Alderman Dana McLendon

House Bill 716 / Senate Bill 976

2009-06-08T15:14:00.000-07:00

Likely moot. Nevermind.

Cryptical Envelopment

2008-06-09T19:03:00.000-07:00

A simple question has been asked of me. My policy for the ten years that I have held office has been to try to answer legitimate questions in a straight forward, unvarnished manner. In this instance, because I consider the question "in bounds", I'm going to answer it. However, because the complete answer wouldn't change anything and might do more harm than good, I'm going to be deliberately ambiguous and say less than I know. Stated differently, I think the public is entitled to an answer, but it serves no purpose to pick at a scab.

The question was whether I was facing an ouster action recently. The answer is this: I have it on good authority that in the wake of Joe Williams' separation from the City, there were one or more people who wanted rid of me, or at least wanted to see me penalized, politically and/or professionally, whatever they could get.

Nothing has or will come of this nonsense. Subsequent actions have (largely) made moot this ill-fated initiative.

Have at it.

Don't Call It a Comeback

2008-02-01T20:13:00.001-08:00

I don't know how or why, but my comment section was enabled. I didn't do it, but it happened. Not one to fight the tide, I guess I'll leave it on for now. I'll try to drop in and answer questions from time to time, and if I have something useful to post, I will.

Bloggers Anonymous

2006-03-01T07:26:00.000-08:00

I have grown weary of the blogosphere.

There are too many people hiding behind anonymity taking cheap shots at people who are working very hard to make the community a better place.

I don't mind disagreement, debate and constructive criticism. However, for the time being, I feel that the ad hominem attacks, rumor mongering, and simple hatefulness outweighs the constructive dialogue.

I'm signing off, at least for now. People who want to communicate with me can do so by phone, email, snail mail, fax, or even in person. All I ask is that you tell me who you are.

Anyone know of a twelve step program for detoxing out of the blogosphere?

Experiment

2006-02-25T16:52:00.000-08:00

I think I'm going to wander around next week and hand out $50 bills. I want to see how many people will complain that I'm not handing out $100 bills.

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

2006-02-15T15:06:00.000-08:00

Here's my recap of last night's BOMA meeting.

The Good
The BOMA declined to annex about 40 acres of property east of Wilson Pike. I advocated against the annexation primarily because the annexation would beget an otherwise unnecessary waste water pump station. I hold myself out as the canary in the coal mine when it comes to pump stations because of the fish-kill tragedy of a few years ago. The BOMA also discussed de-annexing other land in the area to prevent the proliferation of otherwise unnecessary pump stations. Portions of land already in the city and under consideration for annexation last night would drain by gravity to the Brentwood wastewater treatment system, thus eliminating any need for pump stations. I have advocated and will continue to contend that good planning should recognize that gravity works always when it comes to waste water. I hope to have further progress on this epiphany in the near future.

The Bad
The BOMA, on a vote carried by Aldermen Bacon, Burger, Kriebel and Phillips, decided to retain the power to hire and fire department heads. In my view, this unnecessarily exposes the department heads to the vagaries of politics and permits or even encourages department heads to pay more attention to impressing the politicians than the city administrator, who remains their day to day boss.

In my opinion, department heads should be focused more on the city administrator's evaluation of their work than on the politician's evaluation of their work because the city administrator is a professional administrator of department heads whose job is to oversee the day-to-day operations of the city. The politicians should be focused more on creating policy and giving direction, in more general terms, to the city administrator and through the city administrator to the department heads. I consider it sufficient accountability over the department heads that the BOMA can fire their boss if the BOMA feels that strongly about the city administrator's supervision, or lack thereof, of the department heads.

None of this is to suggest that the department heads should be alienated from the BOMA; nonetheless, that relationship should be apolitical, or as close to that as possible. Alderman Randolph succinctly hit the nail on the head: we should have divested the BOMA of the power to hire and fire department heads for the same reason that the school board does not hire and fire principals. It was a mistake to retain this power, and I hope the occasion never arises when I could say to my honorable peers, "I told you so."

The Ugly
Mrs. McLendon taught me that if I have nothing nice to say, say nothing. I try to honor my mother, though sometimes I fail. Not tonight.

