In a letter submitted to Senator Tim Barnes and and Representatives Joe Pitts, Phillip Johnson and Curtis Johnson regarding action on the proposed charter revisions, Judge Smith voiced appreciation for their input and concerns regarding the city charter but suggested that their input would not be reflected in charter revisions.

Judge Smith  made an e-mail copy of his letter to Clarksville’s state legislators  available  to media and local civic and human rights organizations. In this missive,  Judge Smith acknowledges the work performed by the City Council but cites limitations to its ability and resources to adequately review information and issues on the Council table:

“Our City Council works hard, attends many meetings, and functions in a fashion that, in my opinion, is totally orchestrated and controlled by the executive branch of government.  The bulk of information utilized by the City Council in decision-making is prepared, edited, and shaped by the executive branch of government.  The current structure does not allow the City Council to have staff or resources to independently examine issues, obtain independent legal opinions or independent financial analysis.”

Judge Smith also criticized the city’s administrative structure, noting in his communique  that:

The Clarksville government structure provides no balance of powers, no checks and balances, and no separation of powers.  The executive branch (Mayor) controls the legislative branch by serving as a voting member, presiding over meetings of the legislative branch, and appointing and removing, at will, council committee members and chairpersons.  The judicial branch is equally under the control of the executive branch.  Except for the brief moment of rendering a decision in City Court, the executive branch controls all aspects of the docket, court personnel, and the enforcement or non-enforcement of judgments of the City Court.

Clarksville is the state’s fifth largest city, but, Judge Smith noted,  unlike the state’s top four municipalities, “the Clarksville City government structure is much more similar to cities or towns with a population of 1,000, rather than an expanding municipality with a population in excess of 100,000.” He added that no major city in Tennessee has its mayor as a seated member of the City Council, and summed the state of the city as “a monarchy.”

The Letter

Here is the complete text of Judge Smith’s letter:

Dear Senator Tim Barnes, Representative Curtis Johnson, Representative Phillip Johnson, and Representative Joe Pitts:

Thank you for your suggestions concerning the revised Clarksville City Charter.  The City Council’s analysis of the concerns you raised was, in my opinion, “one-sided,” much like the Charter revision process.  It appears that no meaningful change will occur.

I realize that municipalities in Tennessee exist at the pleasure of the State in their numerous and frequently unusual forms.  Unfortunately, the Clarksville City government structure is much more similar to cities or towns with a population of 1,000, rather than an expanding municipality with a population in excess of 100,000 (e.g. no mayor of TN Big 4 cities also sits as a council member).  The Clarksville government structure provides no balance of powers, no checks and balances, and no separation of powers.  The executive branch (Mayor) controls the legislative branch by serving as a voting member, presiding over meetings of the legislative branch, and appointing and removing, at will, council committee members and chairpersons.  The judicial branch is equally under the control of the executive branch.  Except for the brief moment of rendering a decision in City Court, the executive branch controls all aspects of the docket, court personnel, and the enforcement or non-enforcement of judgments of the City Court.

The revised Charter, in my opinion, conflicts with State law in several areas as it relates to the judiciary.  T.C.A. § 16-18-310(b) provides, in part, “the clerk of the municipal court shall maintain an accurate and detailed record of court proceedings… .”  T.C.A. § 55-10-306(a) provides, in part, “that every magistrate or judge of the court shall keep or cause to be kept a record of every traffic complaint, warrant, traffic citation… .”  The proposed Charter, Article V, section 1(f), provides, “the clerk of the City Court, under supervision of the Finance Department, shall keep or cause to be kept City Court dockets… .”  The proposed Charter assigns judicial statutory responsibility to the Finance Department.  T.C.A. § 16-1-102 provides, in part, that “every court has the power to compel obedience to its judgments, orders, and process… .” The proposed Charter, Article V, section 1(b), states, in part, that “the City Judge shall have power… to enforce the collection of all such fines and costs and, in default of payment thereof, to pursue collection of the same through the City Finance Department and City Attorney.”  The proposed Charter seeks to dictate, limit, or proscribe the method the Court would utilize to “compel obedience to judgments.”  The proposed Charter, Article V, section 1(d), ends with the language “the City Judge, with approval of the Mayor, may remit with or without conditions, fines and costs imposed for the violation of any ordinance or Charter provisions of the City or any part of the same.”  This language, and language in part (e) which states that “the Judge to certify to the Finance Department for collection of all fines,” is gibberish. The elected Judge does not require approval of the Mayor” to discharge judicial responsibilities, and further the Judge does not handle any funds and, unfortunately, all personnel who collect funds, establish dockets, and discharge any other functions related to the judiciary are supervised and accountable exclusively to the executive branch of government.  The Judge cannot “remit” or “certify” anything related to funds.

These are a few obvious conflicts the proposed Charter creates concerning State law and common sense as it relates to the judiciary.  The Charter Revision Committee did not ask for my input, the input of the former City Court Judge, or the input of anyone with judicial experience as they made Charter revisions.  The current Charter is admittedly obsolete and outdated in many areas; however, the proposed Charter does not address fundamental Charter shortcomings.

Without independent branches of government and separation of powers, there are no checks and balances, and the executive branch in Clarksville simply does as it chooses without regard to the proposed or current Charter, statutory law, or Constitutional law.  Our City Council works hard, attends many meetings, and functions in a fashion that, in my opinion, is totally orchestrated and controlled by the executive branch of government.  The bulk of information utilized by the City Council in decision-making is prepared, edited, and shaped by the executive branch of government.  The current structure does not allow the City Council to have staff or resources to independently examine issues, obtain independent legal opinions or independent financial analysis.

The proposed Charter further erodes the concept of independent branches of government and balance of power.  Unfortunately, there does not appear to be a method of accountability for the executive branch, given the total control exercised over the legislative branch of government.  The Mayor presides over the legislative branch, introduces legislation, and votes on any matters he chooses, which essentially creates a monarchy. Unfortunately, I do not see avenues for bringing about positive change unless you act.  Keep asking the hard questions.  Clarksville deserves it.

Thanks for your consideration.

Judge Charles W. Smith

Referring to his candidacy, he says he is “your vote for change.” Topping his list of issues is redevelopment, which he maintains “should not be done on the backs of the public,” and he particularly the use of eminent domain as a tool ripe for abuse. TIF (Tax Incentive Financing), a critical component of the city’s redevelopment strategy, “is a serious mistake; each dollar diverted must be replaced by the people.” The whole process of eminent domain should not be done so that the city can maximize taxes, Baggett said.

