|
TENNESSEE LEGISLATIVE ACTION IN FEBRUARY 2011 27 FEB 2010, by the TOUR editor There have been a few changes in the way the legislature operates since the Republicans took over the transportation committees in the Senate and House. Senator Tracy and Representative Johnson should be congratulated for their dual meeting concept that allows lobbyist to come before the Senate Committee and share the expertise information and documents with their counterparts in the other body. This unofficial collection of transportation committees is like a Joint Committee and will save a lot of time for TDOT, the lobbyist and the legislature. Unfortunately, all three Wednesday meetings in February were started out with a lobbyist that seemed to be full of suggestions on how to raise transportation taxes. The best presentation was by the Tennessee Trucking Association, and it turned into unqualified support for tax increases plus a prediction of doom if the environmentalist ever got their dream of taking trucks off of the road. With one of every thirteen jobs in Tennessee associated with trucking, it would be risky to do something that has so much potential for unintended consequences. For fear or repeating a script written by Stephen King and violate copyright law, it is best to say that the presentation beats most of the disaster documentaries on cable. Ninety-one per cent of cities in Tennessee do not have railroads so putting the freight on trains is not going to work very well. Even though unions do not impact the whole trucking industry, there are union agreements that limit how much freight can be transferred to trains even if the trip starts and ends on a truck. Senator Doug Henry, a Democrat, provides a lot of comic relief as he interrupts and is always angling for some kind of new way to tax or justify a tax that will bring in more money to TDOT. This tax it if it moves mind set is due to well oiled practice plus natural ability after his long service in the Ways and Means Committee. Now that Representative Henry Fincher is not in the legislature anymore, it is safe to mention toll roads and red-light cameras without fear of vigorous rebuttal. Other possible future taxes mentioned was a per mile tax, a ton-mile tax for trucks, indexing for inflation, making diesel and gas taxes the same and doing something about the possibility of an electric car not paying enough for use of the roads. A group of engineers, the American Council of Engineering Companies, provided very good graphics that showed that the supply of lane-miles was not keeping pace with either the population or the vehicle-miles traveled. Any business would love to have the customer increase and the increased usage per customer shown on these graphs but only if the business was charging more for the service than it actually cost. More damage plus wear and tear is actually resulting in less income for states. Federally imposed fuel standards are having the same effect on the state as an unfunded mandate. It could be that the recent decrease in Tennessee fatalities can, in part, be attributed to the fact that congestion is making it harder and harder to go fast enough to kill yourself. With one consistent voice, the engineers insisted that any new tax be constructed as a user fee but they failed to make it clear that the discipline to put user fees back to the place of use has deteriorated badly since the construction of the Interstate system. All of the blame for the gas tax losing its power to build roads fell upon inflation and the taxpayer's unwillingness to pay for what was received. No one mentioned the diversion or borrowing of gas tax money by both the federal and state government nor did they mention that gas money is used for transit and other non-road projects. A very odd development was the federal action to reduce trucker driving time by one hour. This action, supposedly to reduce accidents, is being taken at a time of record low truck fatality rates. The state will be forced to build more trucker rest stops and more parking pavement for idle trucks as a result. Perhaps this is the old union ploy to increase jobs by decreasing the number of hours that truckers can work. The search for villains and the quest for new tax victims continues. There is no failure of imagination in the Tennessee legislature, only a failure to imagine the right thing. The trucking association thinks that the people should be promised something to overcome the resistance to new taxes. The last time the legislature tried that, they promised a County Seat Connector Program that still remains financially impossible and undone for more than 20 years. Another point that makes tax increases unpalatable is the fact that you have to raise the tax more than a penny to get a penny to spend on roads. The same federal system that makes donor states and donee states is used by Tennessee to create, donor local governments and donee local governments. The common mistake is using area and population formulas to redistribute funds. The federal system of redistribution is highly complex and more complicated but the area and population methodology within the formulas assures that money will flow toward rural areas and states from urban areas and states. The only exception would be the portion of the federal gas tax that flows to urban areas as transit funds. These formulas prevent the user from actually getting significant use out of their own transportation dollar. In other words, it seems like you are always paying for someone else's infrastructure in another state, county or city before you get yours. The third group of lobbyist that testified was the Triple A. They showed the weakest support for new transportation taxes but managed to resubmit an old 2009 letter of ideas for new taxes that was passed onto the new Senate and House transportation committees. AAA was more interested in restoring driver education to the schools in Tennessee. AAA is involved in driver education and because of an unmentioned controversy and statistical evidence about how well it works to reduce accidents, the testimony before the committee was about the need to restore the status quo. The justification was simply pointing out the obvious: Someone has to teach them. Thankfully, no one suggested that a portion of the highway trust fund be sent to the schools. Even though there is new management in town, the Republicans don't seem to have any answers to capacity or the slow decay of mobility except new taxes. They still do not realize that the transportation system can never be over supplied with cash because it is cleverly crafted with redistribution mechanisms to less efficient modes of travel and redistribution to areas with the lower vehicle mile use. The economic winners that produce more tax than they need to sustain themselves are forced not only to pay for the economic losers but to build more losers. The definition of need has drifted away from what is truly transportation need to what is political need. The RPO and MPO system is designed to carve the carcass of transportation taxation without accountability or punishment for bad choices. The inclusion of economic development into the criteria for selecting good projects from among the bad projects has put an improper emphasis on providing money for what might happen instead of what is already happening. The federal government is not only pressing fuel economy measures that stem road funds, it is waging, with the help of environmentalist, a jihad on vehicle miles traveled. The system pays for the infrastructure with vehicle miles traveled. Hope springs eternal that the magic pavement will be finally laid that causes jobs to gush forth in the manner of the mythical cornucopia. This quest is doomed because there is no concern or discussion of productivity. It was increased productivity that fueled the economic gains after the construction of the Interstate. Nearly every state and federal action since the inception of the Interstate retards transportation system and seeks to live lavishly off of its last remaining capacity. Transportation has lost its ability to focus on mobility and economic efficiency. Everyone remembers the remarkable changes made in the economy after the construction of the Interstate but few take into the consideration the many jobs lost and road side service businesses shut down on state roads that were parallel to the new interstate. Americans do not mind losing a job when they can get a better one but we are no longer facing that prospect. Transportation improvements have a lower capacity to make a difference in future manufacturing jobs because the main driver of job loss is the increased cost of labor per item produced or service provided. The state economic development system is a partner in the shedding of jobs when it moves a business from outside the state to Tennessee. An efficient transportation system, focused on maximizing mobility, can make it possible to ease the transition to new jobs by making the search zone for new jobs bigger instead of smaller. A good transportation system makes it possible to draw from a larger pool of employees who are willing and able to reliably commute. There are only fifteen counties in 2008 that exported paychecks to other counties and states. The other 80 counties in Tennessee need to import paychecks from outside of their political boundary to maintain their tax base and standard of living. Doing nothing has become as dangerous as doing the wrong thing. |
RPO MEETING 15 NOV 2010
|