Entanglement

2006-02-13T13:47:00.000-08:00

This is the organization chart for the City of Franklin as conceived by Aldermen Bacon, Burger, Lewis, Phillips and perhaps others:

Correction:

2006-02-12T06:25:00.000-08:00

The Williamson A.M. has a piece today that inaccurately portrays the events of a meeting. First of all, I am the Ward 2 alderman, not the Ward 3 alderman as has been reported twice this week (once I figured was a typo, twice is an error both times).

Second, I did indicate that I wanted to have a follow-up meeting on the step pay plan quickly, and to accomodate that I indicated that I would make myself available during the day. I did not indicate a preference for a day-time meeting and I did not suggest a day-time meeting rather than an evening meeting.

Third, my "outburst" came after Mr. Johnson said that an alderman had requested that no meetings ever be scheduled during the business day. To that, I inquired if the alderman in question was on the committee that was trying to schedule a meeting. Mr. Johnson said the alderman with the perpetual day-time schedule conflict was NOT on the committee we were trying to schedule. It was then that I said, in so many words, that I was not worried about the schedule conflicts of an alderman who wasn't even on the committee for which we were trying to schedule a meeting.

I feel better now.

Half Measures

2006-01-11T09:18:00.000-08:00

At last night's meeting of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen, I was disappointed at what I perceive as half measures by some of my fellow aldermen.

Aldermen Bacon lead the charge, supported by Aldermen Burger, Kriebel, Lewis and Phillips, to dismiss the citizen members of the four "standing" committees of the BOMA (Budget and Finance, Transportation, Safety and Public Enterprise and Parks). As I understood the argument to dismiss the citizen members, it was that unelected citizens should not have the same "power" as the elected aldermen. Somehow, it was argued, the "power" of aldermen on the committees was diluted by the presence of the unelected committee membersl.

I made the following arguments in opposition to the motion to dismiss the citizen members:

The Mayor ran on a platform to increase citizen involvement in the government of the city, and the inclusion of citizen committee members is entirely consistent with this campaign promise. I am aware that some observers have scoffed that the Mayor has not fulfilled other campaign promises and that this assertion somehow rebuts my argument on this point. To those people I say: if you were promised 40 acres and a mule, aren't you still better off if you get only the 40 acres without the mule?;
By long standing custom, the organization of the committees has been the province of the mayor. This, in my opinion, is a matter about which the mayor should be afforded significant deference by the aldermen.
The "power" of the citizen members is not "power" in the sense that it could be dangerous because the committees cannot bind the city or the BOMA. No committee can kill a matter by pigeon-holing it. No citizen committee member has any more "power" than any member of the audience who wants to voice an opinion on a matter before the committee. Ultimately, the BOMA makes the decisions. The BOMA has regularly rejected the recommendation of a committee. I like to think the BOMA makes decisions based on the merit of the matter, not on how an advisory committee split a vote.
Citizen committee members with whom I have served have been decidedly more helpful than not. These citizen members have brought expertise and experience relevant to the subject matters that far exceeded my own or that of any other alderman, for that matter. Other citizen members have afforded insight of the "average joe" that is sometimes lost on the elected officials.

Now all of the above is something about which reasonable people may disagree. I can respect that.

What I was really disappointed about came a few minutes later. We had before us a nomination to the Historic Zoning Commission. I made the point that although by state law membership on the HZC and the Planning Commission are by appointment by the mayor, not one of the five aldermen who had just voted to fire our citizen committee members had balked in the least at appointments of unelected citizens to two truly powerful bodies. The HZC and the PC exercise real and final power, in many respects more power than the BOMA. Still, not a one of the five even peeped an opposition. I told them all, given their expressed opposition to unelected citizens wielding power at the city, that I expected them each to lobby for changes in the state law to prevent mayoral appointments of unelected people to truly powerful bodies. In the meantime, why haven't any of these five aldermen demanded that, pending a change in state law, the mayor use his power of appointment to appoint only elected BOMA members to the HZC and PC? Why haven't these five aldermen objected to the several appointments to the HZC and PC that have come before us recently?

I find the silence on this latter issue irreconcilable with the apoplexy on the former, and it makes me wonder what is really going on around here.

Runs in the Family...

2006-01-10T11:47:00.000-08:00

This is Benjamin, the younger boy.

