May 1, 2011 Judge Greer Orders City of Morristown To Pay $489,674 in Attorney Fees Plus $56,629 in Litigation Costs to the Law Firm Representing Witt Residents

Background: Witt residents complained to the City about sewer odors almost from the moment that Koch Foods began operation in the East Tennessee Progress Center in 2005. The City did nothing. Complaints continued and stonewalling continued. The residents obtained the services of an environmental law firm and sued Koch Foods. The Witt residents and Koch Foods eventually reached a compromise and a Consent Decree was entered.  During the Koch Foods suit, a related suit was filed against the City of Morristown over its sewer operations and the Witt sewer line. In that suit, the U.S. District Court in Greeneville assessed the City with $105,000.00 in civil penalties for violations of the Clean Water Act [Click here] and ordered the City to repair the Witt Sewer Line. A jury awarded $8,500 in damages to two of the Plaintiffs. Then less than a week ago, Federal Judge Ronnie Greer ordered that in addition to the civil penalties, the City has to pay $489,674.26 in attorney fees and $56,629.00 in costs to the law firm that represented the Witt residents.  I haven't blogged in a while but several people have asked about this...here is the most recent Order with footnotes and cites eliminated [ ] to make it easier to read.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT GREENEVILLE


PATRICIA STEPHENS, ET AL. v. CITY OF MORRISTOWN, TENNESSEE


ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ Supplemental Motion for an Award of Costs of Litigation, [Doc. 309]. The plaintiffs move this Court to award them $479,579.06 in fees and $102,629.00 in litigation costs against the City pursuant to Title 33 United States Code section 1365(d), the citizen suit provision of the Clean Water Act. The defendant City has replied, and the matter is ripe for review. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be GRANTED IN PART.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

To review, at the trial of this matter, which took place from November 3-25, 2009, and prior to the jury retiring to deliberate, the Court ruled that Koch Foods, LLC (“Koch Foods”) violated the compatible pollutant limits in its Industrial User Permit 1017 (“IUP”) based on the Court’s interpretation of the permit’s
unambiguous, plain language as setting a ceiling, rather than a surcharge level, for biochemical oxygen demand (“BOD”) and total suspended solids (“TSS”). The Court also ruled that plaintiffs’ state law trespass claims for the intangible odors would be dismissed.

The jury found 72 daily violations of the IUP by Koch Foods for prohibited discharges c. and d.. The jury also found that the City violated its NPDES permit by failing to enforce the [IUP] for Koch Foods or by failing to prevent prohibited discharges from Koch Foods into the Morristown Sewer System. The jury determined that this violation occurred on 72 days. The jury did not find that the City violated its NPDES permit regarding the July 19, 2007 overflow, and the jury did not find that the City violated its NPDES permit by "failing to properly maintain and operate the Witt Sewer Line, including pump stations and pipes." See Verdict Form Questions 3 and 6,

However, the Court subsequently found in its Memorandum Opinion and Order, [Doc. 304], that the evidence at trial did not raise a genuine issue of fact with respect to the July 19, 2007 overflow and that the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment as a matter of law, notwithstanding the jury’s verdict, on that issue.

As to the state law claims, the jury found liability as to three of the 39 plaintiffs on the nuisance claim, awarding a total of $8,500.00 in damages to two of them, and allocating 100 percent of the fault to the City. The jury did not find that the City of Morristown committed inverse condemnation, and it did not find that Koch Foods was negligent.

On February 17, 2010, the Court entered a Consent Decree between plaintiffs and Koch Foods. The Consent Decree reflected a compromise between the plaintiffs and Koch Foods regarding plaintiffs’ outstanding claims for injunctive relief, civil penalties, costs and fees. Then on May 11, 2010, the Court held a motion hearing on several pending motions between plaintiffs and the City. The Court also heard evidence on the issue of civil penalties against the City.

On August 31, 2010, the Court denied the City’s Rules 50(b) and 59 motion, [Doc. 306].  On February 18, 2011, this Court entered an Enforcement Order based on the City's CWA violations. In that Order, the Court ordered that the City rehabilitate the Witt Sewer line as specified by Trial Exhibit 379 by June 30, 2011; and that the City install odor filters on the manhole covers on the gravity line between Witt 2 and Witt 3 pump stations within 30 days after the entry of the Order. Then, on March 1, 2011, this Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order which assessed $105,000.00 in civil penalties against the City for its CWA violations, [Doc.311]. Judgment was also entered on March 1, 2011. On April 25, 2011, this Court denied the City’s Rules 59(e) and 60 motion to alter or amend the Judgment to reduce or waive the amount of civil penalties.

II. ANALYSIS

Again, the plaintiffs move this Court to award them $479,579.06 in fees and $102,629.00 in litigation costs against the City pursuant to Title 33 United States Code section 1365(d), the citizen suit provision of the Clean Water Act.3 They support these figures with many filings, the most important of which is a detailed
Declaration of Lead Counsel Gary A. Davis.4 Section 1365(d) states, in pertinent part: The court, in issuing any final order in any action brought pursuant to this section, may award costs of litigation (including reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees) to any prevailing or substantially prevailing party, whenever the court determines such an award is appropriate. Id.

The plaintiffs argue that the amounts requested should be awarded because (1) the request is timely; (2) they are the prevailing or substantially prevailing parties; (3) the fees are reasonable and have been apportioned in an equitable manner; (4) the expert fees and other costs were reasonably incurred and are equitably apportioned; and (5) the award is appropriate. See [Doc. 310, page 2-3].

The City argues that the plaintiffs were not substantially prevailing parties, and it challenges the reasonableness and the apportionment of the fees and costs.

Specifically, the City argues that (1) the plaintiffs triple or quadruple billed; (2) the hourly fees are unreasonable; (3) the charges for meals and mileage are unreasonable; (4) all costs related to expert Roger Cameron should be denied; (5) the City should pay no more than Koch Foods; and (6) the total should be reduced by 50 percent to reflect the level of plaintiffs’ success. In sum, the City seeks to pay no more than $93,713.38 in fees and $17,629.72 in costs and argues that, in any event, it should pay no more than the $214,000.00 paid by Koch Foods in compliance with the Consent Decree.

The City argues that the plaintiffs are not substantially prevailing parties because they only prevailed on a portion of their claims. As stated above, the plaintiffs were not successful on their state law trespass and inverse condemnation claims. Only three plaintiffs were successful on their nuisance claims, and the total award was $8,500.00. Thus, the City contends that they were not prevailing parties.