Baggett takes issue with the “revisiting” of passed legislation that is subsequently found to be flawed, as the original redevelopment ordinance was. “If you don’t know (or aren’t sure), postpone.” He chastised city officials for not doing their homework before passing new legislation.

In his position statement, Baggett advocates:

• City Charter change to require a runoff election for City Mayor if the leading candidate wins by less than 50% of the vote
• Eminent domain should be used sparingly and only for Government facilities such as roads, schools, and utilities easements.
• Focus on the maintenance of high stanbdards of honesty, integrity, impartiality and conduct by employees and agents of the city (full/part time, paid and unpaid, elected or appointed to any board, commission, council, authority, corporation or other body sanctioned by the city)
• Retention of ward representation (he opposes “at large” council representation)
• Placing all boards and groups such as DDP (Downtown District Partnership) under the “Regional Planning Commission” since planning is their chartered responsibility.
• Consolidated government and streamlining government to maximize efficiency and productivity. “A consolidated government built around Constitutional officers.”

Baggett is a two-term former County Commissioner, and came in second to County Mayor  Bowers in the 2006 election.

[Show as slideshow]

It’s also of some concern that they are now also looking at implementing plans along the “Madison corridor” and Riverside drive in addition to the massive downtown plan. We have serious doubts that city and the developer interests which are behind them, will be interested in stopping with just those sections of Clarksville.

Here’s Mayor Piper talking about his modifications to the Redevelopment plan…

Click here to view the embedded video.

Yes, our city needs conduct some targeted redevelopment, but they should not attempt to accomplish it in this capricious manner. Just take a look at how the city of Knoxville which has been so lauded by Mayor Piper does things. Lets watch the exact same presentation which was given to the delegation from Clarksville. It’s quite long but there is a lot of very interesting information which you can then use to contrast Clarksville’s current plan with how Knoxville has been doing things.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Our local plan seems intended to transfer property from private owners to a hand-picked redeveloper(s) for them to profit from, while Knoxville’s primary goal appears to be helping the properties owner to fix up their own property. If that was Mayor Piper’s goal here, We seriously doubt that anyone would be opposing him on this.

We also strongly object to the city giving a further gift to the developers picked by the RDB by giving them Tax Incentive Financing for new construction projects, something that is not done by Knoxville. When our publisher asked Mayor Piper about this he said he didn’t recall that. So for him, and for you here is the quote in question.

Question: Are you doing any incentives at all for new construction in your (redevelopment) districts?
Answer: Are we donating any?
Question: No are you providing any incentives, tax incentives
Answer: For new construction? No.
Question: None at all?
Answer: No, Not at all.

The differences between Knoxville’s and Clarksville’s views on eminent domain are also especially enlightening. Mayor Piper explicitly refused to rule out eminent domain being used to acquire property for private redevelopment.

In order to fully understand what they are actually implementing you have to take a close look at the referenced plans. Among the things that you will find: Over 45 specific redevelopment plans already mapped out targeting downtown property, a massive expansion of APSU, Lincoln homes becoming student housing, Burt school becoming a parking lot and athletic fields and much more.

Probably the quote from the Knoxville presentation that most applies to Clarksville is this one from Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslim…

If you don’t get the process right, you won’t get the end result right.

Clarksville certainly has not gotten their process right, and Mayor Piper’s modifications do not even come close to fixing the issues. The only thing left for the city to do is to rescind this plan entirely! Then we can start from scratch with full community input and taking into consideration the concerns of the citizens of the city, those of the residents in the areas affected, and come up with a plan that actually works for everyone and not just influential developers.

CLARKSVILLE CENTER REDEVELOPMENT AND URBAN RENEWAL PLAN

March 4, 2008

A. INTRODUCTION

This Clarksville Center Redevelopment and Urban Renewal Plan (this “Plan”) is being adopted pursuant to the Housing Authorities Law, being Title 13, Chapter 20 of the Tennessee Code Annotated (the “Act”), and other applicable provisions of law. This Plan is to be undertaken by the Clarksville Housing Authority (the “Authority”), in cooperation with other governmental entities, including the City of Clarksville (the “City”) and Montgomery County (the “County”), if this Plan is approved by the County. This Plan shall constitute both a redevelopment plan under Section 13-20-203 of the Tennessee Code Annotated and an urban renewal plan under Section 13-20-211 of the Tennessee Code Annotated.

B. DESCRIPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA

The area that is the subject of this Plan (the “Redevelopment Area”) includes the Clarksville Central Business Improvement District (the “CBID”), the neighborhoods of Red River, Emerald Hill and Dog Hill, a portion of the Brandon Hill neighborhood, property included within the River District, Austin Peay State University and the industrial area along the Red River. The area is generally bordered on the west by the Cumberland River, the south by the Corman Railroad, on the east by the Corman Railroad and on the north by Red River. The area encompasses about 1097 acres, exclusive of public rights-of-way.

In January, 1999, a tornado struck downtown Clarksville and destroyed the heart of the CBID. Although the greatest impact of the storm was its effect on governmental structures, there was also a great amount of damage to privately owned structures. Significant amounts of insurance coverage as well as local, State and Federal monies were used to rebuild significant structures within the CBID, including the historic Montgomery County Courthouse. A number of privately owned structures have also benefited from this effort and have been either rebuilt or restored. The Redevelopment Area includes a number of historic or landmark properties.

In order to assure the long term economic viability of these recently restored properties and proposed projects, this Plan will serve as a means of providing for and encouraging compatible and supportive development within the defined area. Coordinated redevelopment efforts should provide for parking and access necessary for any new development. This Plan should help provide the impetus for assembling properties for new development and the elimination of underutilized land and deteriorated structures within the Redevelopment Area.

This Plan is consistent with and implements recommendations of the Consolidated Plan for Clarksville, Tennessee, the Clarksville Land Use Master Plan for the Downtown District Partnership (CBID Plan”), the Austin Peay State University Master Plan, the Streetscape Master Plan for the CBID, and the Emerald Hill Historic District Design Guidelines. This Plan incorporates by reference the preservation and redevelopment goals of those plans and superseding or subsequent plans approved by the applicable governmental bodies, including, but not limited to, redevelopment/revitalization plans that may be adopted for the Red River and/or Brandon Hills communities.