Fish Magnet

2005-12-31T18:25:00.000-08:00

I generally eschew explanations that reduce to "good luck" or "bad luck." Having said that, however, I must confess that the longer I fish, the more I think some people couldn't catch a starving fish in a bucket while other people can't help but catch fish after fish for no apparent reason. My older son, Calvin, falls in the latter category. This kid simply outfishes anyone in the boat, any day, all day. Tonight, we see him posing with another sample of last night's teaser.

Calvin poses with a fine example of Centropomus Undecimalis, or the common snook:

Calvin caught several large snook tonight. But he not only catches big fish, he catches variety. Here we see Calvin with another of tonight's species, the sheepshead (archosargus probatocephalus):

Check out the teeth on this thing!

I'll take fish species for $500, Alex....

2005-12-30T18:41:00.000-08:00

Go Fish.

2005-12-28T13:03:00.000-08:00

Beaver Barrister

2005-12-01T13:02:00.000-08:00

Below is a letter from Joe W. McCaleb, Esq. to the city attorney regarding the beavers and the wetlands at the CCOF. I offer no comment or opinion on Mr. McCaleb's legal conclusions, but I can say that at no time has the city advocated or required that the beavers be killed. References to "conibear traps" flow from the assumptions of local activists, not from any city authority.

Executive Summary

2005-12-01T12:20:00.000-08:00

Counter Offer?

2005-11-30T12:54:00.000-08:00

Rod Heller flew in today and signed "a" contract for the sale of the CCOF. I say, "a" rather than "the" contract so as to avoid any confusion that may arise from the natural assumption that Mr. Heller would sign "the" contract previously approved by the BOMA.

Mr. Heller signed "a" contract for the sale of the CCOF property for the same price as before, $5M. The "counteroffer" contract is somewhat different, however, than the contract approved by the BOMA.

First, the "counteroffer" relieves Mr. Heller of the beaver burden. If the beavers are to be removed, it will be the city doing it.

Second, there is no reference to a lease to Carnton in the counter offer contract Mr. Heller signed today.

Finally, the counteroffer contract has the closing costs split between the parties.

I wonder if I'll ever see the counter offer contract or not.

Anyone know where I can get a politically correct pizza around here?

I hate to say I told you so,

2005-11-29T11:39:00.000-08:00

but I did.

There will be no closing on the CCOF property tomorrow.

One might think this would merit some official press release or something, but the silence from City Hall is deafening.

The beavers are becoming an increasingly sticky wicket, too. They now have lawyers. Well, the beavers and the "wetland" now have lawyers.

Stay tuned.

Williamson Herald

2005-11-23T18:00:00.000-08:00

Proclaiming itself, "The Voice of America's Greatest County" the Williamson Herald has publicly announced its arrival. A launch party has been set for early December. Several former Williamson AM staffers have jumped ship to be with the start up.

When can I get it in my driveway?

CCOF / EF Update

2005-11-17T19:03:00.000-08:00

"Negotiations" are ongoing in the continuing saga of the Country Club of Franklin / Eastern Flank purchase. Despite that it was on tonight's Enterprise Committee agenda, there has not been a lease submitted for review by the BOMA or the Enterprise Committee. Without a special meeting of the BOMA before the end of the month to approve the lease, there won't be a closing this month. No lease, no closing. Given the requirements to give notice of the BOMA meetings and with the holidays approaching, I'm betting the closing is going to be pushed.

Update: Franklin Water System

2005-11-14T12:33:00.000-08:00

The City received approximately 100 applications for the Water Director position. After review by senior staff, six applications have been selected for further consideration. The city also received over 30 applications for the Assistant Water Director position. Senior staff culled these and selected 7 for further consideration. On Monday and Tuesday, on site interviews will be conducted for the director's position. Yours truly has been asked to participate in the interviews.

Now What Do I Do?

2005-11-12T17:31:00.000-08:00

First, the campaign ended.

Now, football season for my sons is over.

My older son's team entered the championship game today undefeated but couldn't pull off the miracle season. Still, they ended 10-1 and it was a great season for those kids, many of whom had never played football before this year.

I coached the defense for my younger son's team. We entered today's championship game 9-1 with 8 shutouts and looking to avenge our only loss to the undefeated Smyrna Bulldog Pee Wee team. This game pitted two very evenly matched teams. At the end of regulation, it was 0-0. In overtime, we scored on our last down to go ahead 7-0. Then the defense made a goal line stand to thwart Smyrna at the 2 yard line and preserve the win.