15 NOV 2010, by the TOUR editor The November meeting of the Center Hill RPO started on time and with a quorum. The representatives from DeKalb County were missing however and since the main point of business was to rank priorities, James Mills expressed concern that there might not be adequate representation in the event that DeKalb County had priorities that were moved down the list. Another surprise was that TDOT had added two new projects to the list of projects that were to be ranked. The two new projects,"X" and "Y" were climbing lanes for I-40. According to the map, these projects are located to the east of Crossville and the "Y" project was east of Crab Orchard. George Adcock, the train specialist, suggested that there be escape lanes for runaway trucks. Many agreed. The location of the work was mile marker 326 and 339. It looked like the ranking would begin in secret but James Mills was clearly uncomfortable with this method even though it had been done in the past. The contingent from Cumberland County started out with a suggestion and eventually, it was approved. The list for FY 2012 is below:
Even though the greatest good for the greatest number would have been better served by ranking the projects with the highest traffic counts as first, the traditional pork carving required that the Interstate projects be dropped to the bottom of the list. This philosophy would also place the Fifth Interchange as dead last in all of the years that it was ever considered. The Fifth Interchange was ranked behind and below the improvements on Jefferson street this year. This is probably because the city was reported as losing nearly half a million dollars when it jumped ahead of TDOT to upgrade the street because of a school construction south of the Interstate. The multi modal report was a brief description of the efforts to make Putnam County a hub for bus traffic from surrounding counties. Surprisingly, they also plan to have bus service to Knoxviulle, Chattanooga and Nashville. A great deal of the meeting was devoted to the problems getting the data assembled to get consideration for a dangerous road project. It takes three years of data but there have been problems with case sensitivity of data and making sure that the location of the accident is not described differently in different reports. There now seems to be computers, programs and training available but the group was warned that there would be a possible two year delay in analysis. No one complained about TDOT using other governments labor in order to get what should be TDOT's job done. There is also a minimum threshold of accidents required to get the project started. This means that a lot of work might come to nothing. There was the usual question and answer period in which the TOUR editor was able to ask about the length of the I-40 projects. They seemed to be too short to address the problems. There was a public meeting and comment period for this and there was a suggestion that there be work done on entrance and exit ramp geometry. None of these projects are on the steep grade up to Crossville. Several times the town of Monterey was mentioned but these projects are many miles away from Monterey. There was a request to provide estimates for the Fifth Interchange since the scope of the project seems to change often. Chester Southerland, the project manager, verified that this estimate would come in the engineering phase of the project. Nothing was said about ranking projects according to the possibility that they were earmarked. Earmarked projects often require another earmark to finish them after construction costs become more obvious. This means that TDOT might have to eat the cost overrun. |
CUMBERLAND BUSINESS JOURNAL ANNOUNCES THE FIFTH INTERCHANGE WITH THE CONNECTOR ROAD
CUMBERLAND BUSINESS JOURNAL
TOUR EDITOR'S COMMENTS
According to the TDOT project manager, the project that was approved is the same as it was in 2006 and 2008, with the connector road. Apparently, the local officials gave up and just asked for the connector as the FHWA wanted it back in 2002.
If the City and the county throw in $11 million dollars, that means that the expected price is $22 million, well below the estimate that was made in earlier efforts to get the interchange approved. This could be because of the elimination of the more elaborate modified clover leaf in favor of a low volume diamond interchange. This does not specify if it is the cost of the two lane or the final four lane desigfn that is approved.
This is a big scoop and the Herald-Citizen really missed it. Halford, at the February County Commission meeting could not tell the commissioners of one potential client for the park and now Halford is talking about them as if they were stars in the sky.
The growth of Cookeville was estimated to be 20 per cent in 10 years?. Is that people growth or new land growth by pushing the city limits out?
The recession must be over if the city and the county can find so easily $14.4 million for work inside of the park and another $11 million for work outside of the park plus who knows how much to finish the project out in the future as a four lane as approved by the FHWA.
|
24 AUG 2010, by the TOUR editor The day before the news hit the local fish wrapper, better known as the Herald-Citizen, word leaked out that the Fifth Interchange had been approved by the Federal Highway Administration. The TDOT web site had no announcement on it so TOUR used its own resources to confirm that the FHWA had approved the road plus connector. It was not possible to confirm that the actual route was the one approved as the route fought over for the Corridor J project. It seems unlikely that there would be a change in the route since this would ignite another environmental assessment and these assesments usually take an average of seventy months. The fish wrapper used a lot of weasle words describing the victory and there is always a few choice pieces of information that the Fish Wrapper hides to support the continued need to keep that brass plaque up at the Chamber of Commerce that announces the Herald-Citizen Room which is upstairs. The information I got was that the approval was not conditional nor was it contingent on any special requirements. It is expected, however that the $10 million that is currently in the project for the diamond interchange will have to be increased to about $35 million just to get the project back to the 2002 level. There will have to be an ammendment to the State Transportation Improvement Plan or STIP. The county will have to pay the equivalent of two schools or maybe a school and a jail for this interchange. Assuming that the project costs the city and the county $18 million dollars and money is borrowed at 4.5% for 20 years the county and city would need about $1.38 million dollars a year in tax income for 20 years to pay off this investment. If you assume that each industrial job yields $15 dollars per hour and that 60 percent of the gross wage ends up as vulnerable to sales taxes, each new job will yield $514.80 for the two local governments if their combined local government sales tax percentage is 2.75%. This means that the new industry is going to have to employ 2681 employees which is much bigger that the estimated local work force employed by VW in Chattanooga. No one knows exactly how many people can be employed in this new industrial park nor does anyone know the probable wage. Some workers may decide to take the new job at a lower wage just to keep from driving to other citites to work. Some new employees export their paychecks to other cities and retail outlets in the surrounding counties. Until a client is found for the industrial park, the citizens must subsidize this "investment." Even though we have a county executive that carries the credentials of a CPA, the county is walking into this fiasco with open arms. So far, there is no sign that the $14 million dollars for infrastructure inside the park is still on the agenda and there was in the last county audit a $14 million dollar surplus in the debt service fund. This makes the inside infrastructure plus the outside the park infrastructure $32 million. This would translate to a industrial force of 4766 needed to get back the investment via local sales taxes. Furthermore, there would have to be no decline in industrial workers, a phenomenon in this county since 1995 and the nation since 1979. If the decline in industrial workers because of productivity is taken into consideration, the actual count of industrial workers inside the park would have to be started at 6196 so that a three percent decay per year would average 4766 workers over 20 years. The citizens of Putnam County and the City of Cookeville would still be stuck with paying for all of the additional services required by new people as a result of the new industrial jobs even if the tax revenue was self sustaining. If the plan falters in any way, the costs are socialized and competing government services are going to be sacrificed or taxes raised. The county already needs a jail and the city has needed a new police station for years. The police station was put on hold the last time there was a big pile of extra cash so that the Chamber of Commerce Building could be built. The Fish Wrapper mentioned that the local governments have already made promises to financially support the Fifth Interchange "if needed." These two bodies, the city and the county, have had major changes in their membership as a result of the last election. The only thing we have not seen is how they are going to handle the problem of TDOT demanding 50% of the costs before the work begins, including the design work. |
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVES FIFTH INTERCHANGE AND LOOP AROUND COOKEVILLE
TOUR COMMENTS ON CITY PLANNING MEETING 23 AUG 2010
27 AUG 2010, by Danny Newton
The Monday night meeting of the Cookeville Planning Commission was attended mostly by people requesting variances in zoning and a rather predictable contingent from the Cookeville Area Residents Association. Ric Finch was out of the country. When the TOUR representative, and editor of this web site signed in, there were a total of 16 people on the sign-up sheet.
