crumley was given way too much power to shift money around with little or no control and often without even having to make a report as to what he was doing or had already done. There was way too little oversight over his actions. The lack of checks and balances in city government is absurd.
Sure, it's efficient and easy to set a tax rate and then turn over the taxpayers' money to a city administrator. Sure, it's efficient and easy for the Mayor and Council to come to three or four meetings a month and act as a rubber-stamp for a city administrator. Now, we find that this efficient, easy, and laissez-faire style of governance leads to abuse, waste, out-of-control debt, perks for the "good old boys," interest-only payments, and, ultimately, financial disaster.
Mayor Barile was always concerned that asking questions or trying to actually take part in the management of the city's finance would be seen as "micro-managing"! Click here. So instead of asking pertinent questions and following through, the Mayor and councilmembers are just now finding out what a financial mess the City is in.
The system needs to change, so that this situation doesn't repeat itself with a new cast of characters. Policies and procedures should be tightened. A system of checks and balances needs to be put in place.
Strict and accurate financial reporting to the Mayor and Council by the Finance Director, Budget Director, and City Administrator needs to be provided on a monthly basis.
Questions need to be asked about all financial reports, revenue, debt, expenditures. And the Mayor and Council need to insist on answers--not namby-pamby, everything's OK answers, but answers that are backed up by financial reports that are provided to the council monthly and that are put on the city's website for the citizens and taxpayers, too.
You can bet that when there are financial problems, the Mayor and councilmembers will NOT be ponying up their own personal money to pay off the debt or to buy this property or that property or to clean up the sewer debacle. No, the Mayor and councilmembers will turn to others--taxpayers and ratepayers--for the money to take care of the city's finances.
Just since 2007, property taxes in the city have increased 25 cents. Sales taxes have increased by 1/4 cent. Sewer fees have gone up AGAIN. And red-light cameras have been installed to generate even more "revenue."
What happened?
Jim Crumley in 2006 said everything was fine. Click here for his glowing 2006 statement.
Then in 2007 (well BEFORE any national financial problems) Crumley and the council were saying there's a huge problem---a structural deficit in the city's finances. That's when property taxes went sky high. Click here.
Sales taxes went up the next year (mid-2008) as the City used taxpayer-money to help finance a political campaign to encourage city taxpayers to vote for the sales tax increase. In its political campaign to get a YES vote on the sales tax increase, the City used a little bit of what some would call tax "bribery" as the city promised to reduce the previous year's huge 40-cent property tax increase down to "only" a 25-cent increase if people would vote YES in the sales tax referendum. Click here to see the taxpayer-funded vote YES political campaign letters. For more info, click here and here.
The city took the county's "pick-your-poison" wheel tax referendum of years ago to a new level by giving city taxpayers the choice of just one big poison (40-cent property tax increase) or two smaller poisons (25-cent property tax increase plus a 1/4 cent sales increase)!
Of course, red-light cameras were also put up to enhance city coffers---and make an out-of-town company rich, too!
In 2009, sewer fees went up dramatically. Click here.
Where has all this additional revenue gone? When will someone step in and ask for a real, detailed audit of the city finances? The cursory sampling of financial transactions in the yearly audit has limited usefulness. Someone needs to get in there and find out what's really going on.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
October 20, 2009 Can a Deputy Sheriff Campaign and Run for Sheriff Without Violating Federal or State Law?
The state attorney general has issued an opinion (AGO 09-167) addressing the question of whether deputy sheriffs who run for sheriff (without first resigning their deputy position) violate any state or federal law.
OPINION:
If the deputy sheriff's position or duties are in connection with an activity financed in whole or in part by federal loans or grants, then the federal Hatch Act would prohibit him from running for the office of sheriff unless he first resigned from employment as a deputy sheriff.
Additionally, a deputy sheriff in a county that has adopted the County Sheriff's Civil Service Law of 1974 is prohibited from making an endorsement of any candidate in any campaign for elected office. A deputy sheriff's announcement of his or her candidacy for the office of sheriff would constitute an endorsement of that candidacy. Accordingly, the deputy sheriff would be in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. Section 8-8-419 unless he or she first resigned from employment.
The complete opinion is here
This Tennessee AG's opinion could have implications for the current sheriff's race in Hamblen County as well as other counties. The Tennessee attorney general has opined that certain deputy sheriffs can not continue to serve as a deputy sheriff and run for sheriff at the same time. The AG's opinion is generally considered as persuasive authority, but it does not have the force of law. If a candidate for sheriff somewhere decides that he or she wants to challenge the right of a particular deputy sheriff to run for the sheriff's office, this AG's opinion may end up being tested in a court of law.