Final tally for the Cowboy PeeWees: 10-1, 9 shutouts, TYFA State Champions.

As usual, a proud papa. See you all next year. Go Cowboys!

Harlinsdale Farm Concept Plan Meeting

2005-11-02T08:10:00.000-08:00

The city will host another meeting to view the revised concept plan for Harlinsdale Farm.

The meeting will be on Monday, November 7, 2005 at 8:00 p.m. in the Police Department Training Room at City Hall.

Anyone who brings up or even mentions beavers will be shot.

Gratitude and Attitude

2005-10-26T19:35:00.000-07:00

A few comments following the election.

First, thanks to the 607 people who got out and voted, including those of you who voted for Mr. Rutherford.

Thanks, too, to Mr. Rutherford, who ran an issue- and idea-driven campaign of which he can be proud.

Congratulations to Alderman Klatt and Aldermen-elect Burger and Randolph. Ladies, I look forward to getting to know and working with you. Kudos, too, to the other candidates who inspired voters and shaped the campaign with your own thoughts and ideals. We are all better off for your participation.

Special thanks from me to:

my wife, who makes endless sacrifices in order that I can do the things I do;
my family, who went door to door to door hundreds of times over without a complaint;
K.S. (you truly went above and beyond – I hope you don’t get sick after yesterday!);
J.B. and R.B. for mining and turning out votes I would never have found;
the firefighters, especially those who went door to door for me, worked the polling places and put out and picked up signs on election day;
the people who made contributions to the campaign;

and last but not least;

the person with a Rutherford yard sign who slammed their door in my face and twisted the blinds closed as I came to ask for your vote – you truly inspired me to work even harder to be re-elected than I otherwise might have.

I think most people will agree that democracy works better with more participation rather than less. Like many others, I wish turnout had been higher than the approximate 8% in Ward 2. While turnout was low, I think for the most part the people that voted in this election - in all four wards - are voters who make a point to follow the campaigns, educate themselves on the candidates and issues, form thoughtful opinions, and then go vote. Turnout may not be the panacea it may at first seem if higher turnout dilutes the impact of the truly informed voters.

TUESDAY OCTOBER 25TH IS ELECTION DAY

2005-10-24T12:25:00.000-07:00

Polls are open from 7AM-7PM.

Please vote. Only 224 of over 7,500 registered voters voted early in Ward 2. That doesn't project well for election day votes.

If you don't know where you vote or have any questions, you can call me at 310-3195 or the election office at 790-5711.

Sunshine, At Long Last.

2005-10-21T12:02:00.000-07:00

Here's a recap of last night's Public Enterprise Committee Meeting as far as CCOF is concerned.

There is a draft lease with Carnton for 10 acres. Carnton will be required to run a "first class" interpretive center. Carnton will also be responsible for the renovation of the clubhouse to be the interpretive center or construction of the interpretive center. It was the concensus of the committee that Carnton will not be allowed to charge an admission fee for visitors to the battlefield park or to the interpretive center, although Carnton will still be able to charge a fee to enter the Carnton property. If Carnton ever fails to operate the "first class interpretive center," that will be a default under the lease and the City will resume possession of the premises. There is still work to be done to make clear what Carnton's responsibility is under the lease.

Assuming that there should be an interpretive center at the property, it makes sense to me to allow Carnton to operate such a thing. This relieves the city of the burden of doing it.

On the professional services agreement front, all professional services agreements that cost the city any money were rejected last night by the committee. The only PSA that will be entered by the city at this time is for a zero cost archeological survey conducted by a professor and, I presume, his students, from MTSU. This MTSU group is apparently extremely qualified and able to satisfy the requirements of the Battlefield Protection Program for further grants.

I anticipate that in the coming months, the committee will consider an agenda item that is more or less, “discussion regarding issuing requests for qualifications for professional services required at CCOF property.”

I, for one, am glad that a committee of the City of Franklin has finally been able to see and discuss the various plans for this endeavor. I am also glad that the committee has slowed down what appeared to me to be an unnecessary rush regarding executing this project. Finally, I am glad that the various players in this mix have finally embraced the warmth of the sun. I look for it to remain sunny, at least anywhere I go.