When considering a petition for attorney fees, the court must first determine whether the petitioning party was the prevailing party. [ ] “In the context of § 1365(d), a plaintiff is said to have ‘prevailed’ if he has succeeded on any significant issue in the litigation, which achieves some of the benefits sought in bringing suit.” [ ]

While it is true that the plaintiffs did not succeed on most of their state law claims, they did, however, succeed on a majority of their CWA claims. More importantly, they achieved what was probably their main goal, i.e. an order to abate the nuisance. The Court ordered the City to rehabilitate the Witt Sewer Line and install odor control filters on the manhole covers. The City presented evidence that rehabilitation would cost $1.6 million dollars. In addition, the City is ordered to pay $105,000.00 in civil penalties. Finally, Koch Foods and the plaintiffs entered into an agreement regarding injunctive relief. These “victories” are more than enough to show that the plaintiffs are prevailing parties.

The City argues that the plaintiffs’ requested fees are not reasonable and that the plaintiffs triple or quadruple billed. Now that the Court has determined that plaintiffs are prevailing parties, this Court must determine what fee is reasonable. [ ] A reasonable fee is “one that is ‘adequate to attract competent counsel, but ... [does] not produce windfalls to attorneys.’” [ ] The fee applicant bears the burden of proving a reasonable fee, documenting the appropriate hours expended, and exercising appropriate “billing judgment.” [ ] The starting point is to calculate the “lodestar” amount, which is “the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate.” [ ]  This resulting sum may need to be adjusted to reflect factors such as the “results obtained.” [ ].

The factors the Court must consider include: (1) the time and labor required by a given case; (2) the novelty and difficulty of the questions presented; (3) the skill needed to perform the legal service properly; (4) the preclusion of employment by the attorney due to acceptance of the case; (5) the customary fee; (6) whether
the fee is fixed or contingent; (7) time limitations imposed by the client or the circumstances; (8) the amount involved and the results obtained; (9) the experience, reputation, and ability of the attorneys; (10) the “undesirability” of the case; (11) the nature and length of the professional relationship with the client; and (12) awards in similar cases. [ ]  In addition, the Court should assess the “prevailing market rate in the relevant community” when determining the reasonable hourly rate. [ ]

Here, the plaintiffs argue for a rate of $300.00 per hour for Mr. Davis, $200.00 an hour for his associates, and $75.00 for his paralegal. The plaintiffs attached affidavits from practicing environmental and litigation attorneys in the area, and they state that these rates are reasonable. The City, however, argues for lower rates. It argues for a rate of $200.00 per hour for Mr. Davis and $150.00 to $165.00 an hour for his associates. The City does not address the paralegal rate. It, too, attaches affidavits of practicing attorneys. However, these attorneys do not focus on environmental law.

This Court has considered all of the factors listed above, and it concludes that the hourly rates requested by the plaintiffs are reasonable. This Court will not adjust the fees upwards or downwards based on any of the factors listed above. This case was complex, the pretrial motions were extensive, the trial was lengthy, and the post-trial motions have been numerous as well. The litigation has been on-going for over four years. The trial lasted approximately one month; there were over 50 witnesses and 210 exhibits.

Mr. Davis supports his request with time sheets generated by him and his staff from legal billing software. There is nothing in the record to indicate that he did not use reasonable billing judgment. His declaration establishes that he equitably divided the billable time and litigation expense into three reasonable categories: (1) time and expenses that applied to claims against both Morristown and Koch Foods that cannot reasonably be allocated separately; (2) time and expenses that applied principally to the Morristown case; and (3) time and expenses that applied principally to the Koch Foods case. Category three is not included in the plaintiffs’ request. Furthermore, his declaration establishes that he did not double, triple, or quadruple bill.

In addition, Mr. Davis is very experienced in his specialty practice of environmental law, and the rate for his associates adequately reflects their experience. Plaintiffs’ counsel represented numerous clients in this complex case, and the time requirements were demanding on such a small firm. Also, the firm had to advance the costs because Mr. Davis took the case on a contingency fee basis, which most attorneys, this Court opines, would not likely do with this type of case. This Court notes the City’s argument that the recovery, in its view, was only $8,500.00, but this Court has previously discussed and rejected this contention. It will not do so again.  Moreover, most of the work and evidence used for the CWA claims was the same as that for the state law claims, with a few exceptions.

In sum, when considering all the factors and evidence of the record, the rates proposed by the plaintiffs are reasonable and will not be adjusted. In addition, the time expended was reasonable. These reasonable rates will be multiplied by the reasonable number of hours worked to reach the total amount of fees. Thus, the plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED in that the City is hereby ORDERED to pay $479,579.06 in fees. See [Doc. 310-1, ¶ 22-26] for detailed breakdown of hours and rates. It is also ORDERED that the City shall pay $10,095.20 in fees, which were incurred in pursuing recovery of attorney fees. See e.g., Coulter v. State of Tenn., 805 F.2d 146, 151 (6th Cir. 1986) (stating fees incurred in pursuit of collecting attorney fees are recoverable). Accordingly, the total amount of fees the City is ORDERED to pay is $489,674.26.

The City also objects to the plaintiffs request for costs. Mr. Davis’s declaration and the information attached thereto is adequate proof of the costs incurred. The City specifically challenges three types of the claimed costs: (1) meals during trial, (2) mileage travel during trial, (3) and Roger Cameron’s expert fees. The City also makes the blanket argument that the fees should be reduced to reflect the level of plaintiffs’ success.

The Sixth Circuit has stated that a plaintiff can recover “those reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the attorney which are normally charged to a fee-paying client, in the course of providing legal services.” [ ] Meals and mileage qualify as such expenses. Therefore, they will be included in the amount of costs.

Roger Cameron’s expert fees present a different question. While expert fees are recoverable, 33 U.S.C. § 1365(d), they should be reasonable. In addition, these fees are specifically authorized by the CWA citizen suit statute. Thus, it logically follows that the expert fees must be incurred in proving a CWA violation. This Court remembers Mr. Cameron’s testimony at trial quite well. He testified extensively as to the amount of property damage sustained by each land-owning plaintiff as a result of the foul odors emitted from the sewer system. The plaintiffs are correct in that this type of testimony is related to plaintiffs’ standing under the CWA, to claims that Koch Foods had violated its permit by discharging substances that would cause a public nuisance, and to the claim that the City had failed to enforce permit provisions. The claim as to Koch Foods, however, is not relevant to the expert fees incurred as to the City. It is clear to this Court that there was much overlap in Mr. Cameron’s testimony as to the City and to Koch Foods.

Considering all of this, the particular testimony of Mr. Cameron, and the requested fee, this Court determines that the amount sought is not reasonable. Not all of Mr. Cameron’s testimony supported the CWA violations. The majority of his testimony was evidence presented to prove the state law claims. In addition, most of the work for which Mr. Cameron billed applies to the state claims and not standing or CWA violations. As such, the amount of the fee should be reduced to reflect the percentage of his testimony that applied to standing under the CWA and as to the CWA violations of the City. The costs incurred by counsel for travel and a meal for Mr. Cameron’s deposition, deposition costs, postage costs, and Mr. Cameron’s expert fee and travel for trial testimony will not be reduced because it clearly relates to all claims and cannot reasonably be separated. See [Doc. 310-7]. His expert fees, however, should be adjusted to a reasonable level.