OPINION:
If the deputy sheriff's position or duties are in connection with an activity financed in whole or in part by federal loans or grants, then the federal Hatch Act would prohibit him from running for the office of sheriff unless he first resigned from employment as a deputy sheriff.
Additionally, a deputy sheriff in a county that has adopted the County Sheriff's Civil Service Law of 1974 is prohibited from making an endorsement of any candidate in any campaign for elected office. A deputy sheriff's announcement of his or her candidacy for the office of sheriff would constitute an endorsement of that candidacy. Accordingly, the deputy sheriff would be in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. Section 8-8-419 unless he or she first resigned from employment.
The complete opinion is here
This Tennessee AG's opinion could have implications for the current sheriff's race in Hamblen County as well as other counties. The Tennessee attorney general has opined that certain deputy sheriffs can not continue to serve as a deputy sheriff and run for sheriff at the same time. The AG's opinion is generally considered as persuasive authority, but it does not have the force of law. If a candidate for sheriff somewhere decides that he or she wants to challenge the right of a particular deputy sheriff to run for the sheriff's office, this AG's opinion may end up being tested in a court of law.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
October 11, 2009 One of My Public Requests Is Answered: Committee Agendas Are on the Hamblen County Website
Wow! For a long time now, I have asked the county commission to put committee agendas and minutes on the Hamblen County website.
At long last, County Mayor David Purkey and his staff have finally done it. And it wasn't hard at all.
Click here to see the agenda for tomorrow's October 12 Finance Committee meeting. [You will also see that agendas for nine Finance meetings long gone by (January 09-September 09) have just now been posted, and if you hit on archives, even older agendas are available.]
[NOTE: The chairmanship of the Finance Committee has been changed by Chairman Stancil Ford. Ford has removed Joe Spoone from his position as Finance Chairman. Ford has named Commissioner Louis "Doe" Jarvis, who was appointed earlier this year to replace Joe Swann, as Chair of this year's Finance Committee. Joe Spoone is rumored to be contemplating a run for County Trustee, a position being vacated by Bill Brittain who is running for County Mayor. Ford is the one who named Spoone as Finance Chair for 08-09, but he has replaced Spoone as Chairman for the current 09-10 year.]
The Public Services agenda for October 12, 2009, is here. As with Finance, Public Services agendas for Jan 09-Sept 09 have just now been posted, and if you hit on archives, even older agendas are available.
When I made a request for posting of agendas and minutes of committee meetings in late 2006/early 2007, committee minutes were posted for January 2007 and then no more minutes. Agendas were posted from January 2007-August 2008 and then no more.
Even when the Mayor and his staff stopped posting the agendas, I continued to ask privately and in public meetings for better use of the website, more information, and agendas and minutes in particular. Because I believe in open and accountable government, I am extremely pleased to see that the agendas for tomorrow's meetings have not only been posted--but they were posted BEFORE the meeting.
NOTE: An article in the local newspaper dated September 18, 2009, Page A-3, had stated that agendas would be posted after the meetings had taken place. From the article Beginning in October, Shelton (Amber Shelton, the Mayor's Executive Assistant) will post committee agendas but not until after the committees have met, she said. The next paragraph quotes Shelton: "We're looking at putting them on before but sometimes there's just not enough time before the meetings. This way (posting the agenda after the meeting), people will have a reference so they can look back and see when an issue was discussed."
When this article appeared in the paper, I, like most people, questioned the usefulness of an agenda posted AFTER a meeting. I knew that committee agendas are prepared and printed and mailed out to commissioners about 5 days before the committee meetings, so I knew the agendas could be posted online about 4-5 days before the meetings in order to give citizens and taxpayers a heads-up on what is coming before the committees--if the Mayor wanted it done.
The next web project should be to post MINUTES of these committee meetings. It's important to know what is going to be discussed (Agendas), but it's just as important to be able to see the minutes of those meetings to find out who was present, what discussion took place, what recommendation, if any, is coming out of the committee to the full commission, and the record of votes taken.
And, finally, a very important change would be to have those committee meetings at a time when citizens and taxpayers can actually attend if they want to.
You can have an agenda and you may be interested in a particular item that is going to be discussed, but unless you are retired or don't work or can take off work for an extended and uncertain period of time, you probably can't make it to a set of meetings that start at 11:30 AM with no set time for any meeting except for the first one.