Two Quick Items:

2005-10-19T14:53:00.000-07:00

1. To the 182 people who have voted in Ward 2 so far: thanks for participating in the process regardless whether you voted for me or not. To the other 7,400+ people registered to vote in Ward 2 who haven't voted so far, I hope you vote tomorrow (20 October 2005) or on Election Day (Tuesday, 25 October 2005).

2. On page v7 of the print edition of the Review Appeal today are pictures of "my boys," the Franklin Cowboys Pee Wee team. I've spent at least four days a week with these twenty six-year-olds, and I've become quite fond and proud of them. Check 'em out!

The longer I'm in politics, the more I like my dog.

2005-10-17T07:18:00.000-07:00

Mayor Tom Miller quoted in Sunday's newspaper in response to my questions about the CCOF situation:

"It's an election year."
"Sometimes aldermen try to get too involved in operational details."
"There's not any deliberate action to keep the aldermen in the dark."

The Mayor says he is "unaware" of this blog. Good thing I put a copy of the "Enough Already" post in his mailbox last week, complete with the url for this blog.

Proud Papa

2005-10-15T18:36:00.000-07:00

Both of my sons play football for the Franklin Cowboys. This year has been a lot of fun.

I coach the defense for my younger son's team. This merry bad of six-year-olds is 7-1 with six shutouts. We have home field advantage for the playoffs and I fully expect we will be in the state championship game. My son, Benjamin, is a second year player. He is also a ninety-five pound lineman who blew open some big holes today as we beat Murfreesboro to secure our home field advantage.

My older son, Calvin, is playing his first year. Cal is 9 and is playing with kids who are 11 and some who have played for several years. His team is 7-0 and has also locked up home field advantage for the playoffs. Calvin scored his first touchdown today, and I just couldn't be any more proud of him.

Go Cowboys!

Enough Already.

2005-10-12T07:52:00.000-07:00

At last night's Board of Mayor and Aldermen meeting, the surprises just kept coming. Let's recap recent events surrounding the CCOF situation before diving into the latest unpleasant surprise.
In recent meetings of the Enterprise Committee, which I chair and which ostensibly has oversight over the city's parks department, the Enterprise Committee had asked questions to the administration regarding plans for the CCOF. The current year budget includes $125,000 for the CCOF, but no details. When pressed at a recent Enterprise Committee meeting, the Mayor announced - and it was news to me and others on the committee - that specific firms had been picked to do certain services at the CCOF after the purchase (survey work, grading, roadbuilding). The Mayor further announced that these firms had also - again, news to me and others - committed to make contributions to Franklin's Charge in an amount equal to the amount they had been paid by the City of Franklin for their work at CCOF.
What hacked me off about this was that the Mayor, and perhaps other officials in this administration, had clearly been off striking deals in the proverbial "back room" without so much as a "by your leave" to other elected officials and citizens who have a responsibility for this endeavor, too. Additionally, the nature of these deals is highly unusual and completely bypassed the ordinary means by which the city obtains services. This is to say nothing whatsoever about the law that requires that we bid services like grading and road-building. I thought I had made it clear to anyone watching that these back-room deals over the CCOF were bad form, to say the nicest thing possible. I had hoped that the people who are pushing this entire deal would realize that it was in the best interest of the endeavor that everyone involved go beyond the call of duty with respect to openness and attention to procedural requirements.
Apparently my message was lost or mattered not at all to the people to whom it was directed. Last night, at the BOMA meeting, we were presented with the contract for sale of the CCOF. This is the document by which the city is to obtain the 110 acres that the BOMA has committed to purchase. In my opinion, the contract for sale should be nothing other than what is necessary to consummate the purchase of the 110 acres. There are standard form contracts for this type of transaction.
Instead, what we got, for the first time, was news that BEFORE the purchase and AS A CONDITION OF THE PURCHASE the BOMA will be required to enter into a long term (how long?) lease of 10 acres of the 110 with the lessee being the Carnton Association. The terms of this "long term" lease have not been shared with me, nor has this lease arrangement even been mentioned in the appropriate committee, the Enterprise Committee. I don't want to sound churlish about this, but the Mayor and obviously other members of this administration have again end-run the appropriate methods for conducting the business of the people in a head long dash for the result they intend.
It also turns out that a large chunk of the money Franklin's Charge is supposed to bring to the table is contingent upon a donor's blessing of a battlefield conservation easement being placed on the property- again, AS A CONDITION OF THE PURCHASE. In other words, Franklin's Charge doesn't really have $2.5 million to put in this deal, they have a lot of money with strings attached to it that they maybe can put into this deal, if everyone contorts themselves to the benefactors' satisfaction.
When will anyone see this lease that six aldermen apparently didn't think mattered enough to delay the approval of the contract of sale?
What will the terms of that lease be?
Is anyone naive enough to think the rent will be other than nominal?
Doesn't that really mean what we now propose to do is buy 110 acres only to immediately in effect donate 10 acres to the Carnton Association?
Will the Carnton Association then use the nearly free premises to generate proceeds for itself?
If that is so, then hasn't the City made an even larger "donation" than the $2.5M to purchase the property? Indeed, if the "rent" is nominal, hasn't the city agreed to an annual donation to the Carnton Association for the entire duration of the lease? That is a flagrant violation of our city policy on appropriations for charitable and community service organizations.
What other demands will the seller and "donors" to Franklin's Charge make as the closing nears?
Here's my challenge to my fellow BOMA members and the other people who want to see this deal get done: If you are proud of this endeavor, start acting like it and do it properly. No more surpises, no more back room deals. Enough already.

