December 31, 2009 Happy New Year 2010!!

On this New Year's Eve, I wish a very Happy New Year to all readers.

And starting tomorrow.....we all have to remember to write or type 2010 on checks, correspondence, and forms---and blog posts!  

December 24, 2009 Merry Christmas

On Christmas Eve, I wish to all a very Merry Christmas!

One of my favorite Christmas songs is The Little Drummer Boy.

The Little Drummer Boy and many other Christmas favorites (lyrics and videos) can found by clicking here.

THE LITTLE DRUMMER BOY

Come they told me
Pa rum pum pum pum

A new born King to see
Pa rum pum pum pum

Our finest gifts we bring
Pa rum pum pum pum

To lay before the King
Pa rum pum pum pum,
rum pum pum pum,
rum pum pum pum

So to honor Him
Pa rum pum pum pum
When we come

Little baby
Pa rum pum pum pum

I am a poor boy too
Pa rum pum pum pum

I have no gift to bring
Pa rum pum pum pum

That's fit to give our King
Pa rum pum pum pum,
rum pum pum pum,
rum pum pum pum

Shall I play for you
Pa rum pum pum pum
On my drum

Mary nodded
Pa rum pum pum pum

The ox and lamb kept time
Pa rum pum pum pum

I played my drum for Him
Pa rum pum pum pum

I played my best for Him
Pa rum pum pum pum,
rum pum pum pum,
rum pum pum pum

Then He smiled at me
Pa rum pum pum pum

Me and my drum...

December 22, 2009 Chief Justice Holder Gets Hacked (Almost)

For martial arts fans --and the just plain curious--click on the link below to see a video of Chief Justice Janice Holder, Tennessee Supreme Court, lying on a table while a martial arts instructor slices a bell pepper with a sword. 

Oh, I forgot to mention that the bell pepper in question is sitting on top of the Chief Justice's stomach...and the martial arts expert is blindfolded!

Click here to read the story and see the video.

December 19, 2009 Lynn Wolfe Lawsuit Against Sheriff Esco Jarnigan Goes Forward

The long-running Lynn Wolfe v. Esco Jarnigan lawsuit is poised to proceed.  According to an article in the Knoxville News-Sentinel (click here), the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals recently turned aside Jarnigan's efforts to have the entire case tossed out before a trial.

The News-Sentinel articles often contain links to court documents. Magistrate Dennis Inman's memorandum and order is here.  The 6th Circuit's opinion is here.

December 19, 2009 Lawyer: Yes, I Bit Off Part of a Man's Nose. No, I Didn't Swallow It

A Memphis lawyer is being sued for $5 Million dollars for biting off part of a man's nose. Memphis attorney Mark Lambert admits to biting off part of the nose of Greg Herbers. Lambert denies swallowing it. Lambert is headed for legal stardom a la ear-biting heavyweight boxer Mike Tyson.

The incident occurred as part of an altercation that began in a men's restroom at a popular Memphis restaurant.

Herbers' complaint alleges that two individuals were occupying a restroom stall talking to Lambert while Lambert used a urinal. Herbers asked the two men to exit the stall since they were not using the toilet. That request precipitated a confrontation with Lambert who has admitted to biting off a part of Herbers nose but now claims self-defense.  

No point in describing this any further or commenting. The story is here.  Unbelievable.

December 16, 2009 City Council Votes 5-2 To Proceed with ETPC Land Acquisition

In a tense meeting yesterday where there was at least some actual "public" discussion by councilmembers of an issue before the city council, the council voted 5-2 to proceed with appraisals and acquisition of land in the East Tennessee Progress Center (ETPC).

The head of the Industrial Board, R. Jack Fishman, was not present at this meeting. Previously, he had spoken twice to council about this land acquisition--once in a work session and once in a Finance Committee meeting held in a small conference room near the Mayor's office. Fishman did not choose to appear at yesterday's regular city council meeting to present the Industrial Board's case or to field questions about the proposal.