Stancil Ford was elected to the commission in 2006 and became chairman in September 2006. Stancil, as Chairman, changed committee meetings from an afternoon meeting time to 11:30 AM and said that he changed to the 11:30 meeting time so people could attend the meetings on their "lunch hour." Give me a break!
Stancil and several commissioners are retired. Other commissioners own their own company or have high managerial positions that allow them to leave work and attend these 11:30 AM meetings without losing pay. Working citizens and taxpayers don't have the same scheduling luxury that these commissioners have. Stancil could change the meetings to a more taxpayer-friendly meeting time next month if he wanted to. Of course, other commissioners could also bring this up for public discussion if they wanted to see taxpayer-friendly meeting times.
The commission meets as a body once a month at 5:00 PM on the Thursday after the 3rd Monday. At commission meetings, it's usually just push-a-button, record the vote, and meeting adjourned.
Committees of the full commission meet on the second Monday of each month. Committees are where the real discussion, if there is any, takes place, before an item is sent to the full body. More time is allowed for public input at committee meetings. Committees should meet at or near 5:00 PM like the full commission does--a more taxpayer-friendly meeting time--instead of 11:30 AM meetings which effectively shut out the average working taxpayer.
At long last, County Mayor David Purkey and his staff have finally done it. And it wasn't hard at all.
Click here to see the agenda for tomorrow's October 12 Finance Committee meeting. [You will also see that agendas for nine Finance meetings long gone by (January 09-September 09) have just now been posted, and if you hit on archives, even older agendas are available.]
[NOTE: The chairmanship of the Finance Committee has been changed by Chairman Stancil Ford. Ford has removed Joe Spoone from his position as Finance Chairman. Ford has named Commissioner Louis "Doe" Jarvis, who was appointed earlier this year to replace Joe Swann, as Chair of this year's Finance Committee. Joe Spoone is rumored to be contemplating a run for County Trustee, a position being vacated by Bill Brittain who is running for County Mayor. Ford is the one who named Spoone as Finance Chair for 08-09, but he has replaced Spoone as Chairman for the current 09-10 year.]
The Public Services agenda for October 12, 2009, is here. As with Finance, Public Services agendas for Jan 09-Sept 09 have just now been posted, and if you hit on archives, even older agendas are available.
When I made a request for posting of agendas and minutes of committee meetings in late 2006/early 2007, committee minutes were posted for January 2007 and then no more minutes. Agendas were posted from January 2007-August 2008 and then no more.
Even when the Mayor and his staff stopped posting the agendas, I continued to ask privately and in public meetings for better use of the website, more information, and agendas and minutes in particular. Because I believe in open and accountable government, I am extremely pleased to see that the agendas for tomorrow's meetings have not only been posted--but they were posted BEFORE the meeting.
NOTE: An article in the local newspaper dated September 18, 2009, Page A-3, had stated that agendas would be posted after the meetings had taken place. From the article Beginning in October, Shelton (Amber Shelton, the Mayor's Executive Assistant) will post committee agendas but not until after the committees have met, she said. The next paragraph quotes Shelton: "We're looking at putting them on before but sometimes there's just not enough time before the meetings. This way (posting the agenda after the meeting), people will have a reference so they can look back and see when an issue was discussed."
When this article appeared in the paper, I, like most people, questioned the usefulness of an agenda posted AFTER a meeting. I knew that committee agendas are prepared and printed and mailed out to commissioners about 5 days before the committee meetings, so I knew the agendas could be posted online about 4-5 days before the meetings in order to give citizens and taxpayers a heads-up on what is coming before the committees--if the Mayor wanted it done.
The next web project should be to post MINUTES of these committee meetings. It's important to know what is going to be discussed (Agendas), but it's just as important to be able to see the minutes of those meetings to find out who was present, what discussion took place, what recommendation, if any, is coming out of the committee to the full commission, and the record of votes taken.
And, finally, a very important change would be to have those committee meetings at a time when citizens and taxpayers can actually attend if they want to.
You can have an agenda and you may be interested in a particular item that is going to be discussed, but unless you are retired or don't work or can take off work for an extended and uncertain period of time, you probably can't make it to a set of meetings that start at 11:30 AM with no set time for any meeting except for the first one.
Stancil Ford was elected to the commission in 2006 and became chairman in September 2006. Stancil, as Chairman, changed committee meetings from an afternoon meeting time to 11:30 AM and said that he changed to the 11:30 meeting time so people could attend the meetings on their "lunch hour." Give me a break!