For the reasons stated above, the plaintiffs’ motion for costs is GRANTED IN PART. It is hereby ORDERED that the City pay a total of $56,629.00.

Finally, this Court declines to grant the City’s request to reduce any award based on the “amount of success.” This Court addressed that above. Also, this Court notes that all figures reasonably apportioned the fees and costs between Koch Foods and the City as explained in Mr. Davis’s declaration. See [Doc. 310-1]. Lastly, this Court refuses to restrict the amounts to be paid by the City to the same amount paid by Koch Foods as a result of the Consent Decree. The City was determined to be more culpable by the jury. Also, the Consent Decree was a result of a negotiated settlement between the plaintiffs and Koch Foods. The City has continued to litigate matters well past the trial. Thus, the plaintiffs have continued to incur fees and costs.

V. CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, the plaintiffs’ motion, [Doc. 309], is GRANTED IN PART. The City is ORDERED to pay $489,674.26 in fees and $56,629.00 in costs.

ENTER:

s/J. RONNIE GREER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

March 2, 2011 Judge Greer Assesses Civil Penalties of $105,000 Against City of Morristown

Recently, the City of Morristown was ordered by Judge Ronnie Greer to rehabilitate the Witt sewer line by June 30, 2011. Patricia Stephens, et al v. City of Morristown. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Greeneville.

Judge Greer has now assessed the City of Morristown with civil penalties of $105,000 in the same federal lawsuit.

In deciding the issue of civil penalties under the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Court determined that the City will pay $1,250.00 per day for 72 violations for a total of $90,000.00 plus $15,000.00 for a particularly serious overflow on July 19, 2007. "The total civil penalties assessed is, therefore, $105,000.00."

The July 19, 2007 overflow, which was one of 14 reported between July 2005-June 2008, resulted in 10,000 gallons of raw sewage flowing from the manhole into the street and the surrounding area where a creek is located. 

Considering that the penalties could have been much heavier, Morristown should be pleased.

Two of the several factors that the Court considered in its imposition of less-than-maximum daily penalties were (1) the violations involved odors and inability of the plaintiffs to fully enjoy use of their property at times rather than violations that poisoned the water and put individuals at risk; and (2) the City's sewer customers and/or taxpayers, both of whom are already feeling the effect of "tough economic times," will ultimately have to bear the cost of the civil penalties.
 
The Court noted that the problems began in 2005 with the opening of the Koch Foods deboning plant in the East Tennessee Progress Center and that the City failed to respond in any meaningful way to the complaints  of the members of the Witt and Roe Junction communities.

The Court: "It took a lawsuit to compel action."

February 24, 2011 Millennium Project Bid Postponed To April 5, 2011

Bidding on the Downtown Millennium Project has been postponed to April 5, 2011.

Click here, here, and here, for background on the many conflicts within this project.

This all started with awards to the City of $1,200,000 of federal grant money for historic preservation and well as improvement and development of the Morristown College site.  Click here.

Four and one-half years later, historic preservation and improvements to Morristown College were left behind.

The City transferred the entire $1,200,000 of federal grant money to the Millennium Partners for improvements to their Main Street property--including "approximately" 22 rooftop parking spaces (atop the private retail shells below) that make the project eligible for grant funds since the City is going to consider this as parking for a "greenways trailhead."  

The lease for the parking deck allows the City, if it desires, to designate two of the parking spaces for  "greenway purposes" and two for handicapped parking. The remaining 18 or so spaces are just standard downtown public parking.

The Millennium Partners include the City auditors (Hiram Jones, son Tom Jones, daughter Mira Craine, and son-in-law James Craine) as J&C Partners; Morristown businessmen/contractors (David Wild and Tim Wild) as D&T Partners; and Dr. Sid Boyd. Businessman Bill Young may still be a partner. 

This is not the first time that the City has transferred grant funds to the Millennium Partners. 

When the first Millennium building was built downtown about 9-10 years ago, the City amended a 1988 UDAG (Urban Development Action Grant) grant in order to give the Millennium group $105,816 of unused funds from that grant. 

[The first Millennium building contains the offices of the City's auditors Craine, Thompson & Jones; of Wild Building Contractors, Inc.; and of Community National Bank).]

February 22, 2011 How Did Morristown College Grant Money End Up With the Millennium Group?

Just how did $1.2 Million in federal grant dollars get moved from needed work at and around Morristown College to the downtown Millennium Partners retail shell space/rooftop parking project?  [This is a follow-up from yesterday's post on conflicts of interest in the Millennium grant process.]

In 2005-2006, federal grant funds of $1,200,000 were received and were to be matched with local funds in a public-private partnership at Morristown College. The goal was preservation of the many historic buildings on the College property along with construction of a Community Center and pools, etc.

Ironically, Todd Morgan, who has been pushing the Millennium project, nominated Morristown College for inclusion in East Tennessee's Endangered Heritage just weeks before Morgan put a plan before the City Council to move the Morristown College grant funds to benefit the Millennium group.

Click here for a post on Morgan's nomination of Morristown College for inclusion on a list of endangered historic buildings and here for a picture of the Laura Yard Hill Administration Building and the full News-Sentinel story.

When the public-private partnership fell through, Mayor Barile signed a contract with TDOT in 2007 changing the scope of the Morristown College grant to construction of a greenway connector trail into the Morristown College site and a trailhead at the Fred Kyle Park with parking spaces.

The new scope also included a perimeter walking path around the College site and 2-1/2 miles of sidewalks with street lights and curbs on parts of Branner Street, Blair Street, Buffalo Trail, Carriger Street, Panorama Drive, E. 6th North, James Street/Daisy Street, Terrace View, and Morristown Cemetery Trail. Drainage problems would also be addressed.

The purpose of revising the plans for Morristown College, as stated by Mayor Barile in her letter to TDOT in 2007, was: "[T]o increase the safety and well-being of the people that live in this area."

After signing the 2007 contract with TDOT,  the City sat on the grant and did nothing. Why? The City was broke and couldn't come up with the local match to access the $1,200,000 of federal funds. Former City Administrator Jim Crumley was hiding a financial mess, and the Mayor and Council either didn't know why the grant work was not starting or did know but were concerned that it all reflected badly on the City, Mayor, and Council.  The Morristown College site continued to deteriorate. 