The overall tone of the TOUR and CARA comments was directed at trying to figure out why the city and the county had rejected professional advice and engineering advice on the Fifth Interchange and the Industrial Park. The Wadley Donavan report did not suggest getting a 500 acre park. What was suggested was a 20 to 100 acre park as a later phase, not an immediate necessity. TDOT engineers have already studied the impact of the Fifth Interchange on the traffic on Willow and found it insignificant when the traffic from Corridor J was applied to it. The traffic to be accommodated without Corridor J will be about one-tenth of that amount over Mine Lick Creek Road as a Corridor J. conduit for traffic. The Corridor J project was moved away from the Mine Lick Road Location several years ago.
As usual, in a city meeting, after a few people got up to criticize the project of putting a loop around Cookeville, the sound system began to develop feedback. James Mills ordered that the system be shut off. Gene Mullins, who is still an acting Commissioner, came to speak against the loop around Cookeville because it is wildly unpopular in his district. This will be one of the last acts by Commissioner Mullins since he is not returning to his duties as a result of not running for re-election this year. Since Liz Engle was the reporter for the Herald-Citizen, No comment from the TOUR editor was allowed to find its way into print.
James Mills told the crowd about the city needing to spend $500,000 to build extra lanes at the site of a new school on Jefferson even though TDOT had a project in the hopper to do the same road project. It was not yet approved at the state level. This is possibly because of missing environmental approvals. One of the reasons that there was such a push on this project was three fatalities near the water treatment plant. Mr. Mills did not mention the fact that the $500,000 might not have had to be spent if the project on Jefferson had been pushed as hard as the project to get a Fifth Interchange.
The main objection by TOUR is that the loop around Cookeville was mostly a north-south arterial among numerous north-south arterials that already exist. What is missing is an east-west arterial at approximately one to two mile intervals. Even though the chairman agreed that was a major drawback on the map, the planning document still stated that there was a need for a circumfrencial route around the city. The popularity of the Route around Cookeville would not be nearly as high if there was honesty about how it was going to be funded. Most people think that this is a road paid for out of the $24 million dollars a year that the people of Putnam County send to TDOT. This is not true according to TDOT policy and the latest version of the Interstate Connector Act. The latest version also includes interchanges on any controlled access highway like SR 111. The existing law requires that the requesting government pay for half of the cost of the interchange. When people find out that their property tax will be used for half of the construction, the "need" for this loop will disappear. TDOT keeps about 90% of the money they get from the County to spend in other counties. An attempt to get James Mills to confirm that there is a plan to enter into a 50-50% split with TDOT failed, but I have gotten such assurances from TDOT.
Tour also predicted continued problems with the Fifth Interchange. The Federal Highway Administration is apparently looking at a plan to build a two lane road on a four lane right of way. This is going to be problematic since the Federal Highway Administration requires that there be some kind of obvious need and copious assurance that the missing two lanes will be built in less than twenty years. The approval by the Federal Highway Administration could be stopped on this slight technicality alone. A quick check on the county audit last year shows that there was $14 million dollars in the debt service fund to be transferred to the fifth interchange for infrastructure. This pile of cash makes sure that there is no chance that a demand for a vote on this project can be forced since there will be no borrowed money involved. The county can hand over their cash to TDOT instead of spending it on the infrastructure within the park. Another problem is a change in the federal law that requires the environmental study to be done again if the construction does not take place within eight years. The average time in completing an environmental study is about 70 months.
This spending supports the looming commercial real estate bubble that is yet to break. The city and county, by claiming a need for visibility from the Interstate, sent a signal that this property in the Industrial/Mixed-Use park could also be for other commercial property besides industrial property. The current stock of land and empty industrial buildings in Putnam County should support over 10,000 industrial workers since this was the count back in 1995 according the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The count of industrial workers in Putnam County right now is about 6000. That is equal to the workers required for two local VW plants! without building any new buildings.
For there to be a Fifth Interchange, somebody has to lie. The penalty for lying that results in federal money being misdirected is $10,000 and five years in jail. Somebody at the Federal Highway Administration has to certify that there is no other way to accomplish access to the Industrial park. Somebody has to certify that the total project will be completed in twenty years. New federal rules dated 18 AUG 2009 require even more assurances that the statements made to the Federal Highway Administration are true.
There were numerous assurances that the inclusion of a project in the list in no way created a priority for the project. The Planning Commission had to include the Fifth Interchange in the plan to keep the City and County from looking foolish and to show some respect to the County Executive and others who voted for the Fifth Interchange at the Rural Planning Organization Meetings. Taking the loop road and interchange out would also be a stab at the large crew of local officials and Chamber of Commerce members that went to Nashville to literally beg for it at the Certificate of Need hearings in the Economic and Community Development meetings.