Stancil and several commissioners are retired. Other commissioners own their own company or have high managerial positions that allow them to leave work and attend these 11:30 AM meetings without losing pay. Working citizens and taxpayers don't have the same scheduling luxury that these commissioners have. Stancil could change the meetings to a more taxpayer-friendly meeting time next month if he wanted to. Of course, other commissioners could also bring this up for public discussion if they wanted to see taxpayer-friendly meeting times.
The commission meets as a body once a month at 5:00 PM on the Thursday after the 3rd Monday. At commission meetings, it's usually just push-a-button, record the vote, and meeting adjourned.
Committees of the full commission meet on the second Monday of each month. Committees are where the real discussion, if there is any, takes place, before an item is sent to the full body. More time is allowed for public input at committee meetings. Committees should meet at or near 5:00 PM like the full commission does--a more taxpayer-friendly meeting time--instead of 11:30 AM meetings which effectively shut out the average working taxpayer.
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
October 6, 2009 City Agenda for Today Posted Yesterday: Work Session Includes Discussion of Meeting Times
I contacted the City yesterday morning when I saw that the agenda for today's meeting and work session had not been posted on the city website as is customary.
I received a reply e-mail yesterday afternoon that said that the agenda was usually posted on the Friday before the council meeting (Monday morning at the latest), that it was not posted last Friday due to an employee being out, and that it had just been posted. You can see the agenda that was posted yesterday here.
The work session agenda includes "Discussion of Council Meeting time." Charles Cook brought this up at a council meeting several weeks ago asking that meetings be held later than 4:00 PM so that more people can attend if they want to. Click here for Mr. Cook's request.
Hopefully, the council will decide to have regular council meetings and also Finance Committee meetings at a later time when more people can attend if they want to.
The Finance Committee meetings, which are currently held at 3:30 PM on certain Thursdays, are where real discussion and information sharing takes place, so it would be particularly important to have those at a time when the working city taxpayer/sewer fee payer can attend.
Finance Committee agendas need to be provided in advance of the meetings so people can decide whether an item of interest to them is on the agenda.
The discussion of later council meeting times will take place in "work session." Council meets in work session after adjournment of the regular council meeting, so you have to stick around if you are interested in work session discussion.
Click here, here, here, here, and here for last Thursday's Finance Committee items to see why Finance Committee meetings are especially important!
I received a reply e-mail yesterday afternoon that said that the agenda was usually posted on the Friday before the council meeting (Monday morning at the latest), that it was not posted last Friday due to an employee being out, and that it had just been posted. You can see the agenda that was posted yesterday here.
The work session agenda includes "Discussion of Council Meeting time." Charles Cook brought this up at a council meeting several weeks ago asking that meetings be held later than 4:00 PM so that more people can attend if they want to. Click here for Mr. Cook's request.
Hopefully, the council will decide to have regular council meetings and also Finance Committee meetings at a later time when more people can attend if they want to.
The Finance Committee meetings, which are currently held at 3:30 PM on certain Thursdays, are where real discussion and information sharing takes place, so it would be particularly important to have those at a time when the working city taxpayer/sewer fee payer can attend.
Finance Committee agendas need to be provided in advance of the meetings so people can decide whether an item of interest to them is on the agenda.
The discussion of later council meeting times will take place in "work session." Council meets in work session after adjournment of the regular council meeting, so you have to stick around if you are interested in work session discussion.
Click here, here, here, here, and here for last Thursday's Finance Committee items to see why Finance Committee meetings are especially important!
Monday, October 05, 2009
October 5, 2009 City Looking to Bones Seivers with Tennessee Municipal League Bond Fund for Help with Debt
In addition to the KIA building/community center that received little support and TDEC's potential fines of $175,000/$15M of sewer corrections, another item that came up at the October 1 Morristown Finance Committee meeting was debt.
I arrived a little after the 3:30 start time for the meeting and missed the first part of the presentation, but apparently Charles "Bones" Seivers of the Tennessee Municipal Bond League Fund (TMLBF) is putting together a loan package of around $7.8 million dollars for the City. Councilmembers said the figure could go up or down.
Several councilmembers commented that Bones was full of energy and spoke/delivered his presentation with the passion of a preacher.
For a couple of fairly recent statewide articles on Bones Seivers, click here and here. Or just "google" Charles "Bones" Seivers.