Mayor Barile, who signed the 2007 grant contract for Morristown College and spoke of the health and safety of area residents, didn't have a clue. According to the Mayor, she didn't know until early 2010 that the City was broke. Click here for the day the Mayor and Council woke up to the financial nightmare that she and the Council have presided over.

Instead of taking care of the city's finances and using the grant funds for the preservation and improvement of the Morristown College site, Mayor Barile and Council spent time and money stamping brick designs on roadways, placing islands in the middle of East First North (that have now been removed), and wailing about "light pollution." 

Morristown College was slowly falling apart. And the City's answer to the deterioration was to take the $1,200,000 of federal grant money that could have been used to preserve and improve the Morristown College site and transfer all that money to the downtown Millennium Square Partnership group, composed of local businessmen and the City's auditors.

Some of the most beautiful buildings at Morristown College have now burned. The historic area continues to deteriorate.  Residents of the area have asked for help as property values decrease and concerns for safety increase. They may get the City to mow the area and do some clean-up.

But the money that was available for the Morristown College area from as far back as 2005 was transferred to downtown businessmen (Millennium Partners) for a project where the City ends up with a 25-year lease for 22 rooftop parking spaces, a bike rack, a stairway, and a sign designating the rooftop parking as a greenways "trailhead."

$1,200,000 for safety, historical preservation, parking, sidewalks, lights, and curbs, OR 22 rooftop parking spaces? The City chose 22 rooftop parking spaces.

February 21, 2011 TDOT: Wild Building Contractors Can Not Bid on Millennium Project Due to a Conflict of Interest

Neil Hansen with TDOT (Tennessee Department of Transportation) apparently informed the City of Morristown on 1/26/11 that it is the position of TDOT's legal counsel that Wild Building Contractors (WBC) can not bid to perform the construction work on the Millennium Project because of a conflict of interest. [Click once or twice on the e-mail at left to enlarge and read]

Hansen summarizes TDOT's position: WBC can not act as a subconsultant to the City's Architect (BIF) and then turn around and bid on the construction contract for this same project. [Click on the above page from BIF's Letter of Intent to enlarge and read]

Click here for a previous article with links to prior posts.

City Administrator Tony Cox did not inform council of this development during his Administrator's Report at council's 2/1/11 or 2/15/11 meeting. Todd Morgan has said nothing publicly. Nothing has been reported in the "news"paper.

The City filed a response last week, attaching a letter from Wild's Attorneys (Woolf, McClane, Bright, Allen, & Carpenter, PLLC) who in turn attached a letter from the Architects Brewer, Ingram & Fuller and other exhibits.

TDOT's position should not be surprising to potential bidders on the Millennium project. In addition to the conflict cited by TDOT, these contractors see many other conflicts of interest that unfairly tilt the bidding process in favor of the Wilds who are partners in Millennium Square Partnership and who, as MSP partners, are ultimately footing the bill for the Architect's fees.

At least two contractors who paid for plans and who initially planned to bid (Ed Hale Construction of Morristown and Inland Construction) have cited conflicts of interest involving WBC/David Wild/Tim Wild as the basis for pulling out of bidding on this Project.  I'm sure that these contractors and others who took out plans could provide a lot of additional information on conflicts of interest and appearances of impropriety in the pre-bid and post-award process.

Why is the Architect (BIF) trying to get Wild back on the bid list? Perhaps it is because the Wilds are partners in the Millennium Square group that is paying the City to cover the Architect's fees on the project.  

Now it is a waiting game to see if the City, BIF, and Wild can convince TDOT to reverse itself and decide that (1) when BIF asked Wild to prepare cost estimates, this was not a conflict of interest and (2) when BIF prepared its Letter of Intent and said that Wild was a proposed Consultant for Estimating, this was an "error," and (3) when Wild prepared estimates and/or helped with design suggestions, there was not a conflict because WBC never had a contract with BIF and never was a "paid" consultant on the project.

What could happen if Wild insists on bidding?  There are several possibilities. A prospective bidder could seek an injuction to stop or delay the bidding pending a determination by a court of the legality of Wild's participation in the bidding.  If the bidding proceeds and the construction contract is awarded to WBC, this could result in a lawsuit by an unsuccessful bidder. 

From the City's perspective, the worst possibility would be that Wild or even someone else gets the construction contract and there is a later finding of bid and/or post-award irregularities that could result in the City being required to reimburse TDOT for all state and federal funds expended on this project.

With the City's current financial mess, it certainly couldn't afford to pay back $1,400,000 + or - in grant funds. Right now, the City is not even certain that it will be able to buy a garbage truck by year's end.

A $1,400,000 + or - money trail leads to a lot of conflicts and a lot of switching money around.

The "Millennium money" was originally intended for Morristown College, not once, but TWICE!

Tomorrow, I will post on what the money was initially supposed to be used for and how financial mismanagement at City Hall prevented the money from being used at Morristown College as originally intended and led to the transfer to the Millennium group.  [UPDATE: Click here for the history of the Morristown College to Millennium money switch.]

February 4, 2011 District Attorney: TBI Investigation of David Purkey/Tennessee Highway Patrol: Reprimand of Purkey's Special Friend Trooper John R. Jones

After my post of December 30, 2010, many people asked me to post the actual letter from DA Steve Bebb to Criminal Court Judge John Dugger that was mentioned. Some people claimed it didn't exist. Some said that David Purkey would never lie to the "news"paper or to the public about anything. Others said if this was really true, the "news"paper would have reported it.

Well, the letter is posted above. You can click on the image to enlarge it and read it or print it out.

What brought about the TBI investigation and the DA's letter was a 2006 election-eve Purkey campaign postcard that said it was "paid for by John R. Jones" but did not mention Purkey's involvement with the postcard.

DA Bebb's letter states that the TBI investigation of former Hamblen County Mayor David Purkey found that Purkey apparently violated the election laws of the State of Tennessee.  Bebb then adds that he won't charge or prosecute Purkey because it might be costly and it might be difficult to seat a jury in Hamblen County--assuming Purkey would ask for a jury trial.

The postcard that the TBI investigated was a last-minute mailout by the Purkey campaign that did not acknowledge that Purkey was involved in the mailout or endorsed the message on the postcard.  For his part, Purkey, when questioned about the postcard by local "news"paper reporter Bob Moore,  denied any involvement in the mailing. [See newspaper article below and click on it to enlarge and read Purkey's comments at the end] 

Despite Purkey's very public denial of any involvement with the postcard, the TBI investigation found that Purkey was indeed involved and thus committed a Class "C" misdemeanor. Strangely, the DA stated nothing about the involvement of a friend of Purkey--John R. Jones, a Tennessee State Trooper. No mention of John R. Jones and no charges against John R. Jones.