23 AUG 2010 AUGUST RPO MEETING 20 AUG 2010
|
by Danny L. Newton 20 AUG 2010 The Center Hill RPO meeting was held this morning at the Leslie Towne Center and there was a quorum for the purpose of conducting business. It was not until the end of the meeting that anything about the Fifth Interchange came up. Chester Sourtherland, the TDOT project manager stated, in the public comment segment of the meeting, that the Federal Highway Administration has before it a request to approve the original version of the Fifth Interchange with a northern connector. James Mills further clarified that the road would be a two lane but that the land for the four lane road would be acquired. Mr. Southerland further clarified that there was no local agreement between the city/county and the state to share the cost of the project as requires by state law TCA 54-5-507. Public comment on this project is coming up next week at the regular meeting of the Cookeville City Commission at 5:30 P.M. The new officers elected in August have been sworn in. This new commission is very pro-road but the Cookeville Area Residents Association and Tour plan to attend to dispel any illusion that there is total public support for this project. No matter how popular the project seems to be, the main obstacle seems to be the Federal Highway Administration. There are rumors from people who work at the Federal Highway Administration that TDOT owes the feds a few very expensive connector roads in other parts of the state. The state was allowed to build only the interchange with the connector to come later and this violates Federal Policy. New management at the Federal Highway Administration seems to be determined to correct the idea that these agreements and Federal Policy can be violated as a matter of convenience. There is also the matter of the unfinished lanes. Federal Policy as found in the Congressional Record requires that the purchase of future right-of-way not be done without copious assurances that the future construction will be built within twenty years. The existing bridge at the Mine Lick Creek Road and I-40 is not wide enough for a four lane road so some kind of redesign is in order whenever this road changes into a four lane. What is at stake is the 50% cost sharing plus the takeover of maintenance of the interchange. A five lane bridge over I-40 in Crossville is expected to cost about $4 million dollars. Even though there are monies available for right-of-way and preliminary engineering, there is no available estimate of the cost of the road. In the original proposals to build the Fifth Interchange it was obvious that the cost of the interchange and its northern connector was being understated. The cost of the land was about a third of the going price for land in that area. The constant speculation created by the chatter at the Chamber of Commerce also tends to raise expectations. Complaints about using the road as an excuse to get TDOT to clean up a Brownfield at Kenny's Auto Salvage resulted in a promise not to include Kenny's in the project, but that was only after it looked like the Federal Highway Administration would approve the project without the connector. The reason costs are important is that the Interstate Connector Act requires local participation in the costs at 50%. There is no doubt, from TDOT comment cards, that the original road and connecter was not a popular project and that popularity improved once the road was taken out of the project. If it becomes certain that the cost of the project is to be partially borne by the local governments, it could be that the shorter route could be considered. This might inject further delay because it could restart the Environmental Evaluations which are about eight years old now. At any rate, no person can assure anyone that when the bridge needs work, replacing or other future work required, the Interstate Connector Act could be enforced even though it was not enforced in the beginning of the project. |
|
22 MAR 2010, by Danny Newton The ongoing landslide problems along US64 in Polk County have given another push to the pressure construct at least the Tennessee side of Asheville to Chattanooga four lane called Corridor K. No one knows yet the final cost but good estimates of the slide repairs from TDOT support the idea that the amount will be close to $3 million dollars. US 64 has been closed since 10 NOV 2009 and is scheduled to open on 16 APRIL 2010. This corridor was proposed in 1965 but never built because of the massive costs in difficult terrain. The House joint resolution was passed with unanimous yes votes. An ammendment to the bill was used as an accounting trick to change the estimated cost from $900 million to zero. The resolution has no impact because the cost were imputed to the federal government rather than the state. This is totally opposite the usual customary and legal requirements for road costs to be divide as 20% state and 80% federal. This joint resolution seems to be saying that the state of Tennessee is 100 percent ready for this road if the federal government pays 100% of the costs. The bill was sent out of the Senate Transportation committee with unanimous yes votes, even by Jim Tracy who is running for the sixth-district congressional seat of Bart Gordon. There are multiple possible routes for Corridor K but none has been blessed by the environmental process. There is no reason to believe that North Carolina will have any urge to build their end of the road so this portion in Tennessee will end up being a road to nowhere for many decades. One estimate of the cost was $1.4 Billion dollars and that is nearly 90 percent of the entire budget of TDOT for a year. Furthermore, Polk County is a county of only about 16,000 people. This project shows once again that the project selection system is broken. Why should 6 million people spend so much money for 16,000? It would be cheaper to turn the county into a state park and move everybody out. |
H-C FINALLY TELLS THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE FIFTH INTERCHANGE SETTLEMENT
|
City to settle case with property owner Liz Engel Herald-Citizen Staff Tuesday, Mar 02, 2010 COOKEVILLE -- A settlement has been reached in a long-running case between the City of Cookeville, Putnam County and a property owner with land surrounding the planned Highlands Business Park. And the Cookeville City Council will consider approval of the settlement agreement later this week. Norma Faye Pyles Lynch, who had owned a 20-percent interest in more than 70 acres now surrounding the planned park south of Interstate 40, will receive 15 acres in the settlement, per an agreed order filed in Putnam County Circuit Court in mid-February. Both the council and Putnam County Commission must approve that document -- the council will vote Thursday evening and the commission is expected to consider the issue later this month. "We can either accept this or let the court decide how to do it," Cookeville City Manager Jim Shipley told the council during a work session held Monday afternoon. The land, which is divided out in three separate tracts, includes a triangle of 6 acres north of Interstate 40 and bordering Mine Lick Creek Road, 3.5 acres cornered by Stewart Cemetery Road and Bennett Road and 5.5 acres joining Bennett Road and Lee Seminary Road. In the agreement, both parties acknowledge they have no control over what the state may do in regards to roads in and around the business park, and all three parties worked to satisfy Lynch's concerns about access to the properties. For example, parcels that currently have road frontage will continue to have road frontage, the agreement says. The case has been a long-running one for the city and county -- in late 2007, both the council and commission voted to condemn Lynch's interest in the property and filed a petition to acquire the property by eminent domain in 2008. Later that year, Lynch, under a formed LLC, filed a motion to dismiss, saying the city and county had not obtained a certificate of public purpose from the state. The city and county then requested that the eminent domain petition be voluntarily dismissed. In early 2009, the city and county filed notice to dismiss the condemnation petition and soon after voted to reconfigure the park to exclude the disputed tracks. The agreed order was signed by Judge Amy Hollars, county attorney Jeff Jones, city attorney Dan Rader and Lynch's attorney Robert Anderson. In other business Thursday, the Cookeville City Council will also set a date for a public hearing and first reading of a rezoning effort at 1629 McCulley Road in east Cookeville. The Cookeville Planning Commission last month approved a developer's request to change the zoning of a 15.5-acre tract from RS20 to a higher density RS10. If approved as part of the consent agenda, that hearing will be held April 1. The council will meet starting at 6 p.m. at city hall. The public is invited to attend. |