There is also an article here that states that Bones' TMLBF overcharged some cities for fees that were not due. According to the article, one of the cities that was overcharged was Morristown. The article names two other cities that were overcharged: (1) Nashville and (2) Murfreesboro, former Morristown City Administrator Jim Crumley's new employer!.
It's a small world.
I arrived a little after the 3:30 start time for the meeting and missed the first part of the presentation, but apparently Charles "Bones" Seivers of the Tennessee Municipal Bond League Fund (TMLBF) is putting together a loan package of around $7.8 million dollars for the City. Councilmembers said the figure could go up or down.
Several councilmembers commented that Bones was full of energy and spoke/delivered his presentation with the passion of a preacher.
For a couple of fairly recent statewide articles on Bones Seivers, click here and here. Or just "google" Charles "Bones" Seivers.
There is also an article here that states that Bones' TMLBF overcharged some cities for fees that were not due. According to the article, one of the cities that was overcharged was Morristown. The article names two other cities that were overcharged: (1) Nashville and (2) Murfreesboro, former Morristown City Administrator Jim Crumley's new employer!.
It's a small world.
Saturday, October 03, 2009
October 3, 2009 City Plans
In addition to the discussion about the KIA Property and Sewer/Wastewater problems, there was one other discussion at Thursday's City Finance Committee meeting that deserves mention.
Councilmember Kay Senter suggested that council meet to discuss where the city wants to be five years from now.
Gene Brooks responded: "Out of debt."
Councilmember Kay Senter suggested that council meet to discuss where the city wants to be five years from now.
Gene Brooks responded: "Out of debt."
Friday, October 02, 2009
October 2, 2009 Crumley and Wastewater Head Bryan Fowler Apparently Kept Sewer Problems and Repair Costs from the Mayor and Council
At yesterday's regular meeting of Morristown City Council's Finance Committee, several councilmembers grilled Wastewater Head Bryan Fowler about potential fines of up to $175,000 that have been levied against the City by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) Division of Water Pollution Control.
Fowler provided the council with copies of the TDEC Commissioner's Order. The Order cites and alleges numerous violations by the City of the Water Quality Control Act (T.C.A. 69-3-101 et seq) which, among other requirements, limits the volume or strength of wastes discharged into waters of the state.
The Order apparently stems from a December 17, 2008, Compliance Evaluation Inspection at the Morristown Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Here are some excerpts from the Order:
Self-reported violations showed "numerous" overflows of the collection system.
During the monitoring period of January 1, 2008-February 28, 2009, the City reported violations of its wastewater permit, "including 56 self-reported overflow events. The overflows constitute unpermitted discharges of untreated wastewater."
In addition, the City reported that the influent flow meter was "out of service" during that entire period. "Failure to have an operational flow meter is a violation of the permit."
The City provided explanations for the discharge violations citing "mechanical failures, blockages in the lines, and grease as the primary causes of the dry weather overflows. Inflow and infiltration of storm water... (were) cited as the primary causes of wet weather overflows."
"To date the (inflow) meter is still not functioning."
Fowler stated that some of the findings were not accurate and would be appealed. Fowler said that the $175,000 in fines can be avoided if the City spends a lot of money to address the list of problems and comes into compliance in a timely manner.
Councilmember Bob Garrett commented: "They don't fine you $175,000 if you're doing a good job."
Fowler said that he needs more manpower and equipment in his budget.
Councilmember Kay Senter said that council doesn't control his budget and that rates (revenues) are supposed to be set to cover costs (expenditures).
Fowler said that he presents a budget but sometimes things get cut.
Senter said that we (council) don't cut anything and asked who made cuts.
Fowler said "People over me."
Who was "over" Fowler? Former City Administrator Jim Crumley.
When were sewer rates and the sewer budget set? In June 2009 after a cost and rate study and presentation by Lamar Dunn & Associates of Knoxville. Click here. That rate study provided for a 3-year rate increase. Now the question is whether rates will have to go up even more.
Frank McGuffin and Bob Garrett asked that City Attorney Dick Jessee work with Lamar Dunn in handling the appeal of the TDEC Order. McGuffin and Garrett also want Dunn to look at the TDEC Order, estimate the cost of rehabbing the system to come into compliance, and then inform the council about any additional rate increase that might be needed--over and above the rate increases that passed less than four months ago.
Some Councilmembers then peppered Fowler with variations of the famous two-part Watergate question: What did you know and when did you know it?
Fowler said that "we" had been anticipating this Order. No doubt this anticipation stemmed from the fact that Fowler and his boss Crumley knew of the self-reported violations from January 1, 2008, through February 28, 2009, and they knew about the deterioration of the sewer system downtown and on the west end with aging and crumbling concrete and clay pipe.