Kind of funny how the local "news"paper reports a public official's denial of any involvement with a campaign postcard that was received by many people across the county but the same "news"paper never follows up and reports that a TBI investigation found that the official WAS involved with the postcard but the DA decided to give Purkey a "pass"!

In my December 30 post, I mentioned that the person whose name was put on the postcard (John R. Jones) happens to be a "special friend" of Purkey. While the DA didn't mention Jones in the letter to Judge Dugger, the THP investigated Jones' involvement and issued a written reprimand to Jones. [Click on the reprimand above]

So...the "news"paper refused to report that DA Bebb sent a letter to Judge Dugger stating that Purkey apparently committed a crime. The "news"paper refused to report that DA Bebb was not prosecuting Purkey because of Purkey's position, the difficulty in seating a jury, and to save money. The"news"paper refused to report that the person whose name was put on the Purkey postcard was Purkey's special friend Tennessee Highway Patrolman John R. Jones.

The "news"paper did report Purkey's denial of any involvement in the last-minute postcard. Then silence.  Apparently, it is "news" when the official says he isn't involved in the crime. But it isn't "news"---and it isn't reported at all---when the TBI investigation is over and it is discovered that the official was lying and covering up his involvement all along. 

And now David Purkey, who violated election laws, who lied to the press and public to cover up his involvement in violating election laws, and who got a "pass" from the District Attorney, is Assistant Commissioner of Homeland Security for the State of Tennessee.

Purkey's official crime was a misdemeanor.  The unofficial crime was that he lied to the press--and to the public--when he denied his involvement with his campaign postcard and even failed to admit that he knew the John R. Jones whose name was listed on the postcard.

And the cover-up continued as the investigation was ongoing. After he was caught in the violation of election law and after he had lied about his involvement with the campaign postcard, Purkey filled out a campaign financial disclosure form that said that [John] Rick Jones of Murfreesboro made a "loan" of $850 to Purkey's mayoral campaign on October 23, 2006.  Now there may be a check to the Purkey campaign from John Rick(y) Jones in October 2006 but you have to ask WHY would Jones be sending a check to Purkey's mayoral campaign over two months AFTER the postcard mailout and over two months AFTER the election? Purkey didn't need any loan AFTER the election was over. 

One reason Purkey may have reported the "loan" from Jones would be to avoid financial disclosure problems that could occur if he didn't report Jones' postcard/loan to the campaign. Click on the Financial Disclosure form below to enlarge.

February 3, 2011 County Commissioner Paul Lebel Running for Morristown City Council?

Hamblen County Commissioner Paul Lebel may be running for the Morristown City Council at-large seat.
Lebel picked up a petition to run for the at-large seat earlier today.

There are at least three others who have picked up petitions for the at-large seat: Charles Cook, Ann Harville, and Luke Pack.

UPDATE: Another person who picked up a petition to run for this at-large seat is the incumbent Frank McGuffin.  Actually, McGuffin took out TWO petitions several weeks ago. One petition was for this at-large seat AND the other was for Mayor. Since taking out both petitions, McGuffin has waffled for weeks about which seat he would run for although every indication was that he was going for Mayor. 

My guess is that Frank waffled all this time because he was waiting for Lebel---or someone else whom Frank considers the right kind of person---to pick up a petition for the at-large seat. Now Frank is free to announce that he running for Mayor. 

[Lebel does not have to resign from his seat on county commission in order to run in the city election.]

January 26, 2011 Millennium Square Bidding Postponed to March 8, 2011

Another bidding postponement for the Millennium Square project has been announced. The new bid date is March 8, 2011. 

The City of Morristown received grant funds for Morristown College in 2005. The City transferred Morristown College grant funds to the Millennium Square Partnership group in early 2010. 

Millennium Partners include four members of the City's auditing firm (Hiram Jones, Tom Jones, James Craine, and Mira Craine); two members of a local construction company (David & Tim Wild); and two other individuals (Dr. Sid Boyd and Bill Young).

[Due to recent business and personal financial difficulties, it is not certain that Bill Young is still a Millennium partner]

Click here, here, here, here and here for background info on the connections.

It is a complicated situation with 2005 grant funds of anywhere from $890,000 up to $1,500,000 being shifted around and finally ending up in the hands of the Millennium partners.

Throughout the saga, Millennium Partners David and Tim Wild have worn several different "hats."  They wear Millennium "owner hats." They wear Wild Building Contractors "construction hats." They wear "local match hats" as they chip in 10% of grant costs in order to get the other 90% paid for by taxpayer grant money. They apparently also wear "consultant hats" and "estimating hats."

During initial consideration of the project in early 2010,  David Wild, wearing his Wild Building Contractor hat, and Tim Wild, wearing his D&T Rental hat, wrote letters to the Tennessee Department of Transporation  (TDOT) endorsing the transfer of Morristown College grant money to the Millennium Square partners.

By some strange coincidence, both David and Tim failed to add a disclaimer to their letters acknowledging that they were among the Millennium partners who would benefit from the grant transfer that they glowingly endorsed.

Hiram Jones, wearing his C(raine) & J(ones) hat, also wrote a letter to TDOT in early 2010 endorsing the transfer of Morristown College grant money to Millennium Square partners.

Like the Wilds, Jones failed to add a disclaimer to his letter acknowledging that he was among the Millennium partners who would benefit from the grant transfer that he glowingly endorsed.

With the grant transfer, the Millennium group is going to chip in 10% of grant costs in order to get 90% of grant costs paid by federal/state taxpayer grant money. This nine-fold return on investment is just not enough for the Millennium group. 

Millennium partners David and Tim Wild not only want their Millennium property improved largely at taxpayer expense, but they also want the taxpayer grant money that will be paid for these improvements to be paid to them while they do the work wearing their "Wild Building Contractors hat."

December 30, 2010 David Purkey Named Assistant Commissioner for Homeland Security

Former Hamblen County Mayor David Purkey has been named Assistant Commissioner for Homeland Security by Governor-elect Bill Haslam. Click here.

In 2008, David pretty much left his job as Hamblen County Mayor to Commision Chair Stancil Ford and started campaigning for Haslam.  David hoped to be Commissioner of Safety in Haslam's administration. 

Haslam, however, tapped Shelby County District Attorney Bill Gibbons for that position.  With Purkey's appointment as Deputy Commissioner for Homeland Security, Purkey will have large amounts of taxpayer Homeland Security money at his disposal and wide access to personal information on citizens.

Hopefully, Gibbons and Haslam can keep David from putting the Homeland Security budget in the red like he put Hamblen County in the red in 2003 after 8 years as Mayor. For his multiple violations of law and general mishandling of county finances and driving the county to the brink of bankruptcy in 2003, click here, here, here, and here. Every single statement has been documented, and David has never attempted to refute any of the statements about his mishandling of county finances or putting a special friend on the county insurance plan even though he was not a county employee and not eligible for coverage.