In light of the city's pathetic financial condition and the recent cutting of hours of city employees, Councilmember Gene Brooks asked where the money would come from for the appraisals and land acquisition. [The city was broke as of 6/30/08 and only recently paid back a $2.5 Million loan from its sewer fund that had helped cover up its dire financial status]. 

Mayor Barile mentioned that the city had recently sold some of its property to MUS (Morristown Utility Systems). She said that money could be used to help pay for the land acquisition. The property she was referring to was some acreage on Sulphur Springs Road that the city had acquired years ago to erect a public works facility.  Because of the city's financial condition, the Mayor negotiated a deal for MUS to purchase that property from the city for just over $300,000. 

Despite offering her assurances that the $300,000 could be used, the Mayor did not state where the additional $1 Million+ would come from for appraisal costs, land acquisition costs, and possible court battles if the city decides to invoke eminent domain on property owners who do not want to sell at all or who do not want to sell for the price that the City/Industrial Board/Jack Fishman offer.

More will follow in coming posts.

December 11, 2009 City Finance Committee Puts ETPC Land Acquisition by Purchase or by Eminent Domain on December 15 Agenda

The Finance Committee of the City of Morristown met at 3:30 PM yesterday in the little conference room near the City Administrator's office.  The room---which can only hold about 10-12 people comfortably--was full. The Mayor and councilmembers were seated around the table with Jack Fishman, Bobby Moore (Tribune reporter and employee of Jack Fishman), and a few department heads. Frank McGuffin, chair of the Finance Committee, was late in arriving.  Councilmember Kay Senter was not present. 

A few people managed to find a seat inside the room, others stood inside the room, and still others, including some city department heads and sewer consultant Lamar Dunn, stood in the two doorways or in the hallway.

[Despite the larger council chambers right next door and a large community room upstairs in the multimillion dollar City Center, the Finance Committee meets in a cramped conference room that is probably not larger and is likely smaller than the City Administrator's office. This conference room is also a secluded meeting place for unannounced meetings of the Mayor and Councilmembers to discuss and deliberate on public business privately prior to walking into the council chambers to vote, but that is a separate issue that I will address more fully in the coming weeks.]

Jack Fishman, who is the longtime head of the Industrial Development Board and President of the company that owns the local newspaper (the Citizen Tribune), wants the City to go ahead and approve acquisition of privately held land in the East Tennessee Progress Center (ETPC). 

Click here to see the previous post about the private land that Fishman wants the city to purchase from willing owners or take by force through eminent domain from any who don't want to sell their land.

Fishman said that he recently obtained local employment figures for 2002 and 2009 from the state employment office.  He said that these figures show a "startling" loss of 5,000 local manufacturing jobs during that time, explaining that there were about 13,000 manufacturing jobs in the area in 2002 and in 2009 there are just over 8,000.  Most people are not startled by that figure. Most people have known about and have been concerned about the exodus of local manufacturing plants to Mexico and China for a long time.  Many of these same people have lost their jobs because of the "sucking sound" of jobs leaving this country for cheap labor, less regulation, and lower taxes.

Fishman said, "Our situation is not good." He added that the Industrial Board had been through a 2-year "hiatus" of no prospects.  Apparently, there are now two new industrial prospects (1 foreign company and 1 domestic company) along with a possible plant expansion of an existing industry.  Fishman used code words for the two new prospects that have completed preliminary surveys.  He said that they each would require about a 90-acre site if they eventually decide to locate here. He added that Thom Robinson, director of the Chamber, was not present at the Finance meeting because he was working with a prospect and "I sent him to 'bow'."

[Fishman added that most companies start by selecting about five states and then checking out four locations in each of those 5 states. The company then does a preliminary evaluation of those 20 sites, conducts additional research, narrows the choices down, and, of course, makes site visits before making a selection.]

A map of the Master Plan for the ETPC was flashed on the screen.  Randy Corlew, engineer for the Industrial Board, discussed the Master Plan. Fishman said that he doesn't want to invite industry to our community if "I don't have a place to put them." 

Claude Jinks said that he can't believe what has happened in the past two years.

Mayor Barile said we can see the problems in the increase of people at the Daily Bread.