Why were problems cited in the TDEC Order not reported to council in a timely manner? Fowler said he was following the directions of the lawyers. Kay asked, what attorneys? City attorney Dick Jessee? Fowler said "we" have several lawyers due to lawsuits.
Crumley's legacy of keeping information from the Mayor and Council is gradually being exposed. Those who worked under Crumley and kept information from council have no cover. Hopefully, the new council will continue to be assertive, ask for information and reports on a regular basis, and watch out for the ratepayers who are the victims of this mess.
The recent (June 2009) three-year sewer increases were hard to take. If yesterday's predictions by councilmembers are accurate, it looks like even higher sewer fees are just around the corner as the real condition of the sewer system and its operations are revealed.
Fowler provided the council with copies of the TDEC Commissioner's Order. The Order cites and alleges numerous violations by the City of the Water Quality Control Act (T.C.A. 69-3-101 et seq) which, among other requirements, limits the volume or strength of wastes discharged into waters of the state.
The Order apparently stems from a December 17, 2008, Compliance Evaluation Inspection at the Morristown Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Here are some excerpts from the Order:
Self-reported violations showed "numerous" overflows of the collection system.
During the monitoring period of January 1, 2008-February 28, 2009, the City reported violations of its wastewater permit, "including 56 self-reported overflow events. The overflows constitute unpermitted discharges of untreated wastewater."
In addition, the City reported that the influent flow meter was "out of service" during that entire period. "Failure to have an operational flow meter is a violation of the permit."
The City provided explanations for the discharge violations citing "mechanical failures, blockages in the lines, and grease as the primary causes of the dry weather overflows. Inflow and infiltration of storm water... (were) cited as the primary causes of wet weather overflows."
"To date the (inflow) meter is still not functioning."
Fowler stated that some of the findings were not accurate and would be appealed. Fowler said that the $175,000 in fines can be avoided if the City spends a lot of money to address the list of problems and comes into compliance in a timely manner.
Councilmember Bob Garrett commented: "They don't fine you $175,000 if you're doing a good job."
Fowler said that he needs more manpower and equipment in his budget.
Councilmember Kay Senter said that council doesn't control his budget and that rates (revenues) are supposed to be set to cover costs (expenditures).
Fowler said that he presents a budget but sometimes things get cut.
Senter said that we (council) don't cut anything and asked who made cuts.
Fowler said "People over me."
Who was "over" Fowler? Former City Administrator Jim Crumley.
When were sewer rates and the sewer budget set? In June 2009 after a cost and rate study and presentation by Lamar Dunn & Associates of Knoxville. Click here. That rate study provided for a 3-year rate increase. Now the question is whether rates will have to go up even more.
Frank McGuffin and Bob Garrett asked that City Attorney Dick Jessee work with Lamar Dunn in handling the appeal of the TDEC Order. McGuffin and Garrett also want Dunn to look at the TDEC Order, estimate the cost of rehabbing the system to come into compliance, and then inform the council about any additional rate increase that might be needed--over and above the rate increases that passed less than four months ago.
Some Councilmembers then peppered Fowler with variations of the famous two-part Watergate question: What did you know and when did you know it?
Fowler said that "we" had been anticipating this Order. No doubt this anticipation stemmed from the fact that Fowler and his boss Crumley knew of the self-reported violations from January 1, 2008, through February 28, 2009, and they knew about the deterioration of the sewer system downtown and on the west end with aging and crumbling concrete and clay pipe.
Why were problems cited in the TDEC Order not reported to council in a timely manner? Fowler said he was following the directions of the lawyers. Kay asked, what attorneys? City attorney Dick Jessee? Fowler said "we" have several lawyers due to lawsuits.
Crumley's legacy of keeping information from the Mayor and Council is gradually being exposed. Those who worked under Crumley and kept information from council have no cover. Hopefully, the new council will continue to be assertive, ask for information and reports on a regular basis, and watch out for the ratepayers who are the victims of this mess.
The recent (June 2009) three-year sewer increases were hard to take. If yesterday's predictions by councilmembers are accurate, it looks like even higher sewer fees are just around the corner as the real condition of the sewer system and its operations are revealed.
October 2, 2009 Purchase of KIA Property for Morristown Community Center Gets No Traction
At yesterday's meeting of the City Finance Committee, councilmember Kay Senter turned the presentation over to Realtor/County Commissioner Paul Lebel.
