After receiving a request in September that the city consider the possible sale of water to the West Cumberland Utility District, city manager Greg Wood and council member J. H. Graham III met with the district and research was done on the possible impact on the city's water operation.
Graham reported to the council at the October meeting and said that the city could sell to the utility district at the current city wholesale rate of $3.88 per 1000 gallons. Graham said city finance director Fred Houston had analyzed the cost of water production and looked at incremental and variable costs.
Crossville city council members L-R, J. H. Graham,
Danny Wyatt, Mayor James Mayberry, Pam Harris
and Scot Shanks.
“Based on this information,” said Graham, “the city of Crossville would have an adequate return at the current wholesale rate of $3.88.” He added that the city had the capacity to provide water the West Cumberland, he moved to approve an offer to sell water to the district at whatever the needs of the district are with no minimum purchase or service charges required. Graham's motion was supported by Councilman Scot Shanks.
Currently, West Cumberland is buying water from the Bondecroft Utility District and has seven years left on that contract. West Cumberland Board member Ed Anderson had advised the council during the September work session that neither side was happy with the current contract and it is unclear exactly when the sale from the city to West Cumberland will begin.
Council also approved the appointments of two members to the Crossville Shooting Sports Park board as the project starts to get off the ground having held a groundbreaking ceremony last month. When the city agreed to sell property near the city's old landfill to the group that was applying for the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency funding to build the facility, part of the agreement was that the city would appoint two board members.
Previously Mayor James Mayberry had recommended that Jim Petty and Glen McDonald be appointed but two additional people contacted the city seeking a seat on the board. The location of the park has been controversial to property owners near the location concerned about the noise and effect on property values.
When the item came up on the agenda, the discussion was brief and councilman Graham moved that Petty and McDonald be appointed by acclamation. The motion was approved by voice vote.
While the city's Garrison Park redevelopment
project has a signed grant contract with the state, engineers and a grant
consultant and work is progressing on design and engineering work,
council's action at last weeks called meeting put off passing the
third and final reading on a budget amendment funding work that has
taken place during the last part of the 2016-17 fiscal year.
So far the council has not canceled the
project, the work or the grant but only tabled the approval of a
budget amendment pending additional information.
City council called meeting-sitting at table L-R
Danny Wyatt, Pamala Harris, Mayor James Mayberry
and J. H. Graham
The discussion mainly concerned the
fence that is currently surrounding the park that the grant
application indicated would be removed. The LPRF (Local Parks and
Recreation Fund) has said the fence can be replaced but are holding a
position that the current must be removed as it was part of the grant
application they approved.
During discussion, councilman J. H.
Graham said that his phone calls over the previous two weeks
indicated that if the fence had to be removed and field A was lost
that his constituents were in favor of discontinuing the renovations
until coming up with a better solution. He added that finding a ball
park was difficult in the city of Crossville.
Concept for Garrison Park re-development plan
Garrison Park entrance and fence
City manager Greg Wood said that the
city would have the use of the ball fields that belong to the local school
system at the two high schools if they were needed. It was also
clarified that field A was not being removed and was not part of the
current grant or renovation plan.
The fence remains the main sticking
point as Graham said “I have a real problem with taking down a
perfectly good fence and building it back.”
Councilman Danny Wyatt said that there
was 4000 feet of chain link in the park that he said was “somewhere
in the neighborhood of $100,000. “I'd like for a good level headed
person to tell me why you would take a perfectly good fence down and
create a safety concern,” commented Wyatt.
Manager Wood explained that the current
trend in parks is to have open access and not have fences all the way
around them to encourage access to the park from all sides.
Wyatt said, “I'd like to make a
motion to table this until someone can tell us why we have to take
the fence down.
Questions arose on the fact that
the city has already signed contracts for work done by the
engineering firm Lose and Associates and Community Partners for grant
administration. City attorney Will Ridley said that the city would
have to pay for work that has already been done by the firms if the
city were to back out of those contracts.
Questions about whether backing out of
the grant would cause the city to be ineligible for additional such
recreation grants was also discussed but manager Woods planned to
meet with representatives of the city of Livingston for additional clarification
on some of the issues since they just completed a similar grant.