While many structures within the Redevelopment Area are used productively, visual inspections by the City and the Authority demonstrate that there are elements of blight within the Redevelopment Area due to dilapidation, obsolescence and deleterious land use that are detrimental to the safety, health or welfare of the community. This conclusion is supported by the incidence of code violations that occur within the Redevelopment Area and the eligibility of some of the Redevelopment Area for Community Development Block Grant funding. Because of these elements of blight within the overall area, the Redevelopment Area is the proper subject of a redevelopment and urban renewal plan, and the redevelopment activities to be undertaken pursuant to this plan constitute an eligible redevelopment project under Section 13-20-202 of the Tennessee Code Annotated.

1. BOUNDARIES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA

The boundaries of the Redevelopment Area are shown on Redevelopment Plan Map attached to this Plan as Exhibit “A” (the “Plan Map”).

2. PLAN OBJECTIVES

The specific provisions and actions incorporated in this Plan have been developed and are necessary to achieve the following objectives:

a.

To establish harmonious land use patterns and provide sites adequate for the planned development of new cultural, commercial, educational, mixed use, and residential uses.

b.

To support resident-sensitive, sustainable growth, while preserving the Red River and Brandon Hills neighborhoods as primarily, though not exclusively, residential.

c.

To provide for redevelopment of the Redevelopment Area, wherein non-conforming or deleterious land uses and the present subdivision and ownership of land precludes the orderly assemblage and desired changes in the use of land.

d.

To eliminate substandard buildings through acquisition and demolition or through a conservation program for the rehabilitation of existing structures where feasible and compatible with objectives of this Plan.

e.

To clear and provide for redevelopment of portions of the Redevelopment Area in which a change in type or intensity of land use is necessary. Within these areas it may be required, and is within the objectives of this Plan, that certain buildings, which are not structurally substandard, be acquired and demolished.

f.

To provide for the temporary or permanent relocation of businesses or residents where necessary to accomplish the objectives of this Plan.

g.

To eliminate and prevent the recurrence of blight.

h.

To eliminate vacant and underutilized land by monitoring development and taking actions necessary to encourage effective and desirable uses of land in accordance with this Plan.

i.

To provide for the layout of new streets, pedestrian ways, parking facilities and other public improvements necessary to support the redevelopment of the area.

j.

To enhance the historic resources represented by structures in the Redevelopment Area.

k.

To create a range of housing opportunities and choices through non-profit and for profit developers.

l.

To ensure that new homes are affordable and blend with existing housing in the community.

m.

To increase and/or expand economic and employment opportunities for residents.

3. PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS

The ultimate objective of this Plan is to create an environment conducive to the redevelopment and the long-term economic viability of the CBID, Red River, Emerald Hill and Dog Hill neighborhoods, a portion of the Brandon Hill neighborhood, Austin Peay State University and the underutilized and underdeveloped industrial area along the Red River, and the property along the Cumberland River. These objectives are to be accomplished through the coordinated and planned redevelopment of the area and the elimination of blighting influences posed by dilapidated buildings and structures, underutilized land and incompatible uses. The various provisions of this Plan have been adopted to remove the conditions which have created or contributed to the substandard character of improvements in the Redevelopment Area and restore the vitality of the area through redevelopment and rehabilitation. The types of actions necessary to achieve this objective are:

a.

The acquisition of land through negotiation, condemnation, or otherwise for public purposes and/or for private infill development, whereby the condition of title, diverse ownership of real property to be assembled, street or lot layouts, or other conditions prevent a proper development of the property in accordance with this Plan.

b.

The acquisition of land for the purpose of removing, preventing, or reducing blight.

c.

Demolition, clearance and relocation as necessary within the Redevelopment Area to achieve the objectives of this Plan.

d.

Closing, vacating, or relocating various streets, alleys, pedestrian ways, or utilities.

e.

To provide for and construct improved streets, alleys, public facilities, open spaces, greenways and pedestrian ways and the provision of additional access roads in and through the area are anticipated or provided for herein.

f.

Negotiation of agreements with developers to undertake redevelopment of property in accordance with this Plan.

g.

Obsolete or inadequate utilities or other public improvements will be removed.

Proposed site improvements and public improvements which are necessary to meet redevelopment objectives, such as streets, sewers, gas, water, power, parks, open spaces, playgrounds, drainage improvements, sidewalks, fire alarms, parking facilities, pedestrian ways, public transportation facilities, and other improvements shall be installed by the Authority, redevelopers, utility providers, or the City of Clarksville.

h.

Changes in zoning to be consistent with the Consolidated Plan for Clarksville and Montgomery County and the CBID Plan and any updates or addendums thereto.

C. LAND USE PLAN

1. LAND USE MAP

The permitted uses of land within the Redevelopment Area are as shown on the Plan Map, and as further described in the following sections. In the event of a conflict between the language pertaining to land uses contained in this Plan, and any other restrictions applicable to the same property, the applicable then existing City zoning laws, codes and ordinances will control. The permitted uses of the land as shown on the Plan Map, and as further described in the following sections, provide a vision for future uses and planning and will promote change in an orderly fashion, and this Plan will be used as a tool for appropriate governmental bodies to determine if rezoning requests are consistent with the community vision.

2. LAND USE PROVISIONS AND BUILDING REQUIREMENTS

In order to achieve the objectives of this Plan, all redevelopment and use of land within the Clarksville Center Redevelopment District shall be subject to all requirements and restrictions of the Clarksville Zoning Ordinance, the Consolidated Pan for Clarksville and Montgomery County, the Clarksville Land Use Master Plan for the Downtown District Partnership (”CBID Plan”), the Streetscape Master Plan for the CBID, the Austin Peay State University Master Plan, the Clarksville River District Master Plan, the Dog Hill Design Guidelines, the Emerald Hill Historic District Design Guidelines, and other redevelopment/revitalization plans adopted by the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Clarksville that include territory within he Redevelopment District). The Redevelopment District Board (”RDB”), created pursuant to Section I herein, may recommend the adoption of additional design guidelines regarding appropriate land uses, design, color, setbacks, landscaping, parking, ingress and egress and other restrictions to be adopted by the appropriate governmental bodies and/or the CBID.

a. General Land Use Districts: Within the general land use districts shown on the Plan Map, the following represent objectives for redevelopment in accordance with this Plan:

1. Central Business and River District: This subarea encompasses the majority of the CBID, the Austin Peay State University campus, property bordering the Cumberland River and the Dog Hill Historic District, Emerald Hill Historic District and the Red River Improvement Corporation plan area. It is desirable that some buildings be renovated or demolished as appropriate or necessary and vacant or underutilized land be redeveloped with new development encompassing uses permitted by this Plan. Redevelopment and restoration projects may involve the assembly of land in order to promote a set of comprehensive yet diverse improvements to the area. The intent is to promote an “urban” atmosphere within the CBID and a mixture of uses that enhance the river front.
   • General residential
   • Public and private schools and daycare centers
   • Institutional, churches
   • Public parks, plazas and playgrounds
   • Cultural center, fine arts center, museum, theater or assembly facilities
   • Offices -business, governmental, professional, medical, arts, etc.
   • Convenience retail, general retail and personal services
   • Hotels, motels, or other habitation for transient use
   • Indoor recreation facilities and commercial amusement
   • Club, bar or nightclub, excluding adult entertainment
   • Parking
   • Restaurants and other eating or drinking establishments
   • Warehousing
   • Wholesale sales
   • Light industrial activity as regulated in Section 11-316 of the Official Code of the City of Clarksville
   • Churches and other similar places of worship
   • Financial institutions, including drive-through facilities
   • Accessory uses customarily incidental to any of the above
2. Mixed Use District: These areas border the CBID. It is desirable that some buildings be renovated or demolished as appropriate or necessary and vacant or underutilized land be redeveloped with new development encompassing uses permitted by this Plan. Redevelopment and restoration projects may involve the assembly of land in order promote a set of comprehensive yet diverse improvements to the area. The intent is to create an “urban” atmosphere that complements the CBID. Permitted Uses
   • General residential
   • Public and private schools and daycare centers
   • Public parks, plazas and playgrounds
   • Cultural center, fine arts center, museum, theater or assembly facilities
   • Offices-business, governmental, professional, medical, arts, etc.
   • Convenience retail, general retail and personal services
   • Hotels, motels, or other habitation for transient use
   • Parking
   • Restaurants and other eating or drinking establishments
   • Indoor recreation facilities and commercial amusement
   • Club, bar or nightclub, excluding adult entertainment
   • Churches and other similar places of worship
   • Financial institutions, including drive-through facilities
   • Accessory uses customarily incidental to any of the above
   • Medical or health care facilities
   • Warehousing
   • Wholesale sales
   • Light industrial as regulated in Section 11-316 of the Official Code of the City of Clarksville
3. Residential Districts (Dog Hill, Emerald Hill, Red River and a Portion of Brandon Hills neighborhoods): These areas consist of primarily residential development surrounding the CBID. It is desirable that the existing residential development be preserved and protected from incompatible uses and vacant or underutilized land be redeveloped with new residential development. Development within the Dog Hill and Emerald Hill neighborhoods is governed by the applicable Historic District guidelines. Development/redevelopment within the Red River and portion of Brandon Hills included in this Plan is subject to previously mentioned design controls and procedural regulations (Clarksville Zoning Ordinance, the Consolidated Plan, the Clarksville Land Use Master Plan, etc.) and will be further governed by the proposed Red River-Brandon Hills Revitalization Plan if adopted by the City Council. Redevelopment and restoration projects may involve the assembly of land in order to promote the residential character of these areas. It is further the intent of this Plan to support affordable housing opportunities proximate to the CBID. Permitted Uses:
   • Convenience retail, general retail and personal services
   • Country clubs
   • General residential
   • Offices
   • Public and private schools and daycare centers
   • Public parks, plazas and playgrounds
   • Churches and other similar places of worship
4. Industrial District: This area is bordered by the Red River and the Corman Railroad tracks. It is desirable that some buildings be renovated or demolished as appropriate or necessary and that vacant or underutilized land is redeveloped with new development encompassing uses permitted by this plan. Redevelopment and restoration projects may involve the assembly of land in order promote a set of comprehensive yet diverse improvements to the area. The intent is to encourage a variety of industrial, warehouse, and compatible land uses and the revitalization of vacant and underutilized industrial properties. Permitted Uses:
   • Warehousing
   • Wholesale sales
   • Light manufacturing
   • General manufacturing
   • Public and private educational facilities
   • Offices -business, governmental, professional, medical, arts, etc.
   • General commercial
   • Medical and health care facilities

b. General Design Regulations and Controls: In order to achieve the objectives of this Plan, design controls and procedural regulations of the Clarksville Zoning Ordinance, the Consolidated Plan for Clarksville and Montgomery County, the Clarksville Land Use Master Plan for the Downtown District Partnership (”CBID Plan“), the Austin Peay State University Master Plan, the Streetscape Master Plan for the CBID, the Clarksville River District Commission Master Plan, the Dog Hill Design Guidelines and the Emerald Hill Historic District Design Guideline, shall apply, as applicable, to land within the Redevelopment Area developed, redeveloped, or improved subsequent to the recording of this Plan in the Register’s Office of Montgomery County. The RDB may recommend the adoption of additional design regulations and controls to be adopted by the appropriate governmental body. The City Council may adopt additional redevelopment/revitalization plans to control and regulate development within the Redevelopment Area.

1. Site PlanTo the extent site plans are required under the general design regulations and controls listed in Section C.2.b., a copy of the site plan shall be submitted to the RDB and where the development is to be accomplished in phases, a construction-phasing schedule shall accompany the site plan. The RDB shall review and provide comments to the governmental agencies with the authority to approve such site plan. Development shall conform to the approved site plan.
2. Landscape Plan To the extent landscape plans are required under the general design regulations and controls listed in Section C.2.b., a copy of the landscape plan shall be submitted to the RDB. The RDB shall review and provide comments to the governmental agencies with the authority to approve such landscape plan. Development shall conform to the approved landscape plan.
3. Exterior Design Control To the extent design guidelines arc required under the general design regulations and controls listed in Section C.2.b., including, but not limited to, building materials, landscaping and paving materials, development shall conform to the approved design guidelines and controls.
4. Historic PreservationTo the extent historic guidelines and controls are required under the general design regulations and controls listed in Section C.2.b., development shall conform to the approved guidelines. A copy of the design plans shall be submitted to the RDB. The RDB shall review and provide comments to the governmental agencies with the authority to approve such design plans. The RDB may recommend the adoption of additional guidelines generally consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Structures to the Governing Body or such other guidelines as the RDB may deem appropriate.
5. EnforcementIn the case of violations of the restrictions contained in this Plan, the RDB may send Notice of Violation to the appropriate code or building official of the City and/or the Clarksville City Attorney who shall be entitled to seek immediate injunctive and other equitable or legal relief to enforce restrictions of this Plan, including pursuing all remedies available at law or in equity, including, without limitation, those that are provided by the Official Code of the City of Clarksville.

c. Duration of Land Use Controls: The provisions of this Plan, specifying the land uses for the Redevelopment Area and the requirements and restrictions with respect thereto, shall commence upon approval of this Plan by the City Council, and, upon being recorded in the Register’s Office of Montgomery County, and shall continue in effect until December 31, 2028.