THE DAY THE FIFTH INTERCHANGE NEARLY DIED OF NEGLECT
|
The last item of business at the County Commission was to vote for a resolution to work with the Tennessee Department of Transportation to keep the Fifth Interchange an active project. According to the County Executive, Kim Blaylock, the resolution was cobbled together after a meeting with unnamed TDOT officials who expressed concern that the local community was divided about the fate of the Fifth Interchange. Not told to the County Commission was that Ric Finch and Wayne Pegram, officials in the Cookeville Area Residents Association were asked to come to Kim Blaylock's Office before the County Commission meeting and asked not to oppose the resolution that the City already passed during a meeting that was held before the regular Thursday night meeting. Earlier in the day, Ric Finch sent out a letter alerting CARA and TOUR that a new move to get the Fifth Interchange moving again was in the wind. County Commissioner Greg Rector confirmed, earlier in the day and before the meeting that the plan to seek a resolution had not been in the works very long but that there had been some brain storming on how to fund the project with federal money making up the bulk of the matching funds, perhaps with a federal 75%-25% program, only 25% of the funds as a local government contribution would be required. The Tennessee law still exists and is on the books requiring the requesting government to pay for 50% of the costs. It also forbids engineering expenditures to be made by TDOT on the project until the funds have been deposited. Altogether, the law provides for three discrete stages of disbursement, the engineering, half of the estimated construction cost and the final costs. The current engineering work done is not for construction but for making an application to the Federal Highway Administration for approval. During the final land negotiations in the Pyle Property partition suit, it finally became obvious that the state planned on a low volume diamond interchange and submitted it to the Federal Highway Administration. Kim Blaylock tried to explain the reasons that there seemed to be such a scramble to get approval of the resolution of cooperation between the County, City of Cookeville and TDOT. For the first time, Kim Blaylock told the Commission that they were being pressured by TDOT to pay for part of the connector road. Apparently, this has been known since March 2009. TDOT rejected a letter crafted by both the County Executive and the City manager that says the same thing and now, the issue had to come before the governing bodies of Putnam County and the City of Cookeville. It is possible, but not mentioned that TDOT wanted the city-county partners to pay for the traffic study showing the connector road to the south rather than the north. Bob Luna, CEO of the Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of the project and reminded everyone that they represented 800 businesses and 1600 people. Some of the County Commission was suspicious of the proceeding because of fear that it contained an implied and uncertain financial obligation on future commissions. The County Attorney, Jeff Jones, assured the County Commission that the resolution contained no promise of financial obligation because it was in no way a binding contract. The appearance of an emergency plus the need to act so quickly that the resolution was not on the agenda created some suspicion. County Commissioner, Gene Mullins, from the tenth District, then followed up with the observation that if the resolution had such little ability to bind the governments to future sums of money, then why was TDOT asking for it? Eventually, Kim Blaylock, the County Executive was obliged to tell everyone that without the resolution the Fifth Interchange would die. The county lawyer was also asked about the legal wrangling over the Pyle Property and the county attorney announced that the suit was over and that the county would be required to pay only $25,000 of the $150,000 of legal fees that were requested by the Pyle family. Next, George Halford came forward and announced that he had another secret deal simmering behind the scenes. The details were secret however but they involved a total of $425 million dollars worth of investment in real and personal property. Later on it came out that their "suspect" or "prospect" had made application at seven other locations in the state. There was also a lot of sad stories about how nearly daily chances that slipped through our Industrial Park dragnet because the newest park was not ready. It will take 18 to 24 months to get the park ready, meaning that the infrastructure will be installed. The alleged prospect plans to be in operation by 2014. Gene Mullins told the Commission and the audience that he had reservations about the assumption that you have to have the park ready with infrastructure but moved on to ask Kim Blaylock why there was a business at the end of an interchange in Roane County? Once Again Kim Blaylock was unable to answer this question, even to her own satisfaction. The county executive said that they had some people "helping us with the FHWA." She even told about trying to use her mother, Senator Charlotte Burks, to get information that had been hard to pull out of TDOT. That did not work either. Kim Blaylock wants another access study done to get the connector road connected to the one going through the business park. Commissioner Mullins, clearly exasperated tried to explain to Kim Blaylock, supposedly a CPA, that the estimated cost of the project was a critical factor in determining the benefit-cost ratio. Still, this is unknown. The old Corridor J estimates of the cost of the Interchange was $12.2 million for Route A and $8.7 million for route B. When the interchange was perceived as a gift, the more expensive solution was the preferred option. An approximate cost on the $12.2 million dollar project would be $16 million in current dollars if the consumer price index was used but if a construction price index, targeted mostly on highway historic costs was used, it would be closer to $20 million. Changing the design to the less elaborate diamond interchange will help however. |
CITY AND COUNTY FINALLY ADMITS PROBLEM WITH FIFTH INTERCHANGE
|