Councilwoman Pamala Harris indicated that the comments that they city could not get another grant didn't make sense to her since grants are usually awarded on a point system. Said Wood,
“If you don't close out one grant then it may be that you are not eligible to get
another one.”
Wyatt's motion was approved with 4
votes in favor.
A motion to approve the year end budget
amendments was approved by the council with little discussion and a
unanimous vote of the council members present. Councilman Scot
Shanks was out of town for the meeting.
Crossville city council could not come to a consensus on downtown sidewalks again, leaving the project where it stood from a motion last July to do piecemeal repairs as the street department can get to it.
A motion to follow a recommendation from city manager Greg Wood and engineer Tim Begley received 3 votes but failed as changing a previous action it required 4 votes to pass. That recommendation was to bring all the corners downtown up to ADA standards and install new LED street lights including conduit. Because the plan would include some "bump outs" into side streets and a few in Main St. that project would have to be done prior to TDOT paving the road through downtown.
City engineer Tim Begley, standing, explains the
sidewalk plan to members of the city council.
Manager Wood said he hoped he was working on an objective that the council can all agree on. Wood explained that for the last week he, Tim Begley and Kevin Dean had been working on "What will it take to get everything prepared to get the corners to ADA standards so that we can go ahead and get TDOT to get 127 paved." For that plan to work, the city would have to do all of the corners, run the conduit and because in several places the existing street lights interfere with the proposed plan, installing the new LED street lights is included in the plan with street light material expected to cost $270,000.
Looking over plans that did not pass.
The total project would cost about $1 million and according to Wood "would get this thing off of dead center." Additional work on sidewalks that need repair between the corners could be done after the paving as well as paving work on the side streets that need paved due to the water line work done last year.
Mr. Begley went over design items with council including bump outs into Main Street and side roads in order to make the ramps compliant. The bump outs seemed to confuse some of the council. WHen asked about the staff to allow the city to do the work, Mr. Wood said that the two part-time positions approved by council for the street department would have to be full time. Wood said the city was not getting applicants for the part-time positions anyway.
Mr. Begley, center, discusses plans with council members
Wyatt, left and Harris, right.
Wood continued that once the current light poles were removed, they would be adapted and used to replace wooding light poles at Warner Park that have been attacked by woodpeckers. Mr. Begley also said that the city would do the curb and gutter around any new bump outs that were built.
"It's not going to be Nirvana but it's going to get us down the road and get the road paved," quipped Wood.
The matter of budgets came up next with councilman Danny Wyatt asking about the 2017-18 budget. Wood explained that $800,000 would be budgeted for the coming year and the balance in the following budget year. A question from Mayor James Mayberry drew clarification for Wood that that was the cost of materials and the work would be done by city crews but that costs was not part of the estimated costs. Mayberry also asked about the timeline and the discussion began to break down.
The length of time to complete the work was not something anyone could estimate precisely. Council spent some time discussing the project and other work that the street department has to do.
Mayor Mayberry said that the recent report on Crossville from the Austin Group on how site locating companies look at the area and the report specifically said that the downtown area is vita to the impression companies get of Crossville. Mayberry also shared a survey of 450 people by the Chamber, a high percentage who felt downtown revitalization was important.
Cracked and worn downtown sidewalks and a
problem streetlight base near a corner.
Councilwoman Pamala Harris asked Mayberry how many of them were in favor of a tax increase saying the original plan for sidewalks could have meant a 9 or 10 cent tax increase. Harris talked about her own survey and was interrupted by Mayberry.
Is that how you got the answers to your survey? Telling people it would be a 9 or 10 cent tax increase? Harris said "That's what it would be." Mayberry said, "That's what I thought." Mr. Wyatt said it could even be higher. "I've got three businesses (car washes) without sidewalks. I'd love to have sidewalks in front of them." Wyatt suggested a way to settle the matter was with a referendum.
Mayberry responded, "How long have we been talking about this? How long do you want to kick this down the road? Vote your conscience people, that's all that I can say."
Councilman J. H. Graham moved that the recommendation as discussed be approved. Ms. Harris supported the motion. Because the action superseded another previous action by the council 4 votes would be required for the motion to pass. Voting in favor was Graham, Harris and Wyatt. Councilman Scot Shanks and Mayor Mayberry voted no and the motion failed.