D. LAND ACQUISITION

In order to achieve the objectives of this Plan, it may be necessary to acquire properties within the Redevelopment Area, with the exception of properties owned by Austin Peay State University and other governmentally-owned properties. Upon the recommendation of the RDB and the approval of the Authority, property may be acquired by eminent domain to provide for the redevelopment of vacant and underutilized land; to eliminate structures which, because of poor initial construction, inadequate maintenance, obsolescence or other conditions, are not suitable for rehabilitation; to eliminate non-conforming land uses which are detrimental to the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Area; to provide for the replatting of land and the development or adjustment of streets, alleys and pedestrian ways; and to assemble suitable tracts for disposition. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no property shall be condemned and/or acquired by eminent domain pursuant to this Plan for the purpose of conveying such property to a third party for redevelopment if the owner of that property has submitted a proposal to redevelopment such property in the manner described and to the extent permitted herein unless such acquisition is first approved by resolution of the City Council and County Commission (if this Plan is approved by the County).

In addition to the potential acquisitions described in the prior paragraph, parcels may also be acquired at the request of the owner or for such valid public purposes as to provide for necessary adjustments in utility easements or street, alley or pedestrian rights-of-way; to provide for the redevelopment of abandoned railroad rights-of-way; to eliminate dilapidated or deteriorated structures which may be found to exist following subsequent surveys of interior conditions where the owner of the property shall have been notified and accorded a reasonable time, in no case less than ninety (90) days from the date of notice, to bring the structure into compliance with applicable building and housing codes: to provide clear and marketable title for vacant or abandoned properties; to eliminate any nonconforming uses in conflict with the permitted uses listed in Section C.2.a. of this Plan or applicable zoning ordinances; if the owner of any said property refuses to comply or reach written agreement with the Authority to abide by the design guidelines of Section C.2.b. of this Plan in the development of or planning of any improvements to be made; or to eliminate buildings which may encroach upon existing or planned rights-of-way whether they be totally or only partially located within the Redevelopment Area.

E. REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS AND OBLIGATIONS; LAND USE CONTROLS

The RDB will establish redevelopment priorities within the Redevelopment Area and will make recommendations to the Authority as to those areas within the Redevelopment Area that have the most pressing need for redevelopment. If a particular property is identified for redevelopment by the RDB, the Authority, in consultation with the RDB, will request redevelopment proposals for such property. If the property to be redeveloped is owned by a single owner, the Authority will first request a redevelopment proposal from such property owner in the manner provided below. If the property to be redeveloped is owned by multiple owners, the Authority will request redevelopment proposals from any interested parties. The entity or person whose proposal is selected to redevelop a particular property is referred to herein as the “redeveloper.”

If the RDB and the Authority have identified a particular area for redevelopment that is owned by a single owner, the Authority will request a redevelopment proposal from such owner. Each proposal shall include, in detail, a description of the owner’s proposed redevelopment of the property, the improvements to be made to the property, a proposed budget for such improvements and a timetable for construction. In addition, each owner must demonstrate in its proposal its financial ability to complete any proposed redevelopment project, including evidence of the availability of funds to complete the project. The current property owner will be given at least 90 days to submit a proposal after request from the Authority for a proposal.

The RDB will review proposals submitted by property owners. The RDB will advise the Authority in determining whether a proposal is consistent with this Plan and whether the proposal is feasible. The RDB may discuss an owner’s proposal with the owner in whatever manner the RDB deems appropriate, and the property owner may resubmit a proposal to the RDB and the Authority based upon such discussions. The ultimate approval or rejection of a proposal shall remain with the Authority, however.

If an owner’s proposal to redevelop property is approved by the Authority, the Authority and the owner will enter into a development agreement under which the owner will agree to develop its property as described in its proposal as approved by the Authority. In the event that any such owner fails to redevelop its property in accordance with its development agreement, the Authority may elect to acquire such property and make it available for redevelopment.

If an owner submits a redevelopment proposal, and the Authority does not approve the redevelopment proposal, the Authority shall notify the owner in writing, specifying the reason or reasons why the Authority did not approve the redevelopment proposal. The owner shall have 30 days from receipt of such notification to submit a revised redevelopment proposal responding to the reasons specified in the notification.

If an owner of property identified for redevelopment fails to submit a redevelopment proposal, fails to receive approval of its redevelopment proposal or fails to redevelop its property in compliance with its proposal, the Authority intends to solicit proposals from third parties to redevelop such property and to acquire such property. Responses to such proposals shall also be submitted to the RDB for its review and any recommended proposals shall be submitted to the Authority for approval or disapproval. Such responses shall include at least the same information required of property owners. The Authority will enter into a development agreement with any person or entity whose proposal is approved by the Authority in order to ensure compliance with the proposal and the requirements of this Plan.

The Authority, in disposing of any land in the Redevelopment Area to be redeveloped or in connection with entering into a development agreement, will, in its contract and deed or other instruments of conveyance and/or the development agreement, include such terms and condition as in the judgment of the Authority will be necessary or advisable to ensure redevelopment of the Redevelopment Area and its use thereafter, in accordance with this Plan, and to prevent recurrence of the condition of blight or inappropriate land uses in this area. Such provisions will be contained in such contracts, deeds or other instruments of conveyance irrespective of whether they duplicate, in whole or in part, requirements of existing or proposed zoning ordinances or other local laws, ordinances or regulations with respect to the Redevelopment Area, so that such obligations may operate independently of such zoning or other laws, ordinances or regulations. In all instances, the improvements in the Redevelopment Area will be made in accordance with the applicable zoning ordinances, building, electrical, plumbing and other local codes and ordinances, the requirements of this Plan, and such other requirements as may be set forth in the contracts between the Authority and the redevelopers.