CITY AND COUNTY FINALLY ADMITS PROBLEM WITH FIFTH INTERCHANGE by Liz Engle, Herald Citizen PUTNAM COUNTY -- Plans for a fifth interchange in Putnam County have hit a serious snag with federal officials -- bringing up concerns about the future of the project and its potential impact on the development of the Highlands Business Park. The Tennessee Department of Transportation recently issued a letter to city and council officials about the status of the interchange, which would add a fifth Interstate 40 exit at Mine Lick Creek Road. But in recent discussions with the Federal Highway Administration, the letter says, serious concerns have been raised about the lack of development and funding for a northern connector to Highway 70 -- bringing into question the validity of the entire project. Despite the letter, local officials are pledging that the latest news is just a bump in the road and are now focusing their efforts into figuring out exactly how this happened and how to move forward. "We've already had several meetings and at each juncture the issue of the connector has been discussed. And at each juncture it was my understanding that the connector was important to the plan, but it didn't have to be concurrant, or happen at the same time as the interchange," said Rep. Henry Fincher, D-Cookeville. "This is far from being a deal-breaker for the fifth interchange. I think it's a question of finding out how much of this is from the feds or how much of this is what TDOT prefers rather than requires." TDOT anticipates that the latest FHWA comments will now be incorporated into a revised interchange justification study set for resubmission on Jan. 29. The department recommends that "to receive FHWA approval, we believe that this document will need to include written commitments regarding funding and schedule of the connecting road no later than concurrent with the construction of the proposed interchange." Since the connector would be considered a local road, it would be the responsibly of the local government entities to fund its construction -- at last estimate, that cost was around $11 million. TDOT's letter does reference a local interstate connector program for which the city and county may be eligible -- it would provide funding up to 50 percent of the cost. "There's no way we can fund it. It's going to take about all our debt capacity to build our roads into the business park," Cookeville City Manager Jim Shipley said during a council work session last week. "It doesn't make sense to me, the way the economy is, that there's a community that's going spend $14-15 million on a business park to try to provide jobs and all we need is an interchange." Fincher said he, Sen. Charlotte Burks and Rep. Charles Curtiss will all be working to resolve the issue, including a possible meeting with TDOT Commissioner Gerald Nicely in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, leaders at the Cookeville-Putnam County Chamber are also urging community support. The lack of a fifth interchange would have a direct impact on the development of the Highlands Business Park, which continues to take shape in south Cookeville. "The business park will survive without the fifth interchange, but it will impact the marketability of that park land," said former chamber board member Joe Albrecht. "As a community, we need to do everything we can to support this interchange being built. This project is not dead," he continued. "It's just a road block that we've got to overcome." |
|
TDOT ANSWERS INQUIRY ABOUT THE SLIGO BRIDGE Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:19:50 -0600 From: Ed.Wasserman@tn.gov To: dnewton@multipro.com CC: TDOT.Comments@tn.gov Subject: Sligo and Hurricane Bridges Thank you for your inquiry of the 12th, subject above. Contrary to your expressed outlook, there is light at the end of the tunnel, but perhaps not immediately. Development of plans to replace the Sligo Bridge and rehabilitate the Hurricane Bridge are well underway, however, funding issues will require several years to be able to let contracts. The Hurricane Bridge was last rehabilitated in 1977 with a repainting in the 1990's. Recent inspections and analysis have found section loss in several members. These, along with a complete re-decking will be required. As to concerns for two businesses potentially closing, it is doubtful that the bridges are the primary reason, as opposed to other dynamics in the economy. For example, the automobile parts company shipping via I-40, would only experience a 26-mile round trip increase for each shipment in bypassing the Hurricane Bridge. nonetheless, we will be addressing these bridge needs as funds become available. Edward P. Wasserman, CE Director TDOT - Structures Division 1100 James K. Polk Bldg. 505 Deaderick Street Nashville, TN 37243-0339 Phone - 615-741-3351 Fax - 615-532-7745 ed..wasserman@tn.gov |
|
NOVEMBER RURAL PLANNING MEETING CONFIRMS TECHNICAL COMMITTEE CHOICES The November Rural Planning Meeting has held on 12 November at the Clarion Motel which is the former Holiday Inn in Cookeville. The Former road priority picks were confirmed from the October technical meeting. The Fifth Interchange was scheduled for Construction in 2013 but technically has no money. For some reason, the Right-of-Way step was skipped over and it went straight to construction. In the last meeting, Chester Sutherland, the Fifth Interchange project manager, seemed to admit that there was a change in the design to a traditional diamond and that the connector road no longer goes northward toward U.S. 70 but south to Lee Seminary Road. This means that the deceleration loop in the southeast quadrant of the modified clover leaf that forced the city to condemn the structures on the Pyle Property is no longer in the plan. This explanation is finally conforming to the cost estimate. The northward connection was estimated at three times the cost. The most disturbing revelation during the meeting is that there is no relief in sight for the Sligo Bridge. This project failed to get an earmark form Senator Alexander and for some reason, Representative Bart Gordon has gotten earmarks all over his district but is uninvolved in this problem. Maybe, he exhausted the earmark money in Cumberland County? On top of that, was the revelation that the Hurricane Bridge would be posted with new and lower load limits. A fully loaded 18-wheeler can weigh up to 40 tons but the new limits are going to be set at 18 tons. This mysterious action by TDOT follows a pavement upgrade that took place near the time that the Minnesota bridge went down. The Hurricane Bridge is similar to the Minnesota bridge over the Mississippi that collapsed on 01 AUG 2007. It has been more than 24 hours since TDOT has been asked to explain this action. Missing from this meeting was Kim Blaylock, Putnam County Executive, state representative Curtis and state senator, Charlotte Burks. On one level,it is too bad the state representatives were not at the meeting but on the other hand, these state representatives are a big part of the problem. This week, TDOT is accepting comments on two projects that are not nearly as important as the upgrade on Jefferson in Putnam County or the repairs on Hurricane and Sligo Bridge. One of the projects is earmarked from the federal level but TDOT is doing these projects in Van Buren County also because of state earmarking of projects associated with the County Seat Connector Program. This is the poorly managed and ill conceived idea of furnishing every county seat a four lane connector to the Interstate no matter how much it costs and no matter how little the benefit. Without Sligo Bridge, there are two industries that might leave Dekalb County. These industries have a total of 1527 employees. Mayor Sam Sallee was at the meeting and with Chairman James Mills tried to make it clear that the City would be experiencing the cost of installing a turn lane on Jefferson to ease the traffic problem for the new 1600 student school on the south side of the interstate. That turning lane would have to be either torn out or in some way modified later during the change from a two lane to a four lane road. James Mills told the panel that this road already has a very high traffic count of 17,000 per day. The Sligo Bridge Fiasco, which is over two years old, and the Jefferson Street rehab in Putnam County is only two examples of the failure of the project selection process. Nothing was said about the Fifth Interchange or Mine Lick Creek Interchange Project except by the TOUR editor. My comment was that the Fifth Interchange should be cashed in for the Jefferson Ave. School road project. It is also totally ridiculous that Putnam County, which sends about $21.3 million to the TDOT Highway Fund every year, cannot get a road project done that costs a lot less than that. An attempt to mention the problem of sharing money with TDOT through the local aid mechanisms was also mentioned and it was mentioned that the Putnam ounty is already using 3 out of 8 dollars of its own sales tax and property tax money because the sharing formula is inadequate. |