As council tried to figure out their next move, councilman Wyatt moved that manager Wood contact TDOT and tell them to come pave Highway 127. Sidewalks would then be dealt with after that. Graham gave a second. The motion was approved with Wyatt, Graham, Harris and Mayberry voted in favor and Shanks voted no.
It is estimated that TDOT would not do that work until sometime in 2018.
Following over 18 months in discussions
and occasional action on a location for a proposed shooting sports
park, the Crossville city council voted to rescind a sales contract
it approved in February for a portion of the city tract of land off
of Albert Frye Road.
The project has became controversial in
the last few weeks as residents and property owners in the vicinity
of the property became aware of what the proposal may mean to their
use of their property and they expressed concern over possible
property values.
Council initially agreed to essentially
donate (sell for $1) 146 acres of the 217 acre site to the the
nonprofit corporation that has been formed to operate the shooting
sports park. The Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency would fund the
over $2 million for most of the construction costs. The group hopes
to attract tournaments and other competitions that would bring in
visitors from outside the area that would stay in local hotels and
spend money here.
Council considers rescinding contract on Albert Frye property
After numerous meetings since June of
2015, the council approved the sales contract on the land to the
nonprofit at the February regular council meeting and residents near
the property became aware of the project and the proposal. They
organized and began to contact officials to find out more and
circulate a petition opposed to the planned location.
The March regular council meeting
attracted a crowd of project supporters and those seeking to have the
project location moved. Council approved a motion requiring the
nonprofit hold a public hearing with property owners and area
residents after contacting them by mail. Before the group could get
much done on that action, the council called a special called meeting
barely within the 24 hours notification requirement to rescind the
the February action.
Because both parties had signed the
sales contract that said the property sale would close before April 1
there could be legal ramifications to arbitrarily ending the contract
but the resolution rescinding the contract prepared by city attorney
Will Ridley referenced section 3.2 of the contract that said,
“Purchaser understands that seller is a government and can only
purchase or sell land subject to the requirements of its charter and
state law. The seller understands and agrees that the contract is
subject to the successful completion of all requirements, including
but not limited to, advertising the sale of property without public
objection.” Councilman J. H. Graham read the resolution aloud at
the meeting, “Whereas during the March work session and March city
council meetings several members of the community spoke in opposition
of the land transfer and have further submitted a petition in
opposition and whereas public objection to the transfer has clearly
been set forth.”
Council members L-R J. H. Graham, Danny WYatt, Mayor James Mayberry,
Pamala Harris and Scot Shanks
Graham moved to approve the resolution
to rescind approval of the contract receiving a second from
councilman Danny Wyatt.
Councilman Scot Shanks asked how many
property owners who have homes in the area were affected by the
shooting sports park? Graham said that a petition by those opposed
to the site was signed by 42 people. Graham said that a “clear
majority” of property owners on Albert Frye Road were opposed to
the location for the shooting sports park.
Shanks sought further clarification
including a show of hands of who was present at the called meeting
who lived on Albert Frye Road. Some 7 hands were raised. After some
back and forth it was determined there were 5 homes in the immediate
vicinity with another two near the end of the road.
Albert Frye Road residents identify themselves to council
“I think the issue is noise, fear of
the unknown,” said Shanks, “but has there been any kind of
testing done to determine what the sound of these guns going off and
how loud that's going to be?”
One audience member said that they
could hear the other shooting range in their back yard and they are
over a mile from that location.
Mayor Mayberry addressed the issue
saying, “This discussion started June 11, 2015. There has been a
total of 7 either work sessions or council meetings in reference to
the shooting park. The members of the shooting park board, TWRA, US
Fish and Wildlife services, State Senator Paul Bailey, Crossville
city employees all have dedicated many hours in advancing to the
point we are now and where construction could begin. All the
environmental studies and surveys have been approved and secured a
highly sought after grant.”
Mayberry continued, “For years this
community has complained that there is nothing for our youth to do.”
Mayberry listed several ball sports, tumbling and cheering but added
there is a large group of kids that are interested in shooting
sports. He talked about an email he got from a mother who said her
son was unable to compete in other sports but he can shoot. “The
city spends thousands of taxpayer dollars to promote our community
for tourism. We wouldn't have to spend any on this facility's
promotion. When competitions are held here the local hotels,
restaurants and campgrounds will benefit greatly but the main thing I
want to emphasize is the positive effect this will have on our youth
and families. You can't put a price on that.”