Lebel noted that a community center has been a topic of discussion in Morristown for a long time. He stated that the KIA property on West Andrew Johnson Highway is in foreclosure and this presents an opportunity to purchase the property at a reasonable price and develop it into a community center with good planning.
Lebel estimated that the purchase might be made for $2 or $2.5 Million dollars. He said that the City is the only entity that could do this, and if the community center project fell through, the city could remarket and sell the property.
Bob Garrett said that we don't need to take the property off the tax rolls by buying it out from under a private purchaser.
Doc Rooney said he didn't mind taking it away from private individuals, but he didn't think the location was a proper place for a community center.
Kay Senter said that it's not good for athletics at this time and that we're not in a position to buy it outright. During the discussion, Kay also mentioned the Encore Theatre, Theatre Guild, Chamber of Commerce, an Antique Car Museum, and weddings. She said she had talked to some private individuals who might be interested in a public-private partnership.
Gene Brooks said: Where's the money?
Interim Administrator Buddy Fielder mentioned annual operating costs of around $500,000-$600,000 if fully staffed and operational.
Lebel commented that if this is not done now, "I bet everyone in this room will be dead before it's done."
Frank McGuffin told Kay that if there is someone interested in a public-private partnership, we can revisit this then.
No recommendation was made. The property is scheduled for foreclosure sale on October 8, 2009.
Lebel noted that a community center has been a topic of discussion in Morristown for a long time. He stated that the KIA property on West Andrew Johnson Highway is in foreclosure and this presents an opportunity to purchase the property at a reasonable price and develop it into a community center with good planning.
Lebel estimated that the purchase might be made for $2 or $2.5 Million dollars. He said that the City is the only entity that could do this, and if the community center project fell through, the city could remarket and sell the property.
Bob Garrett said that we don't need to take the property off the tax rolls by buying it out from under a private purchaser.
Doc Rooney said he didn't mind taking it away from private individuals, but he didn't think the location was a proper place for a community center.
Kay Senter said that it's not good for athletics at this time and that we're not in a position to buy it outright. During the discussion, Kay also mentioned the Encore Theatre, Theatre Guild, Chamber of Commerce, an Antique Car Museum, and weddings. She said she had talked to some private individuals who might be interested in a public-private partnership.
Gene Brooks said: Where's the money?
Interim Administrator Buddy Fielder mentioned annual operating costs of around $500,000-$600,000 if fully staffed and operational.
Lebel commented that if this is not done now, "I bet everyone in this room will be dead before it's done."
Frank McGuffin told Kay that if there is someone interested in a public-private partnership, we can revisit this then.
No recommendation was made. The property is scheduled for foreclosure sale on October 8, 2009.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
September 30, 2009 City Finance Committee Meeting and the Tennessee Open Meetings Act
The regular meetings of the Morristown City Council are on the first and third Tuesdays of each month. The Finance Committee of City Council meets regularly on Thursdays prior to Tuesday council meetings.
Yesterday (Tuesday) there was a special called meeting of the Finance Committee. There was an announcement of yesterday's Finance meeting in the Tribune on Sunday (9/27) and Monday (9/28). The announcement said the meeting would take place at 4:00 in the City Chambers, the usual meeting place of the full Council. There was no information as to why a special Finance Committee meeting was being called and no information as to what would be discussed.
I called the interim Administrator's office around 4:00 pm on Monday afternoon to find out why there was a special Finance Committee meeting on a Tuesday and what was on the agenda for discussion or action. The administrative assistant, Nellie, said that she had been on vacation and that she had only found out about the special meeting by reading the notice in the paper just like I did. Nellie didn't know what was on the agenda and didn't know if any packets or information had been given to the Finance Committee members. Interim Administrator Buddy Fielder was not there and did not have voicemail to get messages.
I went to City Hall yesterday and walked over to the City Chambers to attend the meeting but found that the council meeting room was closed. It turned out that the meeting had been moved without announcement to the "mayor's conference room" near the Mayor's and Interim City Administrator's offices. Just before 4:00 pm, the new Finance Committee chair Frank McGuffin passed out a lengthy agenda. Click on the image above to see a copy of the agenda.
The first item on the agenda was the KIA property next to the Golden Corral on the West A.J. Hwy. It is my understanding that Councilwoman Kay Senter, various city officials, Chamber officials, Tribune publisher Jack Fishman, and "others" have already met in groups and have toured the KIA building. The KIA property is in foreclosure, and apparently some people have been discussing a public-private partnership to purchase the building for a future community center and other uses.