Bob Garrett said, "Put it on the agenda." Then he said (jokingly), "I want to thank Mr. Fishman for coming and bowing to us."

Fishman said the Industrial Board could probably have an appraiser by February. The appraiser will determine Fair Market Value for the property, an offer will be made, and then the purchase/sale will "close."  Neither the Mayor nor any councilmember asked what happens if a private property owner does not want to sell. Of course, they already know that Fishman's answer to that question would be--- "Take it" through eminent domain. They also already know that Fishman has prepared an ordinance for them to pass that provides for just that-- "taking" the property of anyone who does not want to sell through eminent domain proceedings.

If eminent domain is used, this could end up being a negative for industrial prospects. Often new industry is hesitant to come and locate on land that has been taken from its owners agains their will. If there are several industrial locations available, most companies would prefer to locate on land that has been developed without the ill-will created by the use of eminent domain.
In light of recent city cutbacks of employee hours and other financial concerns, Gene Brooks asked Fishman how the city could pay for the private land that is currently appraised at about $1.3 Million.

Fishman first said that he is not the Finance Director for the city. Then he added that he would recommend  borrowing the money through the issuance of bond anticipation notes over the 3-year phased acquisition period.

Perhaps Fishman should have stayed to hear more about the city's situation, but he left before the city's sewer meltdown was discussed.

December 7, 2009 Pearl Harbor Day

Pearl Harbor Day. December 7, 1941. 
The day after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt inspired the nation with a moving speech before Congress. See and hear the speech here.

The News-Sentinel has an article on an 86-year old man who enlisted in the navy as a teenager just five months prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor. On December 7, 1941, Ed Johann was serving as a seaman, ferrying passengers to and from the USS Solace, a hospital ship moored at Pearl Harbor. He saw planes coming toward the harbor and thought they were American planes conducting drills. Johann only realized that they were Japanese planes when the explosions began and the screams of American sailors could he heard.  Johann will return to Pearl Harbor for the first time today.

December 5, 2009 Public Notice: City Announces Three Different Early Closing Times on Fridays

According to a new public notice just a couple of days ago in the Tribune, the City of Morristown now has three different early closing times on Fridays.                                                                                       Click on the notice at left to enlarge. The City Center will close early at 3:30 PM on Fridays. The Public Works Department will close early at 2:30 PM on Fridays. The Parks and Recreation Department will close early at 4:00 PM on Fridays.                            

December 3, 2009 City Council Meeting: Sewergate To Cover-up Bankruptcygate?

In a previous post (click here), I mentioned the City of Morristown's illegal transfer/loan of $2.5 MILLION dollars from the city's sewer fund to the city's general fund in the fiscal year ending 6/30/08. Former City Administrator Jim Crumley apparently authorized the transfer to cover up the "poor" cash situation of the general fund.

The city's auditor is Craine, Thompson & Jones. Terry Winstead of CTJ (click on e-mail below) states that Tom Jones of CTJ was present in a meeting when Crumley authorized the transfer but that CTJ's auditing "independence" and objectivity were not lost because while Jones knew about the entry, he (Jones) didn't physically  make the entry himself.   So Jones was in the meeting where the entry was authorized. Jones then completed his audit of the city's books and recorded the $2.5 MILLION switcheroo as an inter-fund loan.  BUT Jones did not report that this $2.5 Million "inter-fund loan" had not been approved by council (as is required). AND Jones did not report that this $2.5 Million "loan" had not been approved by the State Comptroller's Director of Local Finance (as is required).

At left is Winstead's e-mail to Wampler describing how the $2.5 Million "entry" for fiscal year 2008 came about and then disavowing any direct involvement by auditor Tom Jones-- Jones just happened to be there when the entry was authorized.  On the November 2009 e-mail, there is also a written notation by Wampler stating that Dynise (Robertson), the city's finance director, informed Wampler that the $2.5 Million 2008 sewer to general fund transfer was "transferred back last week."  No mention of who authorized the transfer-back or why the transfer-back, like the initial transfer, did not go through council.