Mayberry pointed out that the property
location is right by the Interstate and there is noise from it 24/7.
He added that he had gotten a copy of an email from someone at Deer
Creek who wanted the city to come up with a noise ordinance to quiet
down I-40. That comment got a chuckle from the audience.
“As far as I'm concerned, I feel we
have a valid contract that needs to be honored. It really bothers me
that this council will vote to approve and agenda item and expend
employee's time and effort and taxpayer's dollars on a project and
possible even receive a grant to later decide to abandon it,”
concluded Mayberry.
Ms. Harris said the situation was not
good and that it was not an easy position for the council to be
sitting in. Harris said she had weighed the issue seriously over the
past week adding, “I want this community to have a shooting park.
I think it is a wonderful thing for this community to have.”
Harris continued, “The whole thing,
in my opinion, was handled somewhat poorly from the front end. None
of us did our due diligence and homework as well as we should have
and that includes the nonprofit and the city. We all have to take
responsibility for that. There should have been a public hearing and
an opportunity for people to speak out.”
Councilman Wyatt made a short comment
saying, “We don't have zoning in the city or county. That's a bad
word around here. It would make it simple if we did (have zoning.)
Councilman Graham called for the
question and when the vote on rescidning the contract was taken,
council members Graham, Wyatt and Harris voted in favor and Mr.
Shanks and Mayor Maybery were opposed with the majority approving the
resolution to rescind the contract.
Following the meeting, Crossville
shooting Park, Inc board member James Wattenbarger described the
council's action as “a big loss for the kids.” He added that the
loss of the over $2 million grant would be a big financial loss and
there was an unknown economic impact if the project is lost. When
asked what was the next step, Wattenbarger said he didn't know yet.
A special called meeting is set for 4:50 PM Tuesday March 21 at Crossville city hall. The meeting has been called by council members J. H. Graham and Pamala Harris.
The single item on the agenda concerns discussion and possible action on the rescindment of contract with Crossville Shooting Sports Park, Inc.
The contract calls for closing on the property sale to the nonprofit by April 1. It is unclear if the nonprofit could take legal action if the contract is rescinded by the city.
The project has been discussed for just over 18 months and the city agreed to provide property that was originally purchased for use as a landfill. 37 of the over 200 acres remains as a former landfill and the city kept 40 acres along Albert Frye Road for possible industrial development.
The project was originally brought to the city by Co. Mayor Kenneth Carey but since the county is not involved in the project it is unclear if Carey was acting in his official capacity or as a private individual. Carey holds a seat on the nonprofit board that plans to operate the park.
The funding for construction is $2.5 million from TWRA.
Another council called meeting is also set to follow for 5 PM on rehiring previously retired city employees and finally a work session on the city's capital improvement plan.
There was a standing room only crowd at
the March Crossville city council meeting in expectation of a
discussion of the property transfer for the Shooting Sports Park to
be located between I-40 and Albert Frye Road.
The controversy is over the city's
approval last month of selling part of the acreage that the city
bought over 20 years ago for use as a landfill to a non-profit
organization hoping to operate a shooting sports park at the
location. Some of the residents and property owners in the area were
not aware of the project until recently and are concerned about the
noise that the shooting will generate and the possible effect on
their property values.
A large crowd attended Crossville city council meeting as they
discuss concerns by residents near the property proposed for
a shooting sports park. Here Harold Stryker speaks on behalf
of property owners in the area of the Albert Frye Rd. property.
There was also a large contingent of
supporters of the project including young people who participate in
shooting sports for several local organizations and so,me of their
parents. A number of members of the board of the newly formed
non-profit group and they also spoke to the council.
Public comments on the topic of the shooting sports park.
After some 45 minutes of public
comments and discussion of the matter the city council approved a
motion to ask the non-profit group to hold a public meeting with the
property owners and area residents to share information about their
plans and the operation and how it might affect the area.