As it turned out yesterday, there was very little discussion about the KIA property or any other item on the agenda.
There are laws in Tennessee covering Open Meetings, and these were enacted to ensure openness and transparency in the governmental process at every step of the way. I talked to Finance Committee Chair Frank McGuffin privately right before the meeting about the Open Meetings Act. Since this meeting was not a regular previously scheduled Thursday meeting, it appears to fall under the notice requirements for special called meetings.
I showed Frank an unpublished opinion of the Tennessee Court of Appeals which also cites a published opinion regarding notice requirements for special called meetings. The main requirement for special called meetings is notice to the public of what is to be discussed, so the public can decide if this special matter concerns something in which they are interested.
Frank was polite but did not want to re-schedule the meeting. Instead, he chose to call the meeting to order and proceeded to announce the first item on the agenda (KIA property).
I then asked and was allowed to present to the full Finance Committee and other city council members in attendance the questions that I had initially raised privately with Frank. As concisely as possible, I explained that special called meetings are called to deal with specific items--most often items that can't wait for a regular meeting--and that these items should be announced in advance so that the public can decide whether the special issues to be discussed or considered are such that they wish to attend.
Although Kay Senter clearly wanted to continue with the meeting, she did acknowledge that typically special called meetings do have a specific agenda and the council can only discuss what is on the agenda for the special meeting. The agenda for yesterday's meeting was drawn up at the last minute and was only handed out to council and those in attendance right before the 4:00 meeting time. Neither the public nor the full council knew the topics that were to be discussed and considered at this special meeting in advance of the meeting.
Of course, the Clintonesque excuses were then bandied about. Mayor Barile said the meeting was to be primarily about the KIA property, but she had added several items at the last minute. Mayor Barile said that the document that had just been passed out-- the one entitled "Finance Committee Agenda"--wasn't exactly an agenda. It was mostly just her thoughts.
Frank McGuffin and the others admitted that regular Finance Committee meetings take place on Thursdays, but Interim City Administrator Buddy Fielder argued that this Tuesday meeting wasn't a "special called" Finance Committee meeting, it was just an "additional" meeting of the Finance Committee. Some wondered aloud, if no votes are taken at the meeting then that that would take care of any Open Meetings Act problems.
When the Clintonesque talk begins at any public meeting, you cringe.
This is not a regular previously announced Thursday Finance Committee meeting, but it's not a special meeting either. [OK, so what is it? A semi-regular or semi-special meeting?]
Even though this document that we just passed out says "Finance Committee Agenda" and lists what we are going to discuss and in what order, it's not really an agenda, it's mostly just some "thoughts." [OK, so if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and even says it's a duck, it's not really a duck?]
If we don't take a vote, do we still have to worry about whether it's a meeting or a special meeting with additional notice requirements to the public per case law. [If there is discussion and deliberation of an item of public business or an item that will come before the governing body, then it is a meeting and adequate public notice applies. If the meeting takes place on a day/date (Tuesday) other than the day/date previously announced (Thursday), it requires a real stretch to say that it is somehow not a special called meeting and thus does not fall within the more specific notice requirements for called meetings.]
MTAS, upon whom the city frequently relies for legal opinions, has provided guidance on special called meetings and has included a reference to the unpublished opinion [Englewood Citizens] that I discussed with Frank and mentioned in my comments to the Finance Committee and other councilmembers. Click here to see the MTAS opinion.
There was notice of the Finance Committee meeting. Under the three-prong Englewood test cited by MTAS, there would be a question as to whether two-days notice was adequate public notice. In the case of a special called meeting, there would be a serious question as to whether the public was adequately informed of the public business to be discussed or deliberated upon at the special meeting. In fact, since the "agenda" was only passed out to Finance Committee members at the meeting, there is a serious question as to whether the Finance Committee itself was provided with adequate notice of items to be discussed or considered at the special meeting.
NOTE 1: The city's website never provided notice of yesterday's Finance Committee meeting. As of several days ago and today, the city's website provides notice of the council meeting on 9/15; the Solid Waste Board meeting on 9/18; and the regular Finance Committee meeting on October 1 at 3:30. No website mention was ever provided of the 9/29 special Finance Committee meeting.
NOTE 2: It is my understanding that the items on the 9/29/09 agenda (shown above) will be considered at tomorrow's (10/1/09) regular Finance Committee meeting. Tomorrow's meeting, however, will start at Thursday's regularly scheduled time of 3:30 pm!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