The scariest part of the note is Wampler's second statement: "We will have to transfer most of that money back to the General Fund before the end of the fisical (sic) year."   Why? To cover up a poor financial situation again?  After the whopping property tax increase of 2007, after the sales tax increase of 2008, and after red light cameras were installed for even more revenue, is Wampler's comment a warning that the city may still not have enough funds for general government operations at the end of FY 2010 (6/30/10) and will somehow need another sewer loan as a cushion?

At city council yesterday, Charles Cook asked Mayor Barile if she knew about this $2.5 Million sewer fund to general fund transfer in 2008. She said she didn't recall being told at the time.

Cook then passed out an e-mail that I had received from the Director of Municipal Audit (Dennis Dycus) in the State Comptroller's office in response to questions about (1) whether a temporary transfer of money from the sewer fund to the general fund could be made (no) and (2) how an inter-fund loan from sewer to general fund should be handled (carefully).  [Cook had blacked out my name on the e-mail so the city officials could concentrate on the contents of the e-mail itself.  By now, the Mayor and/or some members of the council or others have probably called up the state to find out who was asking questions when in reality it is the Mayor and the councilmembers who should have been asking this and many more questions all along.]

Mr. Dycus, Director of Municipal Audit, simply confirmed the obvious. There has to be local approval of an inter-fund loan by the city council. Then the loan is sent to the Division of Local Finance in the State Comptroller's Office for approval.  Dycus twice notes that any loan of this type has to be an arms-length business transaction and that the going rate of interest has to be paid by the fund that is borrowing the money. In the city's case, the general fund (largely funded by taxes) borrowed the money and should have paid interest to the sewer fund (largely paid by ratepayers) that made the $2.5 Million loan. Click on the e-mail below to enlarge.

Because of the illegalities of the handling of the funds transfer/loan and because the whole thing was cleverly orchestrated to cover-up the dire (essentially bankrupt) financial situation of the city's general government fund, Cook referred to this matter as "sewergate."  Maybe it was "sewergate" to cover up Morristown's "bankruptcygate."

Now click again and read Wampler's last statement in his hand-written note on Winstead's e-mail. "I will develop a fund transfer policy as soon as I can."  Transfers are not allowed.  No need for a transfer policy.

An inter-fund loan from sewer to general fund can be made, BUT it must be an arms-length transaction that is first passed by the council and then approved by the state. The Dycus e-mail pretty much outlines the procedures for such an inter-fund loan. Maybe the city should consider following state law as its inter-fund loan policy!

Of course, maybe the city would not have to borrow money from its sewer fund at all if the Mayor and councilmembers managed the taxpayers' money responsibly and didn't pass every nice-sounding spending proposal that comes around plus borrow and spend every penny that they can get their hands on.

Mr. Cook pointed out to the Mayor and Council that they could and should have known about the $2.5 million switcheroo (my word) if they had ever actually looked at the 2008 audit.  He also pointed out that they could and should have known that the city's 2008 general fund balance of $3,431.536.00 was all smoke and mirrors (my words) if they had actually looked at the audit. 

The $3,431,536.00 fund balance was largely a charade, but you had to ask questions or you had to be paying attention to see the charade.  Every penny of the 2008 "fund balance/rainy day fund" of $3,431,536.00 was  reserved or set aside (1) to pay back the sewer loan ($2,500,000.00), (2) to pay existing contracts ($995,419.00), and (3) to pay other bills owed by the city ($135,617.00). 

Real available general fund balance/rainy day fund as of 6/30/08. Zero!

Now how many times do you reach the end of the year (December 31) and your debts and bills are EXACTLY, down to the penny, what is in your checking account (fund balance) at that point in time?

Yet, that's what the city's 2008 audit would have the taxpayers believe. The audit suggests that the city's checking account (fund balance) had EXACTLY $3,431,536.00 in it as of 6/30/08 and that the city's current debts and bills just happened to total EXACTLY $3,431,536.00 as of 6/30/08.  An unbelievable coincidence? Smoke and mirrors? Or plain old local hoodoo economics?