The motion did not make any changes to
the sales contract that calls for a closing on the sale by April 1,
2017 and likely to take place before the meeting can be held. The
biggest issue seems to be that there was no notice to those in the
area about what was planned for the property.
Local businessman Harold Stryker spoke
first on behalf of the concerned property owners who shared petitions
with the council. Said Stryker, “I want to make it very clear.
We are not opposed to a shooting park.” He said their concern was
the location and the effect on neighboring properties. He said he
understood there could be as many as 10,000 shots filed in a single
day. According to Styker, a home he and his son own is estimated to
be only 600 feet from one of the proposed shooting stations.
Stryker concluded asking that the
council reconsider the action on the property.
One of the members of the non-profit
board, James Wattenbarger spoke saying that he had looked at a lot of
locations for the park and he was not aware of an available location
that would impact less citizens then the Albert Frye Rd. location.
He added that some locations that had been studied would increase
traffic through residential areas. Wattenbarger explained they were
looking and making some changes to the plans in order to control
noise from the park.
Greg Cantrell identified himself as the
trustee for the Frank Brown Family trust. The trust owns between 400
and 500 acres from the Bean Pot to Albert Frye Rd. Cantrell said the
trust was interested in economic development, great healthcare and
education. He said that the family had donated the land for Brown
Elementary School.
Cantrell said his concerns were that
until last night neither he nor other family members knew anything
about the project and they are very nearby property owners. In
addition, he said the family had a vision for many years of what the
corridor might become. Development of the family trust property
could be an 80 to 100 bed assisted living facility that would be an
$8 to $10 million investment that may not be compatible with a
shooting park. “I'm asking you to slow down this process if you
can and let us work with you as a significant property owner.
Valorie Cox is a member of the
non-profit board and presented a petition with over 382 signatures in
favor of the shooting park. Cox explained that in the region there
were 25 counties that sought the park location and Cumberland County
was selected. She said one event with 300 shooters would bring at
least some 600 visitors to the county and at a spending of just $50
per person they could leave $30,000 in the county.
Following the public comments the
council quickly agreed to move the item concerning the shooting park
up on the agenda and began to discuss the topic.
City Council discussion on shooting sports park
Councilman J. H. Graham moved that “the
city requires the non-profit organization to have a public hearing
where the property owners are identified and asked to come to a
meeting within the next 30 to 60 days to identify the pros and cons
of the shooting range.” Graham's motion was supported by
councilman Danny Wyatt.
Mayor James Mayberry asked how the
motion would affect the city's current sales contract that says the
sale will be closed by April 1? City attorney Will Ridley explained
that any extension of the contract would have to be agreed to by both
parties.
Councilwoman Pamala Harris said she
felt the park would be a good thing for the community. “I just
want to be fair to all of the parties involved,” added Harris. She
said the council won't make everyone happy no matter what they do but
perhaps not enough due diligence was done on the deal.
Wyatt said that until the end of the
year he thought the project was a joint city county project. He
apologized saying he should have done more homework. “I think
these people need to be given the opportunity to speak and ask
questions and it should have been done a year ago,” said Wyatt.
Crossville attorney Randall Boston
addressed the council. He said he was speaking as a member of the
non-profit board and not as an attorney or as the county attorney.
Boston said the he and a man named Kenneth Carey and not mayor
Kenneth Carey and several others had worked on the project for quite
some time. “I stand here before you to say that we have a contract
and time is of the essence,” Boston continued, “and there is no
law that says we have to notify anyone or put up a sign.” He added
that the conversations have been going on since the middle of 2015
and well documented stories by local media sources. Boston pointed
out that drag strips and race tracks and airports all make noise.
The vote on the motion included 4 votes
in favor from Graham, Wyatt, Harris and Scot Shanks. Mayor Mayberry
voted no after seeking clarification that the proposed public meeting
would not affect the contract.
Following the vote, J. H. Graham
requested a 5 minute recess that was approved by Mayor Mayberry.
Action in a special called meeting
changed the person holding interim city manager by a majority vote of
the Crossville city council Tuesday.
The special meeting was called by Mayor
James Mayberry on Saturday to consider the dismissal of interim city
manager Steve Hill. Council member Pam Harris was not present for
the meeting.