Hopefully, Gibbons and Haslam can keep David from running around and ordering expensive shows of overwhelming force to shut down anti-illegal immigration rallies. For his use of Homeland Security, THP, and local enforcement in shutting down an anti-illegal immigration rally, click here and here.

Hopefully, Gibbons and Haslam can keep David from using Tennessee Highway Patrol troopers to assist him in violating election laws as David did in his 2006 run for County Mayor. 

And, hopefully, Gibbons and Haslam can keep David from lying about his illegal actions when he gets caught violating laws or obtaining and using personal information to get political opponents directly or through their families. 

He's out of Morristown/Hamblen County for now, but his use of state law enforcement and Homeland Security resources to stop an anti-illegal immigration rally in 2006, his bankrupting of the county in 2003, his accomplishment in having more audit findings than any other county in the state, his use of a Highway Patrol Trooper in 2006 to violate criminal election laws, his lying to a compliant press about his violation of criminal election laws in 2006, and his being given a pass by a district attorney for his criminal violations is a lasting, pitiful legacy to a man who plans to lead "Homeland Security" in Tennessee.

For someone who is going to be in a sensitive law enforcement position, the real kicker is Purkey's "use" of law enforcement trooper friends to violate election laws in 2006 followed by Purkey's blatant cover-up of his involvement in those violations by publicly denying any knowledge or involvement with an Election Eve postcard mailout in 2006-- a public statement that was later found to be false.

The "news"paper reported on the Election Eve postcard and published Purkey's strong denial of any involvement. The "news"paper also noted that an investigation had been ordered. Then there was total silence.

When the investigating District Attorney's letter/report was sent to Judge John Dugger in May 2007 stating that David was "apparently" involved in criminal election law violations related to the Election Eve postcard, the local "news"paper reporter (Bob Moore) ignored it.  Why? The initial story was reported. Why no concluding story?

The local "news"paper reporter also ignored the fact that David had lied to Moore in 2006 when David denied any involvement or knowledge about the Election Eve postcard mailout, a postcard that said it was paid for by a John R. Jones, who, as it turned out, was David's special Highway Patrol law enforcement friend. Why? The initial statement was reported? Why no follow-up at the conclusion of the investigation?

[The District Attorney's letter/report referenced a TBI investigation and the fact that David Purkey apparently violated criminal election laws. The DA then refused to prosecute. Why? Because Purkey might demand a jury trial and this would cost some money and, heck, it might be difficult to seat a jury in Hamblen County! 

Preliminary TBI reports gave the DA an early indication as to where the investigation was headed and the parties that were involved --David Purkey and his special friend Trooper John R. Jones.  If the DA was going to give David and his law enforcement friend John R. Jones a pass even though all the evidence, interviews, and witnesses pointed one way, he should have stopped the investigation at the start and saved the money for prosecution of some little unknown person somewhere where seating a jury would be "easy."]

Many things can seem trivial when viewed in isolation.  It's surprising that Haslam could not or did not attempt to find someone for this sensitive position who had not used law enforcement friends to help him break the law and had not then publicly lied about it.

It is David Purkey's use of law enforcement friends to assist him in breaking the law followed by his public lies to cover-up his actions and those of his THP law enforcement friends that make his selection for a sensitive position as Deputy Commissioner for Homeland Security singularly standout.

He used a Tennessee Highway Patrolmen in an election campaign in violation of criminal election laws and lied about it.  What could he do or attempt to do to political opponents, their families, and their friends with his power as Deputy Commissioner of Homeland Security?  Who watches the watchers?

December 29, 2010 Millennium Bidding Postponed Again

The Millennium Square Project Bidding has been postponed again. The new bid date is tentatively February 1, 2011. Click here, here, and here for recent posts.

The original bid date was December 14, 2010.  However, on December 10, 2010, TDOT cancelled that bid date based on questions raised by contractors and information provided to TDOT by Councilman Gene Brooks about conflicts of interest and other contract-related issues. These issues still have to be addressed.

At about the same time, the architectural firm Brewer, Ingram & Fuller set a new bid date of 1/4/11.

Now, the Architects have set yet another new bid date of February 1, 2011, ostensibly at the request of the City of Morristown in order to work out contract-related items with TDOT (Tennessee Department of Transportation) and "others."

The conflicts and webs of relationships in this project are about as extensive as they can be. The Millennium Square owners are Tim and David Wild, James and Mira Craine, Tom Jones, Hiram Jones, Sid Boyd, and Bill Young. 

In addition, the Craines and the Joneses are principals in the city's auditing firm Craine, Thompson & Jones. The Wilds are also principals in Wild Building Contractors. Millennium Square Partners/Craine Thompson & Jones/Wild Building Contractors are tightly knit.

Now the Craines and Joneses and Wilds not only want the city's ($890,000-$1,200,000) grant money for improvements to their Millennium property, they also want the Wilds to be able to take off their Millennium Owner hat and put on their Wild Building Contractors hat and bid to perform the actual construction work. 

[Originally Millennium Partners/Wild Building Contractors wanted Wild to be "given" the contract for the construction work without any bidding. The plan was to have Wild designated as a "sole source" provider for the  construction  work. That plan didn't go very far, however, because construction work of this kind is NOT any type of specialty work that only Wild can do.

Had the attempt to pursue a "sole source" designation  for Wild been successful, it was designed to enable the City to "select" Wild as contractor without any competitive bidding and keep the project and all the grant money in the Millennium Partners' hands.]

Apparently getting lots of free improvements of  $890,000+ or - to their property and access to public parking that the Millennium employees could use is not enough for the Craines, Joneses, and Wilds.

December 25, 2010 Merry Christmas To All

December 10, 2010 Downtown Millennium (Un)Square Deal

The Downtown Millennium (Un)Square Grant Deal will be coming under tighter and more intense scrutiny in the coming days.

Long ago, I posted about the obvious and multiple conflicts of interest in this set-up. Recent posts are  here and here.  As more people are becoming aware of the conflicts, hard questions are being asked and those involved and those who approved this (un)square deal are being asked to explain what's going on.

With the bid date of 12/14/10 fast approaching, the bidding may be postponed for completion of certain work by the Architect or his consultants. Since there are many other reasons to postpone the bidding and look closely at this deal, a postponement for any reason is a positive sign.

Stay tuned. Others are picking up on the conflicts and irregularities in the Millennium (Un)Square Deal.

December 9, 2010 Haslam Picks DA Bill Gibbons As Safety Commissioner

Governor-elect Bill Haslam has selected Memphis/Shelby County DA Bill Gibbons as Commissioner of Safety.

Click here for the News-Sentinel story.