December 2, 2009 The Draft Contract for City Administrator Anthony Cox

The first image (left) is the first page of a 7-page draft of the proposed city administrator's contract that was approved yesterday at City Council. The other pages (2-7) of the draft contract are in order at the end of the blog text.  You can click on each image to enlarge it for reading.

At yesterday's council meeting, the "contract" was approved without a mention of the terms of the contract by the Mayor or any councilmember.  Click here for my earlier post about council's lack of "public" discussion in the "public" meeting to consider this contract ("public" business).

Page 1 is a general recital of the city's desire to employ Cox.  The 2nd page is Cox' Compensation (salary), Benefits, Vacation and Sick Leave. Page 3 is Retirement (Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System and ICMA Retirement (International City and County Management Association) and General Business Expenses.

Page 4 includes Termination and Severance. Page 5 is Resignation, Outside Activities, Moving and Relocation Expenses, and Indemnification. Page 6 includes Bonding, Other Terms, and General Provisions.  Page 7 is for the signature of the parties.

While the council did not "publicly" discuss the salary or benefits yesterday, you can view a draft contract and its terms on this blog, and you can read about most of the terms in today's Tribune article by Bob Moore.  Moore did not get the salary and benefits information for his article during the "public" portion of the council meeting because there was no discussion of those terms during the "public" meeting. Moore got his information from City attorney Dick Jessee who gave Moore a copy of a draft contract with handwritten notes made by Jessee. The link to Moore's article is here. But jump on it fast because the Tribune usually disables its links quickly.

December 2, 2009 Council Approves New Administrator's Contract But Never Mentions a Salary Amount or Benefits during the "Public" Discussion of "Public" Business at a "Public" Meeting

At yesterday's public meeting, the Mayor and City Council passed an employment contract to forward to Anthony Cox, the city-administrator select, for his consideration.

During the "public" discussion and deliberation of the contract, Mayor Barile and council seemed nervous. 

It seemed like they were talking in some kind of special, private code.

In most contract discussions, the contract amount is mentioned. Not so during yesterday's "public" discussion of the new administrator's contract.

In most contract discussions, there is discussion of other payments (like benefits, perks, car allowances, pre-negotiated severance terms). Not so during yesterday's "public" discussion of the new administrator's contract.

"Public" discussion of "public" business at a "public" meeting" has not exactly been a hallmark of city government lately.  Yesterday's "public" discussion of "public" business was unusual and that is putting it mildly.

November 29, 2009 Mayor Barile and Councilman Frank McGuffin "Fast-Track" Contract with New City Administrator

The City Council Agenda is here. It lists the contract with the new city administrator as one of the items [IX (1)] for consideration at the council's 4:00 PM meeting at the City Center on Tuesday, December 1.

IX (1). Approval of an employment contract with Anthony Cox to serve as city administrator.

Mr. Cox was selected on November 24, 2009, at a special called meeting of the council at 11:30 AM. Mayor Barile was set to negotiate the contract with Cox. When a councilmember suggested that a councilperson be put on the negotiating team, Barile appointed Frank McGuffin to help her. 

Let's see. Public "meet-and-greet" of administrator candidates and council interviews on Thursday (11/19) and Friday (11/20).  Selection made on Tuesday (11/24), Thanksgiving on Thursday (11/26), and the employment contract is already on the council's agenda on the city website by Friday (11/27). 

Barile and McGuffin put this contract on the fast-track. Of course, Pat Hardy of MTAS, who thinks that Jim Crumley is an excellent administrator, has already given the council some money guidelines and other contract suggestions.

Hopefully, Barile and Frank McGuffin and City Attorney Dick Jessee (who is Frank's uncle) have crafted a contract that adequately protects the city from a repeat of the situation which arose with Crumley.

Hopefully, this contract will provide that in the event that it is discovered--shortly AFTER termination for cause or shortly AFTER voluntary resignation or retirement--that the city administrator violated state law, the city charter, or local ordinances in the conduct of his office, then he/she must pay back to the city all monies and the monetary value of all benefits paid to or for him/her as part of a contractual or negotiated severance package.