Any contract or agreement for conveyance or redevelopment of property in the Redevelopment Area by the Authority or the City, as well as the deed or deeds to the land, shall contain a covenant that the redeveloper and its successors and assigns shall not discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, or national origin in the sale, lease, or rental, or in the use or occupancy of the property or any improvements erected or to be erected thereon. It is intended by this Plan that the Authority and the City are the beneficiaries of all such covenants and obligations and that each shall be entitled to represent the interests and to act on behalf of the community in enforcing any covenants and obligations as to the redevelopment and continued uses of the Redevelopment Area in accordance with this Plan. Such contracts, deeds, or other instruments of conveyance and/or development agreements, in addition to including such other terms and conditions as the Authority may find desirable in order to implement and effectuate the objectives of this Plan, or as are recommended by the RDB, will obligate the purchasers and redevelopers of property in the Redevelopment Area and their successors in interest to:

1. Devote the parcels owned by them to, and only to, uses and controls specified in this Plan;
2. Diligently pursue the construction of the improvements as provided in a development agreement, and to begin and complete such improvements within a reasonable time as provided by the contract;
3. Make no changes, additions or alterations in such improvements after completion of their construction that are not approved by RDB as being in conformity with this Plan, or as it may be changed or amended; and
4. Not reassign contract rights, resell or otherwise transfer the land or any part thereof of interests therein purchased by them prior to the completion of the improvements thereon without the approval of the Authority and except in cases satisfactory with the Authority, and not to speculate in or with respect to such land.

F. RELOCATION ASSISTANCE

In the event any individuals and businesses are permanently or temporarily displaced by the Authority in connection with the implementation of this Plan, assistance will be offered in accordance with the Tennessee’s Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1972, or other applicable federal, state or local laws and regulations that may be in effect at the time even though no State or Federal funds may be involved with a particular project. No residents are expected to be permanently relocated as a part of this Plan. Since many of the planned developments incorporated in this Plan are to occur on vacant land or through the renovation of existing unused or underutilized structures, it is expected that relocation of businesses will be minimal.

G. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING

Total property taxes receivable from land and leaseholds in the Redevelopment Area are currently estimated at around $4.26 million based on a total assessed value of approximately $207 million. The projected future increase in the value of property developed in conjunction with this Plan on land leased or sold by the Authority is estimated to exceed $200 million, which is the estimated cost of the redevelopment project. The total net annual increase of approximately $4.15 million in property taxes so generated in the Redevelopment Area will not occur without the redevelopment activities of the Authority and the RDB. This net annual increase would support approximately $41.5 million of tax increment financing to be issued on one or more series or emissions and secured by all or a portion of the incremental tax revenues generated by the Redevelopment Area, to assist with the financing of redevelopment projects in the Redevelopment Area. By approving this Plan, the City and the County (if the County approves this Plan) are hereby by authorizing the allocation of incremental taxes in the Redevelopment Area as provided in the Act for the purposes provided herein.

Given the blighting elements in the Redevelopment Area as well as the difficulty of development presented by poor access and the diversity of ownership of individual tracts evident in the Redevelopment Area, private investment and redevelopment is unlikely to occur without public assistance. The activities of the RDB and the Authority will make the area conducive to new private development and result in increased tax revenues to the City and the County. The estimated principal amount of debt payable from incremental tax revenues described above and provided for by this Plan is expected to require less than 50% percent of the projected net new property taxes generated by the Redevelopment Area if redevelopment can be induced to occur as anticipated by this Plan. Therefore, the City and the County, as the taxing agencies within the Redevelopment Area, are expected to realize substantial revenues from the Redevelopment Area and will not be substantially impacted by the tax increment financing authorized by this Plan. However, based upon current property tax rates, the estimated annual impact to the City and the County of applying the approximately $4.15 million of incremental property tax revenues as provided herein would be $1.25 million or 30% to the City and $2.9 million or 70% to the County. If the County does not approve this Plan, the entire impact would be on the City.

The estimated amount of bonds or other indebtedness backed by tax increment revenues issued pursuant to this Plan is $41.5 million. The final maturity date on any bonds or other indebtedness backed by the tax increment revenues from the Redevelopment Area shall be on or before 20 years from the date the redevelopment project being financed is expected to be completed. Upon retirement of all bonds or other indebtedness incurred and payable from tax increment funds or at such time as moneys on deposit in the tax increment fund or funds are sufficient for such purpose, all property taxes resulting from the development of the Redevelopment Area shall be retained by the City and the County. Activities or improvements eligible for tax increment funding shall include all permitted projects that may be financed as part of a redevelopment project or urban renewal project pursuant to the Act. Sources of revenue to finance the costs of redevelopment projects, in addition to tax increment financing, include private equity and loans.

If this Plan is not approved by County, the tax increment financing provisions contained herein shall still be effective as to incremental City property tax revenues provided the City furnishes to the County an agreement, as permitted by the Act, exempting the County’s property tax levy from these tax increment financing provisions.

H. DELEGATION TO NEGOTIATE PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

The Clarksville-Montgomery County Industrial Development Board (”IDB”), pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated, § 7-53-305, is hereby authorized and delegated the authority to negotiate and accept from the IDB’s lessees located within the Redevelopment Area, payments in lieu of ad valorem taxes upon the IDB’s finding that such payments further the IDB’s public purposes and the purposes of this Plan. The IDB is requested to establish appropriate and necessary guidelines that will promote redevelopment and further both the public purposes of the IDB and the Redevelopment Area. The Authority is also hereby authorized and delegated the authority to negotiate and accept payment in lieu of ad valorem taxes with respect to low-income housing property in accordance with the Act. If this Plan is not approved by the County, the delegation in this Section H shall only apply to City property taxes.

I. REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT BOARD

Pursuant to the Act, the Authority shall establish an advisory board to assist with the implementation of this Plan, which shall be known as the Redevelopment District Board (the “RDB”). The Chairman of the Authority shall serve as a member and chairman of the RDB and will appoint twelve additional members to the RDB as follows:

• one (1) member to be recommended by the County Mayor for an initial 3-year term (if the County does not approve this Plan, this member shall be recommended by the City Mayor),
• one (1) member to be recommended by the City Mayor for an initial 3-year term,
• the Director or one (1) representative of the Clarksville Office of Housing and Community Development to serve for an initial 3-year term,
• the President of the Lincoln Homes Residents Council or one (1) other member who resides in public housing in the Redevelopment Area to be recommended by the Authority as a public housing representative for an initial 2-year term,
• one (1) member of the Downtown District Partnership to be recommended by the Downtown District Partnership for an initial 2-year term,
• one (1) member of the Clarksville/Montgomery County Regional Planning Commission to be recommended by the Clarksville/Montgomery County Regional Planning Commission for an initial 3-year term,
• one (1) voting member as a representative of Austin Peay State University as recommended by the President of the university for an initial 2-year term,
• one (1) member with real estate, financial, and/or development background, recommended by the City Mayor for an initial 2-year term, and
• one (1) member for each of the four residential neighborhoods who resides in the Emerald Hills, Dog Hill, Red River, and Brandon Hills neighborhood for an initial 2-year term. The four neighborhood members shall be jointly recommended by the City Mayor and County Mayor (if the County approves this Plan).