Former Hamblen County Mayor David Purkey has missed out on his dream job where he could run across the state undercover, in a limo, or with blue lights flashing and sirens screaming. 

Lots of law enforcement gear and lots of personnel would have been at his disposal--from THP officers in riot gear, to THP helicopters, to rooftop snipers, to Homeland Security Command Centers.  

Yep, all the gear and personnel that he assisted in calling to Hamblen County to intimidate and disrupt local citizens at an anti-illegal immigration rally in June 2006 while he observed.

Maybe the dream job is not there any more, but another opportunity will be right around the corner. Wait and see. 

December 7, 2010 Alpha-Talbott Utility District Will Not Handle Morristown's New Garbage Billing

The gang that can't--or won't--shoot straight (City of Morristown) just got itself into another pickle over its belated efforts to have outside water utility districts include Morristown's $10/month garbage fee on the utility's water bills to city residents.

Yesterday, the Alpha-Talbott Utility District Board met and voted NOT to include the City of Morristown's $10/month garbage fee on AT water bills that go to city residents. AT won't do Morristown's dirty work--pun intended!

[Bobby Moore, "news"paper reporter/City of Morristown PR person, had reported on December 2: "Phillip Combs, Alpha-Talbott manager, said that if other utility districts don’t experience problems, he will start billing the 42 qualifying customers..."

Somebody missed the reporting boat or things took a dramatic turn from December 2 to December 6.  On December 6th--4 days after Moore's quote from Combs--the AT Board met and voted NOT to bill for Morristown's garbage. It looks like Alpha-Talbott wasn't basing its decision on what other utilities did nor was AT waiting to see if other utility districts had problems.]

Next comes Russellville-Whitesburg Utility District. The Russellville-Whitesburg Utility District Board is scheduled to vote toward the end of December on whether to include the City of Morristown's $10/month garbage fee on RV-WB water bills that go to city residents.

[RV-WB is leaning strongly toward joining AT in refusing to do Morristown's dirty work, but you never know what will happen when Morristown power players jump in and start to twist arms.]

So far, the only outside utility district that Morristown has convinced to do Morristown's garbage billing is Witt Utility District.  Coincidentally, Witt recently got an extension of its water contract with Morristown.

Now---is it legal to send some city residents a garbage fee bill while other city residents are not billed?

Who let this go for nearly four months before even giving these utility districts a billing list and officially asking them to do Morristown's garbage billings?

December 7, 2010 Pearl Harbor Day

To hear President Franklin D. Roosevelt address Congress after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, click here.  A day which will live in infamy...

December 7, 2010 City Council Meets With Attorneys Again...Still No Public Discussion of Lowland Sewer Plant Contract and Future Costs

City Administrator Tony Cox is playing it close to the vest as he works behind the scenes to save the Lowland Wastewater Plant contract. It's a $5 Million purchase, but that's just the tip of the money iceberg.

Wilbur Smith & Associates has estimated that it will take another $70 Million to complete a 5-phase construction program with force mains, gravity lines, pump stations, excavation, storm and water system repairs, etc.

So far Tony is making sure that discussions with or by City Council about the Lowland Wastewater Plant continue to take place in closed sessions with City Attorney Dick Jessee and recently-hired outside counsel Mark Mamantov of Knoxville. Tony is not scheduling any public discussions yet.

After today's 4:00 PM City Council meeting, the Mayor, councilmembers, and Tony Cox will retreat to the Mayor's conference room or will clear out the council chambers so they can hold yet another closed meeting with Jessee and Mamantov. The last announced closed meeting took place on November 16, 2010.

In my opinion, Tony is trying to get a consensus among enough councilmembers (4) to approve a few cosmetic changes to the contract--call it a "lease," add an "out" clause, and continue to pay MPLG (Mike Ball and Joe Fielden) $182,500 every year for 25 years to go along with the $750,000 already paid to Ball and Fielden.

Once the votes are in place,  Tony will schedule a perfunctory public vote at a public meeting but with as little public discussion as possible.

Tony has already made the decision---or, more likely, knows that he is to carry out the decision/wish of others.  Tony and others are more than happy to have the hard-pressed sewer customers of the City of Morristown pay even higher sewer fees to help pay for a dilapidated plant ($5M) and for all or part of the the additional millions ($70+ Million) needed for construction and upgrades to make this plant fully operational--even though the City has let its own sewer system go to pieces and is in the middle of a multi-million dollar repair process in that arena!

City of Morristown and Sewer:  Let what you have fall apart, raise sewer rates, and throw MILLIONS of other people's money at it.  And, while you're at it, buy a dilapidated plant, raise sewer rates, and throw MEGA-MILLIONS MORE of other people's money at it.

December 6, 2010 Some Attendees at the Millennium Square Project Pre-Bid Meeting

Tim Wild (Millennium Square Partner and principal in Wild Building Contractors); James Craine (Millennium Square Partner and principal in the auditing firm Craine, Thompson & Jones that performs the City of Morristown annual audit). For a previous post listing all attendees who signed in, click here.

Clint Harrison (foreground) Engineer and City of Morristown consultant for sewer for Millennium Square project. 

Lisa Hoskins (Brewer, Ingram & Fuller, Architects) and Todd Morgan (Program Director, City of Morristown Community Development Corporation). Ed Hale (Hale Construction) is also pictured in the background looking at Millennium plans.

December 5, 2010 How's That City of Morristown Garbage Fee Working Out For City Residents?

We're going on 4 months now, and the City of Morristown continues to bill its new $10/month garbage fee to some city residents but not to others.

Failure to bill is no problem if you are one of the unbilled city residents.

Failure to bill is very unfair, however, if you are getting a bill and paying for a city service (garbage pick-up) while the City has not sent a single bill to other city residents.

Graciously, the City has said that it doesn't intend to go back and bill the "unbilled" for the four months (as of now) of free garbage service. That's certainly fair to the unbilled. 

But what's fair to those who have been paying for four months already?  The City needs to stop billing the City residents who have already been billed for four months of garbage pick-up until all city residents have been billed an equal number of months. That's fair and equitable to ALL city residents.

The whole garbage fee and garbage billing fiasco are classic examples of government mismanagement at its best. City leaders should have taken care of the financial mess they created without inventing a new way to take money out of  the wallets of the already suffering citizenry. But that's not the way things operate in the City "Taj Mahal" Center or in most any government building.

Instead of being accountable and trying to save money,  Mayor Barile and company just increased property taxes, increased sales taxes through a "pick-your-poison" sales tax referendum, put in red light cameras, illegally transferred/loaned money from one fund to the other, and then tacked on a garbage fee for a city service that had always been provided through tax payments until new City Administrator Tony Cox arrived.