The council thought Crumley was absolutely wonderful when he was selected about eight years ago, and Crumley may have performed satisfactorily for a time.  Some of the councilmembers who selected Crumley are still on the council today. If a provision as noted above had been included in Crumley's contract or in the negotiated severance package, it might have allowed the city to get back some or all of the $145,000+ severance package that Crumley was given. Click here.

Cox is the council's pack for city administrator. He appears to have the financial qualifications for the position, and he very well may be the excellent administrator that the city really needs at this point. 

After the Crumley fiasco, however, the employment contract with the city administrator (no matter who it is) should provide protection to the city as well as to the administrator in the event that something goes wrong down the road--and in the event that illegal conduct in office is discovered shortly after termination/ resignation.

With Crumley, it came out shortly AFTER he left office that he apparently violated the law in the conduct of his office. The severance money, however, had apparently already been paid by then, and neither the original employment contract nor the negotiated severance contract provided a way to get such payments back or terminate benefits in the event that illegal actions were discovered shortly AFTER any termination or resignation/retirement.

The Mayor and McGuffin---and the entire council---are charged with looking out for the city in a business-like manner in drawing city contracts. Once burned, twice shy. This is a contract that should be carefully prepared, read by all councilmembers, and thoughtfully questioned and considered before a vote is cast.

November 26, 2009 Happy Thanksgiving

Happy Thanksgiving to All.

November 25, 2009 Anthony Cox Selected as New City Administrator

Not surprisingly, Anthony Cox of Radford, Virginia was named the new Morristown "city administrator-select" at yesterday's 11:30 AM special called meeting of council. Wonder how many working taxpayers were able to leave work and make it to that meeting?

Pat Hardy of MTAS and Interim City Administrator Lynn Wampler had presented the council with a slate of four finalists from which to select a new city administrator to replace the "retired" Jim Crumley.

Two of the four finalists (Angie Carrier of White House, TN and Jody Baltz of Tullahoma, TN) were placed among the final four at the last-minute because of their "close acquaintance" with MTAS' Pat Hardy and Interim City Administrator Lynn Wampler. Although Baltz met the advertised qualifications for the job, selection of Carrier or Baltz would have raised eyebrows since apparently both got an automatic pass to the final four--with no telephone interview--based on MTAS connections.

Of the two who went through the entire process and who actually interviewed with Wampler prior to their inclusion as finalists (Anthony Cox and James Payne), Cox emerged the winner. 

Cox has many tasks before him--chief of which is cleaning up the financial mess left by Crumley and company.  Hopefully, the Mayor and Councilmembers are now ready to pay attention and  be active  participants in the operation of city government instead of being a rubberstamp.

Regardless of who is City Administrator, the buck always starts and stops with the Mayor and City Council.

The Mayor and Council appoint an administrator, but they can't just walk away at that point and give free rein to that person, no matter who it is.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The absolute power given to Crumley led to the current financial debacle at the City Center with a huge assist by a Mayor and Council who fiddled while Morristown burned.

Government at all levels should be a system of checks-and-balances. The Administrator is "selected" to be the day-to-day point man at the City Center, but the "elected" Mayor and Council are the people's   representatives in setting policy and acting as a check-and-balance on the power given to the administrator.

Morristown needs an honest administrator who will operate city government like an open book and in a financially responsible manner. Morristown needs honest budgeting without the inflated revenue projections, bloated spending, and excessive borrowing/debt of the past.  
 
Anthony Cox has a huge task before him. 

He can't go wrong by relying on the two most basic tried-and-true financial principles:  Don't spend more than you take in and realize that excessive debt will cripple and enslave you.

At an ever-increasing pace over the past few years, City officials spent more than they took in, created wish lists, and then spent and borrowed more. 

Of course, when you get to spend OPM (other people's money), it is easy to come up with $100 million dollar wish lists and all kinds of nifty spending ideas (e.g., brick-paving machines). It's also easy to go deeper and deeper into debt when you get to use OPM to pay that debt back. It's easy to set up perks for friends and associates when OPM pays it all. It's easy to sign no-bid contracts and work out sweetheart deals when OPM picks up the tab.  It's easy to buy the latest, fanciest, and chromiest vehicles when OPM pays for them and the gas, too.  Two-million dollar cost overrun (Veterans Parkway)? Not a problem when OPM pays it.
.   
The citizens are watching their government and their government officials more closely than ever before--not just in Morristown and Hamblen County but in cities and counties all across the nation. 