The Response

2005-10-05T13:01:00.000-07:00

City Administrator Jay Johnson has provided the following in response to my inquiry regarding the recent retirement of two suspended police officers.

RealiTV

2005-10-05T11:31:00.000-07:00

Tune in to the Candidate's Forum on 06 October 2005 at 7:00 p.m. on Comcast Channel 10 in Franklin to see the candidates for Alderman answer questions.

Power to the People.

2005-09-23T12:33:00.000-07:00

The following email is from Lisa Clayton, Director of the Franklin Parks Department, in reponse to an email from residents of Lancaster Drive. The residents asked Ms. Clayton to eliminate the trail through Harpeth Meadows and instead support a sidewalk on Franklin Road to connect downtown to Harlinsdale. Ms. Clayton agreed:

Dear Mr. & Mrs. XXXXXX:
First of all, thank you for your email and your recommendation. As the Parks Director for the City of Franklin, I understand your concern and agree that sidewalks along Franklin Road would best suit the Harpeth Meadows neighborhood instead of the walking path. The original idea for the walking path came from following the original Interurban Rail system shown on the concept plan for the park at Harlinsdale Farm connecting to the Bicentennial Park. After the public forum in August, this was a decision that was easily made without question. Sidewalks would best suit your subdivision than the proposed walking trail. Therefore, I have contacted our consultants and along with many other suggestions, that is one that has been noted and will be changed. Residents of Harpeth Meadows will be able to see the change firsthand during the second public forum which will be scheduled for late October or early November. I will make sure Harpeth Meadows Subdivision is contacted with the exact time, date and location.
Again, thank you for your email and if I can assist your family further or answer any other questions regarding the neighborhood, please do not hesitate to call my office at 794-2103 or email me.
Thank you for your time.

Lisa R. Clayton
Director, Parks

The Inquiry.

2005-09-23T08:28:00.000-07:00

Below is the text of a memorandum I delivered to Mr. Johnson and the BOMA this week. I anticipate an answer next week.

MEMORANDUM

TO: Jay Johnson
FROM: Dana C. McLendon III
CC: Board of Mayor and Aldermen
DATE: 20 September 2005
RE: Lt. Anderson and Lt. Taylor

A recent newspaper story included the following:

"It's clear the officers [Lt. Anderson and Lt. Taylor] were suspended. It's clear the city paid them more than $80,500 while they were suspended. And it's clear both officers were allowed to retire. What isn't clear is why the disciplinary issues that prompted the suspensions have never been resolved, and why the officers were allowed to retire."