Bobby Moore, who writes press releases in the "news"paper for the City of Morrist, oops, who writes "news" for the Citizen Tribune, recently ran a second article on December 2, 2010, trying to explain the City's failure to bill some city residents (those city residents who receive water from Alpha-Talbott, Witt, and Russellville-Whitesburg Utility Districts) while going on and billing others (those city residents who receive water from MUS).

In his most recent opus, Bobby explains that the City has now (November 29) sent garbage fee billing lists to the three surrounding utility districts and has asked the utilities to include Morristown's garbage fee on the utility's water bills. 

Bobby adds that the utility districts "could begin collecting Morristown's...$10/month garbage fee at the end of December."  Actually, it's the billings that "could" go out in December (or not) but the collection of any money by the utility districts can't take place until January 2011 at the earliest. And even that is not a sure thing.

When Bobby Moore was doing his first CMA (Cover Morristown's rear-end) article on November 18, he reported that the failure to bill all city residents stemmed from "billing difficulties" with the Utility Districts. For some reason, Bobby failed to explain then that actually the City hadn't even sent a billing list to the Utility Districts. 

I guess you could term not providing a list of city residents to the utility districts and not authorizing them to include Morristown garbage bills on the utility's water bills a "billing difficulty," but those certainly aren't billing difficulties created by the districts.

On November 24, I pointed out that the "billing difficulties" with the utility districts were that the City had not authorized the utility districts to bill the fee. Click here.  Now Bobby reports pretty much the same thing and adds that the City has finally given each utility a list of garbage fee customers and has asked/authorized the utility districts to send out garbage bills. 

Now that the City has given the Utility Districts a billing list and the go-ahead to bill, other problems have come out.  At least one utility, RV-WB, doesn't have software with the capability of handling yet another billing task for the City of Morristown. [RV-WB already bills its customers for RV-WB water and includes Morristown sewer and Morristown stormwater charges on the bills that go to Morristown residents.]

The RV-WB utility board will meet toward the end of December and vote on Morristown's request that RV-WB include yet another Morristown fee on RV-WB water bills. 

Since most customers look at their water bill as a lump sum, adding the $10/month Morristown garbage fee to RV-WB water bills may inadvertently create ill-will toward RV-WB, the billing agent, instead of ill-will toward the real culprit, the City of Morristown.

Watch for that RV-WB vote. Morristown power players will be applying behind-the-scenes pressure on RV-WB to go on and handle the Morristown garbage billings and not rock the boat.   We'll see if TPTB can apply enough pressure to get another utility to take flak for Morristown's financial failings and continued lack of accountability.

December 3, 2010 Millennium Project To Bid on December 14, 2010

Several months ago, the City of Morristown sought and got approval to transfer around $890,000 of former Morristown College grant money to a downtown project owned by Millennium Square partnership.

The partners in Millennium Square as of August 2010 are D&T Partners (Tim Wild, David Wild); C&J Partners (James Craine, Mira Jones Craine, Hiram Jones, Tom Jones); Sidney Boyd; and Bill Young.

Millennium Square Partners will get the $890,000+ in grant funds to build a shell for their retail building on West Main Street next to their Millennium Square Building.

What does the City get?  Some rooftop parking in downtown Morristown.  Yep. The roof of the retail shell will have 22 parking spaces that will be available for public parking for 25 years. 

A pre-bid construction meeting was held this past Tuesday at the City Center for prospective bidders.  Construction bids will be received on December 14, 2010.

Because of the economic situation and the depressed construction industry, many contractors were present  at the pre-bid meeting.  Messer Construction, Merit Construction, Southern Constructors, Inland Construction, Burwil Construction, Wild Building Contractors, Hale Construction, Joseph Construction, D&S Builders, and Trent Excavating. 

Wild Building Contractors? Yes, David and Tim Wild, who are partners in Millennium Square, are apparently planning to bid on the newest City/Millennium Square project.

Who else was present? James Craine. Craine, like David and Tim Wild, is a Millennium partner and is also a principal in the City's auditing firm Craine, Thompson & Jones.

So David and Tim Wild (Wild Building Contractors) will be bidding for the construction contract on a project where they benefit as the end owners (Millennium Square Partnership) of the finished retail shell.

Craine, Thompson & Jones, as the City's auditing firm, will audit the spending of the approimately $890,000 in grant money that benefits James & Mira Craine, Hiram Jones, and Tom Jones as end owners (Millennium Square Partnership) of the finished retail shell.

Sweet. The City gives the Wilds, Craines, and Joneses $890,000 of grant money to pay for construction of a downtown retail building for the Wilds, Craines, & Joneses. In return, the City gets some some rooftop parking for 25 years.

Oh, the City points out that it's all "grant money" and that the Millennium partners will graciously pay the city's 10% local grant match in order to get the other 90% free. That's nice. And that's a great deal for Millennium partners.

Did anyone else get offered this great deal? Did the City give any other local business people a chance to submit a proposal for building themselves a brand new store by paying just 10% and getting 90% "free"? No.

November 26, 2010 Final Judgment in Holden v. Swann: Hamblen County Ethics Committee and Its Members Violated the Tennessee Open Meetings Act

The Tennessee Open Meetings Act, like the Tennessee Public Records Act, is an extremely important law for those who truly support open and accountable government.

Ironically, the Hamblen County ETHICS Committee violated this law in December 2008 and failed to even attempt to correct its violation of the law until after a citizen, Gwen Holden, filed suit on February 17, 2009. I represented Ms. Holden in this matter (Holden v. Swann, et al)

The 3-page Final Judgment in Holden v. Swann was signed on October 1, 2010, finding that the Defendants (Hamblen County Ethics Committee, Joe Swann, Stancil Ford, Bill Brittain, James Harrison, and Jack Cartwright) violated the Tennessee Open Meetings Act.

The Judgment enjoins the Defendants from future violations of the Open Meetings Act and provides that the County pay all court costs ($282.50) in the matter and pay $1500 for attorney fees and discretionary costs incurred by Ms. Holden.

You can click on each page to enlarge, read, and print it out. 

Interestingly, the Hamblen County Ethics Committee was dissolved by the Hamblen County Commission on February 18, 2010, while Holden v. Swann was still pending and before any Judgment had become final in this case.  

When it dissolved the Ethics Committee, the Hamblen County Commission, in a divided vote, appointed the county's attorney, Frank "Rusty" Cantwell, as the "County Ethics Officer."  [Cantwell, acting as county attorney, represented the Ethics Committee and the individual defendants in Holden v. Swann, et al.]

All future Ethics Complaints against a county official or county employee will be referred to County Ethics Officer Cantwell.

Then County Ethics Officer Cantwell, who is also the county's attorney for county officials and employees, will decide what to do with any complaint against his client(s).  More on this set-up later.