Mayor Mayberry opened the meeting
commenting, “I hope that the present council members consider the
citizens and the employees of Crossville in the importance of this
meeting's outcomes.” Mayberry then moved, “Due to pending
litigation, revelations of grievances and the recent personnel board
meeting and insecurity among employees that it is in the best
interest of the city to terminate Mr. Hill at the close of business
today.” He continued, “I don't feel that we have to start
discussion at day one of Mr. Hill's management employment and
controversy, but we can if we need to. Details of employee conflicts
at Parks and Rec, conflicts and lawsuits involved with our police
chief and potential future lawsuits should be familiar to all the
council members. My motion stand to potential end these conflicts
today.”
Council member Scot Shanks supported
Mayberry's motion.
Council and interim manager Steve Hill listen as
HR director Leah Crockett answers questions.
Council member J. H. Graham asked if
there was a report from the personnel board concerning the complaint
heard the previous week. The finding of the personnel board was
discussed and the action by the board to follow the recommendation of
the recommendations of the Municipal Technical Advisory Board (MTAS)
that there were actions that were grievances but the time to file a
complaint had expired. The board further recommended that there be
better communication between the city manager and the department
heads.
Councilman Danny Wyatt asked city
attorney Will Ridley if the council could hold pending litigation
against an individual?
Ridley answered, “The decision to
hire of fire a city manager was solely a political decision. However
you come to that decision is at your determination. It can be made
for any reason.
Wyatt continued that he needed some
clarification. “I don't understand the knee jerk reaction here in
the fourth quarter at the two minute warning? We're doing interviews
tonight.
Mayberry responded to Wyatt, “I
believe the last time a city manager was relieved of his duties, your
comments on that one were you just lost faith in his management
abilities. I have lost faith in Mr. Hill's management abilities.”
Councilman Shanks pointed out that
the personnel board was just a small part of the reason for the
action.
Mayberry added that the latest
unacceptable act of consorting with other employees and disrespecting
and intimidation of department heads I feel is unacceptable and I
don't think we need anybody's ruling on that because we've seen the
evidence in black and white.
Shanks commented, “I like Steve.
I've known him for a long time, but to keep Steve as city manaer is
not a business decision, that's a personal decision.” He added
that even though he hopes to have a manager hired soon, with
candidates dropping out it could be three or four months before it
could be finalized. “I just feel we're putting Crossville at risk
if we keep Steve in as city manager,” Shanks concluded.
Wyatt voiced that he had not heard some
firm evidence of that fact and added that he would like to hear some
to prove what Hill did wrong.
Mayberry answered that as far as they
know he's not broken any laws.
Graham also commented that Hill was a
close personal friend but he would make the decision based on
education and professionalism. He pointed out that even though Hill
had applied for the full time city manager position, he was not
selected for the interview process. Graham then made a motion to
call for the question. That motion was approved.
On the dismissal of Hill, Wyatt voted
no while Mayberry and Shanks voted yes. Graham passed on the first
call and then entered a yes vote. The motion was approved.
Council then moved to a discussion of
appointing a new interim manager but that created more issues as
there was not an item on the agenda but it was listed in the agenda
text on the discussion of dismissing Hill.
Mayberry explained that he had given
the matter a lot of thought and he felt a good person who was
involved in many city activities and was in a non political, neutral
position was IT department head Lee Lawson.
Graham said that he was not prepared to
discuss the replacement of the interim city manager and did not think
that subject was part of the agenda.
Mayberry said that the replacement was
germane to the agenda item and the council could make an exception
under the standing rules with a 2/3 vote of council. Mayberry then
moved to appoint Lawson until the permanent city manager can be
hired. Shanks supported the motion.
Council moved forward to suspend the
standing rules and the motion was approved with Mayberry, Graham and
Shanks approving and Wyatt opposed.
The motion for appointing Lawson
returned to the floor and was approved again by a three to one vote
with Wyatt opposed.
Mayor James Mayberry, right, swears in Lee Lawson
as Interim city manager.
Following the meeting adjournment,
Lawson was sworn in to begin the position as of January 18, 2017.
Left to right, following the action to appoint Lee Lawson as interim city manager, city clerk Sally Oglesby, Lawson and Mayor James Mayberry discuss city business.