Thereafter, all members shall serve 3-year terms. The RDB shall review redevelopment projects as being in conformance with this Plan and any applicable design guidelines, and zoning and code requirements, approve developer agreements, recommend tax increment financing transactions to the Authority, recommend to the Regional Planning Commission the rezoning of property, if necessary, recommend the adoption of additional land use regulations, if needed, and recommend acquisition of property by the Authority, if necessary.

J. ADMINISTRATION

The City Council and the County Commission of the County (the “County Commission”) (if this plan is approved by the County), on behalf of the City and the County, hereby authorize the Authority to enter into inter-local agreements with the City and/or the County or any division or instrumentality thereof and the RDB to perform any and all of the administrative functions designated herein including, but not limited to negotiating developer agreements, providing review and comment on proposed development within the Redevelopment Area, recommending additional design guidelines or land use controls to the appropriate legislative and administrative bodies, negotiating the acquisition, sale or lease of property and carrying out relocation assistance functions.

K. AMENDMENTS; TERM

This Plan may be modified, changed or amended by the Authority, with the subsequent approval of the City Council and the County Commission (if initially approved by the County Commission) in the same manner as this Plan was originally approve, provided, however, that in no event will the provisions of this Plan be modified in any manner which will adversely affect any as yet not fully developed land in the Redevelopment Area that has been sold or leased by the Authority, or as to which a sales contract has been entered into by the Authority, except with the written consent of the then owners of such land or of the parties to such contract, or their successors in interest.

This Plan shall remain in effect until terminated by appropriate resolution or ordinance of the City and the County (if the County has approved this Plan).

L. SEVERABILITY

The invalidation of any one or more of the foregoing provisions of this Plan or any part thereof by judgment of any Court of competent jurisdiction shall not in any way affect the validity of any other of such provisions of this Plan but the same shall remain in full force and effect.

Mr. McMoore also went on to encourage the community to be sure to attend both forums because Knowledge is Power and in times like these it is always a positive move anytime the community comes together for a common cause.

Dear “Stop the Violence Community Forum” Panelists & Participants,
This is just a short email to clear up any confusion that may have risen from the sudden announcement of a community forum that the Mayor and the City of Clarksville will conduct this coming Thursday. The “Stop the Violence Community Forum” scheduled for Tuesday, July 24, 2007 is still going to take place at the same location and time.
I applaud Mayor Piper and the City of Clarksville for joining in on this effort to educate our community about gangs and gang awareness. A wise man once told me that you can never have too much education and that “People Perish Due to Lack of Knowledge”. Well it seems that we, as a community, will be blessed with plenty of knowledge on this particular subject.
I would also like to recognize Ms. Linda Darnell whose concern and love for her community first brought this need to the Urban Resource Center and thus the “Stop the Violence Community Forum” was born.
See you all very soon at both forums and God Bless Clarksville, TN!
 

Terry McMoore, Director
Urban Resource Center
931-552-9076
931-378-1999

PRESS STATEMENT

For Immediate Release

Community Comes Together for “Stop the Violence Community Forum”

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 the Community of Clarksville, TN will come together for a “Stop the Violence Community Forum”. This will be a wonderful opportunity for the community to come together, listen, learn and most important, heal from some of the emotions felt by recent gun violence and the lives we have lost in our community.

The forum will take place at: New Providence United Methodist Church

1317 Fort Campbell Blvd, Clarksville, TN from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Moderator & Keynote Speaker Pastor Tommy Vallejos, Director of the Hispanic Organization for Progress & Education (H.O.P.E.)

(A special presentation on Gang Awareness)

“Special Guest Panelists”

• TN State Representative Joe Pitts

• Clarksville Mayor Johnny Piper (invited)

• Interim Clarksville Police Chief Al Ansley

• Jimmie Garland Sr., President Clarksville NAACP

• Clarksville City Council Members

• Leaders from the Faith Community

• Rev. Marvin Barner, Director The Ripple Foundation Inc.

• Gabe Segovia, Concerned Citizen

• Kenneth Albritton, Community Activist

Free & Open to the Public

HOSTED BY THE URBAN RESOURCE CENTER, Mr. Terry McMoore Director
Contact for press release: (931) 552-9076 or (931) 378-1999

The City of Clarksville will host a Community Forum on Crime and Violence on Thursday, July 12th from 6p.m. until 8p.m. in the Kenwood Middle School auditorium. The school is located at 241 E. Pine Mountain Road near the intersection of Peachers Mill Road and 101st Airborne Division Parkway.

Mayor Johnny Piper, members of the Clarksville City Council, representatives from the Police Department and other civic organizations will address issues and concerns regarding violent activity in Clarksville. In addition, the Clarksville Police Department will make a presentation about gangs and will be available to answer questions.

This event is being organized in response to growing concerns from citizens about violent incidents that have occurred in recent weeks. For more information, please contact the City of Clarksville Mayor’s Office at 931-645-7444.

Ward 2 Council member Deanna McLaughlin is especially interested in the forum and encourages as many people as possible to attend. The forum is in direct response to shootings at Dodge’s Store and the fatal shooting which killed retired Northwest High School coach Willard Ross last month.

The Urban Resource Center will host another forum on Tuesday, July 24th, 2007 at 7:00 PM at New Providence United Methodist Church located at 1317 Fort Campbell Blvd. Pastor Tommy Vallejos, a former gang member, will be the keynote speaker and moderator of that forum.

PART II CODE OF ORDINANCES
TITLE 1 ADMINISTRATION, OFFICERS, AND PERSONNEL

Chapter 13 PERSONNEL

Sec. 1-1316. Disciplinary action.

(c) Minimum due process. All regular employees will be afforded the benefit of due process. Due process requires that established rules and procedures for disciplinary action are followed and that employees have an opportunity to respond to charges made against them prior to the decision on the disciplinary action to be taken. Due process consists of the following:

(1) Employees shall be notified of the charges against them. Such notification will detail times, places, and other pertinent facts.

(2) The notification will provide for the employee to have a pre-decision discussion. The employee shall be given a reasonable period of time to prepare to answer charges and present information which might influence the disciplinary decision.

(3) The person conducting the pre-decision discussion will be a department head or the senior supervisor in the employee’s work unit.

(4) The meeting outlined above shall be for the purpose of allowing the employee to present information to the manager regarding the disciplinary action under consideration.

5) The discussion shall be informal. The employee shall have the right to present written statements or witnesses or any other information with regard to the charges. Attendance and participation by persons other than the department head and the employee shall be at the discretion of the department head.