|
TDOT RELEASES AMENDMENTS TO STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM LIST OF NEW OR AMENDED PROJECTS |
FIFTH INTERCHANGE TIMELINE 30 SEPT 1988 Herald-Citizen Reports that Vice Mayor Grogan expects Fifth Interchange by the year 2000. Estimate for the interchange is $1 million. The estimated cost of extending Gould drive to the industrial park is $500 thousand. 03 DEC 1998 Cookeville City Council asks TDOT to perform a feasibility study on constructing fifth interchange on I-40 at Mine Lick Creek Road. SPONSOR-JIM SHIPLEY 01 APRIL 1999 The Cookeville City Council asks TDOT to study the Maple Avenue flyover at I-40 as the new Fifth Interchange. 25 OCT 2000 TDOT dates the Interschange Justification Study for Federal Highway Administration Review as part of Corridor J intersection at Mine Lick Creek Road. 20 MAY 2002 Cookeville proposes to move the city limits to the vicinity to surround the Fifth Interchange 21 JUNE 2002 TDOT Advance planning report on the Northern Connector 15 JULY 2003 Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury releases report to the legislature with reccommendations for objective system of project selection. AUG 2003 Final Report of Independant Investigation Sanctioned by TDOT. Studies selection process of 15 problematic road projects in Tennessee, Mine Lick Creek Road is one of them. 24 FEB 2003 City of Cookeville approves alternate "A" as Phase I Councilman Sam Sallee asks that The Northern Connector be Considered as Phase II. 22 AUG 2005 City of Sparta, in White County, throws in $50,000 for the Highlands Iniative 22 SEPT 2005 Herald-Citizen reports Highlands Initiative Kickoff with $2million. OCT 2005 State Transportation Improvement Plan Shows Project #71005 "Construct New Interchange at Mine Lick Creek Road" ROW acquisition marked for 2006 and construction marked for 2008. See Adobe Page 41/99. Estimated Cost is $10.3 million. DECEMBER 2005 TDOT Provides explaination of the Project Evaluation System. 21 JAN 2005 City of Cookeville announces taking an option on property to be in future industrial park. Mayor Doubts that Fifth Interchange will be built. Sam Salee says more industrial properties needed.WARNING! HERLD CITIZEN VERSION OF THE TRUTH 23 MAR 2003 TDOT report reccommends using SR 111, not Mine Lick Creek Road for Corridor J intersection with I-40. 24 MAY 2006 Tennessee Legislature removes protection from land owners when government acts to build roads or build industrial parks. Bill allows transfer of property to private concerns. Charlotte Burkes listed as a sponser. 29 JUNE 2006 Putnam County loans Cookeville $2,452,685 for their share of the Business Park. 14 DEC 2006 TDOT Signs the Environmental Assessment FHWA concures later on 18 APRIL 2008. The connecting road is to have a design speed of 70 MPH and 250 foot wide controlled access right-of-way. 05 JUNE 2006 Tennessee Governor signs bill limiting the ability of the state, county and city to condemn property. PDF FILE HERE 16 JAN 2007 County Commission votes to listen to Mrs Lynch's side of the story and votes down condemnation request. 05 FEB 2007 Center Hill Regional Planning Meeting votes on transportation projects 06 MARCH 2007 TDOT Holds a public Meeting on the Fifth Interchange 29 JUNE 2007 $5 million transferred out of Putnam county Debt Service Fund to buy an estimated 400 Acre Business Park. 01 NOV 2007 Condemnation of Pyle Property on the City Council Agenda. The vote was unanimous. 12 NOV 2007 The County Planning Commission in a voice vote decides to condemn the Pyle Property. 13 NOV 2007 The Cookeville Chamber of Commerce Refused Tour Editor Access to Engineering Report on the Highland Business Park. 14 NOV 2007 The Chamber of Commerce called a little after 5 PM to advise the Tour Editor that they had prepared a copy of the report that is being used to justify the condemdation of the Pyle Property and that it would be available at the front desk.
12 FEB 2008 The Sheriff Served Mrs. Lynch a summons this morning to initiate the condemnation process on her land. 17 MAR 2008 The City and the County ammend their condemnation suit. This will push back the court date into April 2008. 17 MAR 2008 The Herald-Citizen quotes TDOT spokesperson Jenifer Osborne Flynn as saying that the Fifth Interchange and the Northern Connector are "non related." This suggests that the useless road attached to the interchange can be built later. 18 APRIL 2008 Federal Highway Adnistration, Charles J O'Neil, signs Finding of No Signifigant Impact Statement For Mine Lick Creek Interchange Road And Northern Connector Road. 25 APRIL 2008 THE LYNCH FAMILY ANNOUNCE THAT THE COUNTY AND THE CITY HAVE WITHDRAWN FROM LEGAL ACTION TO PRESS THEIR OUTRAGEOUS EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE UPON THE LYNCH FAMILY 01 MAY 2008 TDOT puts up a partial electronic copy on their web site of the FONSI. This describes the staged construction of the connecting road from two to four lane but on a four lane right-of-way. 08 MAY 2008 The Lynch Family files a petition for Partition in Kind in Circuit Court. Attorneys ask for legal costs and damages. 09 MAY 2008 Herald-Citizen prints Finding of No Signifigant Impact or FONSI claiming that the Northern Connector and the Fifth Interchange are Connected. 18 JUNE 2008 The City Attorney suddenly discovers that he has to go on vaction on the same day that the City and County are scheduled in court to continue their campaign of eminent domain abuse. The Judge rescheduled the next court date to 21 JULY 08. 03 JUL 2008 City announces on the radio that they are paying $16 million to the Upper Cumberland Electric Membership Corporation to compensate them for land annexed in the past few years. 21 JUL 2008 Judge Turnbull permits the city and the county to witdraw from their previous motion to withdraw from the suit. The judge further suggests that the two parties settle the matter out of court in a judicial confrence in November. The Judge allows further delay, until next year for the city and the county to obtain a Certificate of Public Purpose. 03 OCT 2008 The Herald Citizen reported that The city of Cookeville and Putnam County are seeking a certificate of public purpose and necessity from the state Building Finance Committee of the Tennessee Board of Economic Growth. The Cookeville City Council approved a resolution authorizing City Manager Jim Shipley to apply for the certificate during its meeting Thursday. 09 OCT 2008 the Cookeville City Council applies to the Building Finance Committee of the Tennessee Board of Economic Growth for a certificate of public purpose and necessity for the proposed Highlands Business Park." 14 OCT 2008 County Planning Commission approves petition for Certificate of Public Purpose and Necessity at the regular meeting. Kim Blaylock announces that the Business Park is on a "Fast Track." Linda Owens was denied chance to speak at the County Commission Meeting. 23 OCT 2008 The Lynch Family Attorney, Bob Anderson's Appeal to alter the discretionary finding by Judge Turnbull earlier in the year was denied. The Judge also denied a request that the money held in escrow be held in an interest bearing account. 14 NOV 2008 Centerhill RPO moves Fifth Interchange back down to 2011/2012 time frame after voting 11 projects ahead of it in 2010. Project Manager states that this was at the request of local officials. 