OPM belongs to the citizens and taxpayers. It is not free money. It is not for frivolous, pet projects.  It is not to be wasted.  It is not for excessive spending or excessive borrowing.

November 24, 2009 No Public Forum at Today's "Special Called" Meeting of City Council

As mentioned in an earlier post, the City Council is having a special called meeting at 11:30 AM.

The announcement of the meeting in Sunday's paper said that there were only two items on today's agenda:

1) Hiring a City Administrator;and
2) A Bond Anticipation Note in the amount of $950,000 for the purchase of the property on North Liberty Hill Road for the new Public Works Complex.

If you check the city's website, the agenda (click here) shows a third agenda item (Installation of fire hydrants in Witt area) that was not mentioned in the newspaper.

Significantly, today's agenda does not list a public forum where the public is given the opportunity to speak to council. The agendas for Council's regular meetings provide the public with an opportunity to speak near the beginning of the meeting. Today's special called meeting, however, does not include a public forum.

It looks like the council and interim administrator not only called this special meeting for 11:30 AM to keep the working taxpayer from being able to attend but also to keep anyone who might be able to attend (retired or off work today) from speaking about items on the agenda.

The process of naming an administrator has had its own problems--see the post here on the last-minute addition of two "acquaintances" of MTAS' Pat Hardy and Interim Administrator Wampler as automatic finalists.

Now the special called meeting is set for 11:30 AM to make sure that the public can't attend and, if the public should somehow be able to attend, the special called meeting prevents them from speaking 

Not exactly a showcase for openness and transparency.

[At its regular meetings, the Mayor and Council at least go through the motions of allowing the public to speak and act like they are listening.  At today's meeting, they don't want to hear the public!]

November 22, 2009 City Center Closing at 3:30 PM on Fridays

[UPDATED] There was an announcement in today's Sunday paper that the City Center would be closing at 3:30 PM on Fridays beginning December 4.

Now, if you had a business that served the public, would you shut your business down completely for 1-1/2 hours on Friday afternoons or would you rotate employee shifts slightly so that you could be open everyday as usual until 5:00?

Well, if you had a business and had to cut back on employee hours but still truly wanted to serve the public, you would have some people come in and work on Friday from 8-2:30 and others would be scheduled to come in and work on Friday from 10:30-5. That way you are open from 8-5 as usual and those customers who can't get in by 3:30 can still be accommodated.

But if you are Morristown city government, you just shut everything down completely for 1-1/2 hours on Friday afternoon. This decision shows that the city has little concern for the taxpaying public and does not want to apply logic and business-sense to keep the city operating during normal hours with just a slight change in work shifts.

Is this part of a plan to get people to accept another round of increases in fees and taxes? 

A complete and detailed examination of the city budget, city revenue, and city expenditures is desperately needed.

For years and years, the Mayor and Councilmembers have relied on inflated revenue projections and have passed an inflated spending plan and then walked away allowing the City Administrator to switch money around and pretty much spend all the money however he wanted.

Maybe the next newspaper announcement will be that the Mayor and Councilmembers will be meeting at a very quiet City Center on Friday afternoons at 3:30 PM to figure out what has been going on and to set up a system of checks and balances for real accountability in the future.

November 22, 2009 City Council Special Meeting on November 24 at 11:30 AM (For the Convenience of all Citizens? Not!)

The City Council is having a special meeting on November 24, 2009, at 11:30 AM at the City Center to:

1) Name a new city administrator; and
2) Consider a bond anticipation note in the amount of $950,000 for the purchase of the Roy Widener property on N. Liberty Hill Road.

A very important decision--selecting a new city administrator--is on the agenda. Setting this meeting for 11:30 AM shows that the Mayor and many councilmembers are happy to exclude the working and taxpaying public from being able to participate or observe the handling of public business.