(6) If the employee declines the opportunity to have the discussion or present information, the provisions of this section are deemed to have been met.

(d) Cause. Disciplinary actions will be based on cause or sufficient reason, as outlined in section 1-1317 of the City Code.
_________________________________________________

[Here is sec. 1-1317: Sec. 1-1317. Conduct which could cause disciplinary action. )

The following actions may cause disciplinary action up to and including dismissal:
(1) Abusive and inconsiderate treatment of the public or co-workers.
(2) Conviction of a criminal charge.
(3) Willful destruction of city property.
(4) Stealing, deceit, or other dishonesty.
(5) Conduct below the standard of the department.
(6) Reporting to work under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or the use of same on duty.
(7) Disloyalty to the aims and ideals of the department.
( 8 ) Excessive tardiness, absences, or abuses of leave of absence, sick leave, etc.
(9) Inefficiency.
(10) Insubordination or failure to carry out instructions or job assignments.
(11) Violation of rules and regulations of the department or any other failure of good behavior which reflects discredit upon an employee, the department, or the city government.
(Ord. No. 50-2005-06, 1-5-06)]

__________________________________________________
Continuation of Sec. 1-1316. Disciplinary action:

(e) Actions for which employees may not be disciplined. Actions for which employees MAY NOT BE DISCIPILINED include:

(1) Conditions controlled by equal employment opportunity law such as race, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability, or military status.
(2) Union activities as determined by law.
(3) Reporting Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) violations, or cases of waste, fraud, and abuse.
(4) Refusing to perform an unusual work assignment which the employee justifiably believes to be hazardous or life-threatening.
(5) Refusing to perform an act which is clearly in violation of the law.

(f) Disciplinary process.

(1) Employees other than department heads or city officials.

a. Disciplinary action up to, and including, a written reprimand will be conducted by supervisory personnel within the city department. Written reprimands will be authenticated by the department head before they are placed in the employee’s official personnel file in the human resource department.

b. Offenses or conduct which would warrant suspension, demotion or termination will be thoroughly investigated and documented at the department level and the employee will be afforded due process as outlined in subsections (a)(1) through (6) above. If suspension, demotion, or termination is recommended, the department head will forward the results of this investigation and all supporting documentation, with a recommendation for appropriate disciplinary action, to the human resources director. The human resources director will verify that the employee was afforded due process and that the recommended disciplinary action is appropriate and consistent. The human resources director will then inform the employee in writing of the disciplinary decision and will advise the employee of his or her right to appeal. The employee will have seven (7) calendar days to appeal the decision by notifying the human resources director in writing and posting a $50.00 “appearance deposit” which will be refunded at the completion of the appeals hearing. If the employee who is appealing the disciplinary action does not appear for the hearing the $50.00 deposit will be forfeited and the recommended discipline will stand. Also, if the employee does not wish to appeal the decision, the disciplinary action will stand.

c. If an employee exercises his or her right to appeal the recommended disciplinary action, a hearing committee comprised of two (2) randomly selected city council members and one randomly selected employee of equal pay grade will be appointed by the mayor to hear the appeal. The committee will be convened within fourteen (14) calendar days of the receipt of the appeal request by the employee or as soon thereafter as possible. The employee will be advised of the time and place of the hearing and informed thathe or she may be represented by counsel of their choosing at their own expense. The employee shall have the right to appear and defend in person or by counsel and have the process of the city council to compel the attendance of witnesses in his or her behalf. The sole issue to be decided by the committee is whether there is just cause to support the disciplinary action. Upon review, the committee should determine whether the decision of the department head is supported by substantial and material evidence.If the committee determines that the decision of the department is, in fact, supported by substantial and material evidence of cause, the recommended disciplinary action shall be affirmed. Deliberation will occur openly and in public. After reaching a decision the committee will so notify the mayor and the employee in writing. The mayor may, upon his own initiative or upon the written request of either party, review the committee’s decision, and affirm, modify, or reverse it. A request for review of the committee’s decision shall be filed with the mayor within ten (10) days of the decision. If no request is filed, or if, after receiving a request, the mayor decides to take no action within ten (10) days, the committee’s decision shall stand as final. The director of human resources shall make the record of the hearing before the committee available for the mayor in each such case.

d. Anyone removed or dismissed may appeal through the courts of Montgomery County, Tennessee, by filing the customary appeal bond; but he or she shall not exercise any of the functions of their office during the time such appeal is pending and their compensation will be withheld pending final adjudication.

(2) Department heads and city officials.
a. This section applies to heads of major departments and these city officials: city attorney, city clerk, city engineer, and commissioner of finance and revenue.

b. The mayor will present the charges and provide due process, and department heads and city officials will be afforded the same process as other employees, except that they may appeal to the city council instead of a hearing committee. The final decision as to suspension, demotion, or termination will be upon a majority vote of the city council. The city council may sustain the action of the mayor or may reinstate the department head or city official without loss of compensation, or upon such other terms andconditions as the city council may prescribe. If the suspended, demoted, or terminated department head or city official is unwilling to abide by the decision of the city council, he or she will stand discharged as of that date. Department heads and city officials may appeal through the courts of Montgomery County, Tennessee, under the same terms and conditions as other employees.
(Ord. No. 50-2005-06, 1-5-06)

______________________________________________

The question for many is, was Burkhart still just an employee of the city or was he already a Dept. head, as some have claimed?

If a dept. head, then due process was not followed because it takes the Council as a BODY to hear his case and this did not occur.

If he was a city employee, then the hearing panel appears derelict in their duties. It violated the City Code’s Due Process Procedure and denied Burkhart due process protection by sustaining his termination even though the facts showed (1) he was not qualified for the building and codes position, and to accept the position would clearly be in violation of the law (the city code) and (2) he felt the position to be hazardous or life-threatening. The hearing panel violated sections 1-1316(e)(4) and (5) of the city code cited above.

Choose Charles Campaign Celebration – 5 to 7 p.m. on Thursday, Oct. 5, at the Jaycees Building on Hwy. 48/13. Free barbecue from Squirrel’s BBQ, music by the Beagles, and drawings for two pairs of FREE 50-yard-line Titans tickets! Everyone is welcome! For more information, call Choose Charles Campaign Headquarters at 647.2323.

Got Questions? Get Answers! Mayoral candidate Judge Charles Smith will host a question-and-answer session specifically for residents of North Clarksville from 5 – 6:30 p.m. on Monday, Oct 16, at the First Federal Bank Community Room on Ft. Campbell Blvd. Light refreshments served.

For more information, call Cindy Chambers at 237.4518.