17 NOV 2008 The county Commission again refused Linda Owens a spokesperson for Mrs Lynch and the family to address the county commission or accept a written summary of her intended remarks. A resolution to issue general Obligation bonds was passed for the county portion of the $14.28 million of infrastructure costs. 20 NOV 2008 The Cookeville City Council approved a resolution to move forward with a PILOT program of tax incentives and to issue General Obligation Bonds to fund the $7.2 portion of the work in the Business Park. The City Council voted to pay the consultants for their work on water, sewer, gas and road design in the new park. 03 DEC 2008 The city of Cookeville let it be know publicly that contacts with TDOT have been made that suggest that use of connector road that was approved by FHWA and shown to the public in the public meetings could be elimiminated and instead, they wanted a road built by the city and the county to be considered as the connector road. The connector road in the original design was originally designed as a four lane that was part of the Corridor J project. It also was a fragment of a half loop around Cookeville that went from SR111, south of Cookeville to SR111 North of Cookeville. 8 DEC 2008 Recently elected state Representative Henry Fincher criticizes the City of Cookeville for lobbying TDOT to alter the plan for the Fifth Interchange. 27 JAN 2009 City of Cookeville and County Officials request secret meeting with the Department of Economic and Community Development to discuss their application for a Certificate of Need. 05 MARCH 2009 Cookeville and Putnam County gets certificate for an industrial park and a business park for a reduced footprint of about 290 acres. This excludes land under contention because of the partition and condemnation suits. 30 APRIL 2009 Deadline for City/County to respond or withdraw from suit passes. State Supreme Court to hear the case and make a decision, possibly in six months. 03 JUNE 2009 Tennessee Supreme Court hears Eminent Domain Abuse case concerning the government land grab at the Fifth Interchange. 24 JAN 2009 Herald-Citizen finally admits that there is a problem with funding the new Interchange. Federal Highway Administration refuses to certify the Project. TDOT demands local payments to get the project back on track. 12 JUNE 2010 Judge Amy Hollars Hears request for the city and county to pay for the legal fees associated with the condemnation of the Lynch Property. .16 FEB 2010 County Lawyer Jeff Jones tells County Commission that the Law Suit was settled last Friday and that the defendant was only awarded $25k out of the maximum of $150+k that was submitted to her. 16 FEB 2010 Putnam County Commission votes on a blank check commitment to work with TDOT to build the Fifth Intechanghe. County Lawyer, Jeff Jones assured all that the resolution does not contain a dollar amount and can not be considered as a commitment that can fall on future County Commissions. County Executive, Kim Blaylock predicted that this is the only way to keep the project alive. The vote was 3 against and 21 for the resolution. 20 AUG 2010 CENTER HILL RPO MEETING at Leslie Town Center. Fifth Interchange is to be built with a northern connector. The land for a four lane is to be bought but the road is only going to be a two lane road. Chester Southerland announced that TDOT is still waiting on the Federal Highway Administration to give the approval. 23 AUG 2010 Cookeville Planning Commission approves Road Plan with Fifth Interchange and Loop Road as major features. 21 SEPT 2010 First internet hint that the Federal Highway Administration had approved the Fifth Interchange with the connector road attached. 02 OCT 2010 CUMBERLAND BUSINESS JOURNAL Exposes critical details about deal to finish the Fifth Interchange. City/County commits to $14 million last Febuary. Also according to the CBJ, the city/county asked for the connector road and the interchange. 03 NOV 2011 RPO Meeting announces delay in the construction of the Fifth Interchange. Right of Way Acquisition is now to be in 2014 and 2015. RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSCONTACT YOUR TENNESSEE STATE TRANSPORATION OFFICIALS House Committee on Transportation REPRESENTATIVE BILL HARMON, CHAIRMAN District 37  Sequatchie, Van Buren, Grundy and Marion Counties Phone (423) 949-5100 Fax (615) 253-0264 Phone (615) 741-6849 CONTACT:Sandy Sain REPRESENTATIVE VINCE DEAN, VICE CHAIR District 30  Part of Hamilton County Phone (615) 741-1934 Fax (615) 253-0271 CONTACT: Joan Achuff REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE FRALEY, SECRETARY District 39  Franklin, Moore, and part of Lincoln Counties Phone (615) 741-8695 Fax (615) 741-5759 CONTACT: Stephanie Peterson REPRESENATIVE JUDY BARKER District 77  Obion, Lake and part of Dyer Counties Phone: (615) 741-0718 Contact: Audrey Jenkins REPRESENATIVE TY COBB District 64  Part of Maury County Phone: (615) 741-3005 CONTACT: Connie Phelps REPRESENTATIVE HENRY FINCHER District 42  Part of Putnam County Phone (615) 741-1875 Contact: Jennifer Murphy REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD FLOYD District 27  Part of Hamilton County Phone (615) 741-2746 Fax (615) 253-0304 Contact: Cheryl Goodson REPRESENTATIVE MATTHEW HILL Phone: 615-741-2251 District 7  Part of Washington County Contact: Carol Burroughs REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIP JOHNSON District 78  Cheatham and part of Montgomery and Williamson Counties Phone (615) 741-7477 Contact: Celeste Thomas REPRESENTATIVE JIMMY MATLOCK District 21  Parts of Loudon and Monroe Counties Phone (615) 741-3736 Contact: Brenda Moore REPRESENTATIVE BARRETT RICH Phone: (615) 741-6890 District 94  Fayette and parts of Hardeman and Tipton Counties CONTACT: B. L. Rhodes REPRESENTATIVE TONY SHIPLEY District 2  Part of Sullivan County Phone: (615) 741-2886 CONTACT: B. L. Rhodes REPRESENTATIVE JOHN C. TIDWELLDistrict 74  Houston, Humphreys, Perry, and parts of Hickman and Maury Counties Phone (931) 535-2619 Phone (615) 741-7098 Fax (615) 741-4324 Contact: Debra Webb REPRESENTATIVE BEN WEST Rep. Ben West Jr. D-HermitageDistrict 60  Part of Davidson County Phone (615) 889-0801 Phone (615) 741-6959 Fax (615) 253-0331 Contact: Mary Adair You can find all bills, fiscal notes, bill histories and co-sponsors, U.S. mail legislative and district office addresses and streaming video of committee and subcommittee meetings HERE RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSSENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKS YOU MIGHT HAVE A USELESS ROAD IF... 1. The road cost more money than it could ever hope to generate in taxes in a lifetime. 2. The local Chamber of Commerce says it will be good for the economy 3. The Chamber of Commerce organizes a pilgrimage to the Governor's office to tell him that everyone wants it. 4. The local paper tells everybody that if you don't want it your are a NIMBY 5. The local Chamber of Commerce is telling everyone that we have to do this because everyone else is doing it too. 6. The local Chamber of Commerce is claiming that we have to do this to get ahead of everyone else who isn't doing it. 7. TDOT says that it will cure the traffic problems. 8. TDOT says it won't cure the traffic problems. 9. The Chamber of Commerce claims that it will be good for the quality of life. 10. The Chamber of Commerce says it will help get the next factory 11. Your State Representative just thinks you are against it because of a pre-existing oppositional character flaw. 12. The Chamber of Commerce is in secret negotiations with the next whiz-bang company that only needs this road to make the whole deal come together. 13. TDOT is building a four-lane road when a two-lane would still have a high life cycle service level. 14. TDOT is building a road that will damage your business but does not go through your business. (No blood, No foul) RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKS 
web counter |