[Of course, the Mayor and most councilmembers have already shown that they are not interested in having any meetings at a time that is convenient for the public.  See a prior post on council meeting times here.]

One reason for the inconvenient 11:30 AM meeting time could be questions that have arisen surrounding how the last two finalists (Angie Carrier and Jody Baltz) for the city administrator position were selected.

The newpaper hinted at these questions in the last two paragraphs of a November 19 article when Bob Moore reported:  "Interim Morristown City Administrator Lynn Wampler and Pat Hardy, a Municipal Technical Advisory Service (MTAS) consultant, narrowed the (city administrator) field from more than 80 applicants to the final four. Baltz and Carrier, acquaintances of Wampler and Hardy, were added as last-minute entries into the city administrator selection process." 

The normal process of application followed by interview of potential finalists was apparently circumvented with the addition of Baltz and Carrier as finalists despite not being interviewed by phone as were other finalists.

Carrier's situation is particularly troubling. It must be very important to be "an acquaintance" of certain people when you can waltz into the final four with submission of a last-minute resume, no phone interview, and an admission that you are not directly involved in formulating budgets and that you have no experience in industrial recruitment because your city (White House, TN) is primarily a bedroom community for people who work in Nashville. [Bob Moore's November 20 article in the Tribune.]

Strangely, I didn't see any quote in Bob Moore's article from Mayor Barile, other councilmembers, Wampler, or Hardy about the passes given to Baltz and Carrier. Surely, Bob asked for comment about failure to follow procedures in connection with Carrier and Baltz.  Carrier, as I understand, is a very personable individual. Baltz has the financial expertise required for the job, but he, unfortunately, appears to have received an automatic pass to the final four just on the basis of being an "acquaintance" of Wampler and Hardy. 

Contrast the automatic selection of Carrier and Baltz as finalists with the Mayor's comments a few weeks ago rejecting any further consideration of city department head Jay Moore's application and refusing to give Moore an interview because he did not meet the advertised budgeting and financial "requirements" for the job.  

If Mr. Moore had just been an "acquaintance" of Wampler and Hardy, perhaps he, too, could have waltzed into the final four without meeting the financial requirements and without having an interview.

On the other hand, one has to wonder about the Mayor's definition of financial requirements. She seemed to think that the departed Jim Crumley was the financial bomb and that the city would be lost without his presence.

Now that Crumley's behind-the-scenes maneuvers are coming out, what does she think of Crumley's illegal transfer of $2.5 Million from the sewer fund to the general fund? 

What does she think of the contract Crumley signed to lease the Roy Widener property on N. Liberty Hill Road--a contract that Mr. Wampler looked at and saw for what it was--a bad lease for the city. Now the City is having to issue $950,000 in bonds--more debt--to purchase the property and get out of additional lease payments with the minimum of financial damage.  Did she see and approve that contract?

What do she and councilmembers think of Crumley and Janish's 09-10 budget--a budget that the Mayor voted for about 4 or 5 months ago and that is now falling apart around her and around the city employees.  Department heads were required to make cuts. Did the Mayor and council take a 4% cut? Probably not, but it is possible and even likely that these officials have protection from any increase or decrease in their pay during their time in office.

What do she and councilmembers think of the huge city debt? What do she and councilmembers think of the astronomical sewer increases--past and future? 

Have she and councilmembers ever really looked at and examined the 2008 audit and current financial  information to try and figure out what has gone on and what is going on? Have she and councilmembers looked at how much more money the city has taken in over the past five years?  Have she and councilmembers ever asked where the money went?

Are she and other councilmembers ready to ask financial questions now without fear of, gasp, micromanaging?  Or is the Mayor's real concern still light pollution and those pretty brick-paving machines?

November 19, 2009 City of Morristown and the FY 2008 Audit: Stay Tuned

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.

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.

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, the $2.5 million was set to be transferred 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 while most of that money (the $2.5 million that was illegally transferred) has now or will soon be transferred back to the sewer fund,  it will have to be transferred back again to the general fund 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.

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.

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.

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.]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.