Former Crossville mayor and council member Earl Dean has passed away. Current council member and former mayor J. H. Graham posted the news on Facebook saying that "It is with a sad heart that I let you all know that Mr. Earl Dean , former Mayor of Crossville, passed away this morning..He served our Community with dignity.,His love for our Community is unequaled and I respected him and his judgement..He was my mentor and I will miss him."
Dean was elected to council in 1988 and took office January of 1989. He served as councilman until December of 1992 when he became Mayor in January 1993. He continued as mayor until November of 1998. He was returned to the council in November of 2000 and served until 2012.
Dean was also a long time local businessman who owned and operated Monticello Canning.
Crossville mayor J. H. Graham, left, presented Earl Dean, right, with recognition
for his many years of service to Crossville. Councilman Danny Wyatt is in the back.
From Earl Dean's distinguished service award presented when he retired from council:
Earl Dean has served as Mayor for 6 years and a member of the
Crossville City Council for 16 years, Crossville Regional Planning
Commission for 17 years, and the Lake Commission since January 1994
with dedication and distinction, earning him the respect of the
citizens of Crossville; and
Whereas, the exemplary conduct and sense of
fairness he has demonstrated in all his activities has been an
influence for good in the growth and progress of our community; and
Whereas,
during his years on City Council, the population of the county has
grown 61%, resulting in the need for forward thinking and planning to
accommodate this growth and prepare for the future; and
Whereas,
the City Council especially recognizes his progressive leadership in
planning, economic development, infrastructure improvements,
recreation, tourism, education, business
development and support, and marketing during
his tenure;
The Crossville city council approved a
motion that could provide a new location for the Cumberland County
animal shelter if the group known as FOCCAS can raise additional
funds toward the shelter and a proposed new adoption center.
Focus on Cumberland County Animal
Shelter has been working for some time on improvements to the animal
shelter that is located on property that once served the community as
landfill. The building is in poor shape according to the group and
many of the animals spend at least part of their time outside even in
the winter.
Dr. Mark Hendrixson with FOCCAS
Dr. Mark Hendrixson, spokesman for
FOCCAS gave a presentation to the council during their January work
session about the plans and their request for a more central location
for the animal shelter facility and adoption center. Hendrixson said
that the group had looked at property on the back side of the city's
Centennial Park near the current dog park. Currently the group has
some $200,000 in commitments and feels a better location would allow
them to raise much more toward the project.
Mayor pro-tem J. H. Graham moved that
FOCCAS be given six months to raise an additional $200,000 in
donations including pledges and in-kind materials and if they raise
the total $400,000 matched with funds budgeted by the city and county
($90,000 each) then an area of city property with an appropriate
amount of acreage will be dedicated to the Crossville/Cumberland
County animal shelter.
Mayor James Mayberry said he had
concerns over the action that concerns the county operated animal
shelter and that none of the plan has been discussed with the county
nor does it meet requirements they had previously mentioned. “I
think this is a little premature and there needs to be a little more
discussion on a location.
The motion was approved with four aye votes and Mayor Mayberry opposed.
City Council discusses FOCCAS proposal
Prior to the discussion, the matter was
mentioned during the time of public comment by Margie Buxbaum.
Buxbaum is a supporter of the dog park and said she very much in
favor of a new animal shelter. She said her concern was the location
near the dog park and the possibility that people would come and just
dump their dogs in the dog park. Buxbaum agreed that the current
location of the animal shelter was completely inappropriate for an
adoption center.
The Crossville city council approved a
provision to provide a property tax freeze for senior citizens who
meet income limits meaning that if the eligible property owner
properly files each year, their property tax bill would not increase.
The matter was brought to the council's
agenda by council member J. H. Graham III who outlined the change in
state Constitution that was approved by voters statewide several
years ago. Mr. Graham explained that the state comptrollers office
would calculate the income limit each year for the county and that in
the case of improvements to a property, the value of the improvements
would be taxed.
Graham said he knocked on a lot of
doors running for election and said “most of the folks that were
over 65 on fixed income would really appreciated this.” Graham
moved to adopt the resolution to put the property tax freeze into
effect. Graham's motion received a second from councilman Danny
Wyatt.
Councilman Scot Shanks questioned city
finance director Fred Houston about how the program would be
administered and how the city could handle that? Houston explained
that the process would be difficult but that they could do it if they
have to. HE said the taxes for those under the freeze would have to
be done manually and not on the computer as most taxes are
calculated. According to Houston, the more that take advantage of
the more work it will be.
Houston added that the participant will
have to come in each year to prove their income falls under the limit
set and if for some reason they skip a year they could reapply but
the freeze would be at the new tax rate if it had changed since they
first applied for the freeze.
Councilwoman Pamala Harris said that
she knew it would be work to set up at first but that “we need to
serve our community the best way that we can.”
It was agreed that the program would
not become an issue unless the council approved a tax increase.
The new Crossville city council went to
work less then an hour after two new members were sworn in, taking
part in a work session to discuss business coming up on the regular
December agenda Thursday.
Crossville city council discusses business in work session.
One of the items discussed during the
work session was the reinstatement of the monthly work sessions prior
to the regular monthly meets as a way to better understand the
subjects to be decided during the meetings. It appears that the work
session will return based on the discussion during the meeting and
the council will also consider returning the regular meetings to
Tuesdays again.
Council spent a lot of time discussing
the application to the state for a site development grant to help pay
for a construction ready pad for a building up to 200,000 square
feet. Council heard from the Chambers Brad Allamong and city
engineer Tim Begley on the finer points of the project.
City engineer Tim Begley goes over the site plan for the proposed building pad.
The site proposed is a 20 acre space in
the Interchange Business Park on the north side of the park. The
property fits the needs well for a 200,000 square foot building with
loading dock and necessary parking. A company employing some 300
would be expected to use the property. The grant application is due
Friday December 9 the day after the council meeting to approve the
application and some of the decisions may need to be made after the
application is submitted.
The grant provides $500,000 of the cost
toward the project with a minimum match of $214,000. The cost of the
project is estimated at $914,000 and additional match gives more
points in the grant competition. A geotechnical study will be part
of the project to help determine if any issues with the site may
change the cost estimates.
New councilman J. H. Graham suggested
that a turn lane into the industrial park was needed and thought the
city should begin the process of requesting such work from the
Tennessee Department of Transportation. Graham also wanted to see
the interest of the county in working with the city on the project
that would benefit both governments.
The council spent time talking about
the process to hire a new city manager and appeared split over a
quick decision versus pushing out the decision into the new year and
even seeking additional applicants. Mr. Graham called the decision
one of the most important we will make for a couple of years,” but
added that the holidays would be a busy time and make it difficult to
spend the time necessary reviewing the applicants.
Councilman Scot Shanks said he felt the
longer the city waited the more candidates they would lose to other
jobs or lost interest.
A decision could come during the
regular meeting.
Mr. Graham is proposing a special
census of the city to increase the amount of revenue from so called
state shared taxes that are paid based on population. The city has
done several such special census over the last 20 years and they have
been cost effective. Mr. Graham said that while such a census could
cost $40,000 to $50,000 to have done, the city could gain $500,000 in
additional revenue before the next census.
City staff will be studying several
ways to try and determine how many new residents are in Crossville
including water connections, voter registrations and building permits
since the last census.
Councilman Graham is also wanting the
city to look at the possiblity of a tax freeze ordianace as allowed
under state law. The rule allows those who are 65 and older and who
have income within the limits to freeze their tax bill at the time
they apply even if tax rates and assessed values increase. The
benefit must be applied for each year.
Councilman Danny Wyatt discussed the
possibility of city provided health insurance for the city judge and
city attorney. There are some possible issues with the proposal that
may have to be worked out if possible.
City attorney Will Ridley briefly
discussed changes to the city's sign ordinance. According to Ridley
recent legal rulings have changed some of the things the city can do
but the rulings have not given specific rules for the city to follow.
A new sign ordinance will be worked on over the next couple of
months.
Mr. Ridley also talked about a number
of cases the city is involved in through the administrative hearing
process. A number of buildings have been boarded up and secured by
city codes staff and fines have been assessed. According to Ridley
the process of cleaning up derelict and dilapidated properties is
expensive and it sometimes difficult to recover the money the city
uses.
Ridley said the council may have to
decide how much funding they want to invest in cleaning up some city
properties and other legal actions that may be needed to recover
their costs.