As far as I know, the foregoing is a fair synopsis of the situation.
I deliberately did not inquire of the status of the suspensions during the suspensions because I believed it would have been inappropriate for an alderman to participate in the process at that time. As you know, had the matters taken a different course I could have been called upon as an alderman to adjudicate an employee’s appeal of a disciplinary action. It would clearly have been inappropriate to have acquired any knowledge outside of the appeal process.
Now, however, it appears I will not be called upon to adjudicate any appeal from Lt. Anderson or Lt. Taylor. I have a few questions that I believe should be posed and answered publicly. I ask that you respond to this memorandum as you believe is appropriate.
1. In the case of Lt. Taylor, I understand he was on leave for as much as three of the eight months he was suspended. That leaves at least five months of suspension under allegations including domestic abuse, disgraceful personal conduct, disobeying orders, and unlawful harassment. I understand that Lt. Taylor was, perhaps, unavailable as a result of his medical leave, but by the time he took medical leave, he had been on leave for perhaps 60 days or more. Why did the investigation require at least five months and as much as eight months?
2. In the case of Lt. Anderson, it is much less clear to me why he was suspended, but it has been reported that, “Shirley Harmon, Franklin's human resources director, and [Police Chief] Moore said Anderson's file is confidential under the state's drug-free workplace law.” Why did Lt. Anderson’s case take eight months to investigate?
3. At the time of their respective retirements, was either investigation complete? When might hearings have been scheduled?
4. Of the over $80,000 in payments made to Lt. Anderson and Lt. Taylor during the eight months they were suspended, was any part of the money paid to them money that they would have been entitled to regardless of the outcome of a disciplinary hearing? In other words, would either of them be entitled to some or all of the $80,000+ even if they had been terminated following a disciplinary hearing? If so, how much?
I am troubled by several things in this matter. First, two long-time city employees – indeed, long-time law enforcement officers – were suspended for a long time under apparently very serious accusations. If either of these gentlemen were guilty, the citizens of this community deserved swift action to separate them from the Franklin Police Department. If, on the other hand, they were not guilty of the allegations, these gentlemen deserved to be cleared and restored to their positions promptly. It is hard to see, based upon what I know at this time, how the city or Lt. Anderson or Lt. Taylor were well-served by the extended investigations.
Second, many thousands of dollars of wages were paid to employees who might, or might not, have deserved to be fired. The city presumably also had a ripple effect in wages (did the city not have to pay other officers to do the job the suspended officers were not doing?) It troubles me that if the allegations were accurate, that the city perhaps nonetheless paid tens of thousands of dollars that should not have been paid.
Third, I am concerned that there is or could be an appearance that employees under suspicion of wrongdoing who are near retirement can expect to be allowed to retire in good standing. Is there a city policy regarding the relationship between suspensions and retirement eligibility? It seems to me that we should consider whether a city employee on suspension suspected of wrongdoing should be allowed to accumulate additional retirement eligibility pending resolution of the allegations. I know the city couldn’t have changed the rules with respect to Lt. Anderson or Lt. Taylor, but I remain troubled by the result in these cases.
I await your reply.

You decide.

2005-09-21T10:21:00.000-07:00

The other candidate for alderman in the second ward claims on his web page that in September 2004, "we actually were drinking contaminated water." Let's take a closer look at the unadulterated facts.
In the May 20, 2005 Sanitary Survey, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation wrote as follows on this subject:

On 11 November 2004, the then-Director of the Water Department wrote the following memorandum to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen:

I apologize for the poor quality of the copy, but my copy is not good quality.
The substance of Mr. Woodard's memo is that immediately upon being notified of the presence of coliforms, the Water Department, working closely with TDEC, performed follow up and additional sampling. All follow up and additional samples tested negative for the presence of total coliforms. "Therefore," Mr. Woodard wrote, "staff is confident that the positive test results were not an indication of contaminated drinking water, but rather associated with testing procedures." As is obvious, TDEC did not shut down the water department or otherwise act to protect the public from the so-called contaminated drinking water.
Subsequently, working closely with TDEC, the city has discovered that some of the procedures previously used by our staff in collecting samples may have a tendency to contaminate the samples. The city staff has retrained on collection methodology and continues to work to improve in this area.
It is unfortunate that the city lost points on the sanitary survey for the contaminated samples and for the untimely notification of the customers of the system of the contamination. Neither of those unfortunate facts, however, supports the claim that "we actually were drinking contaminated water."
In short, it is highly unlikely that any citizen actually ever received contaminated drinking water.

We're Here From the Government. We're Here to Help.

2005-09-15T08:13:00.000-07:00

ATTENTION RESIDENTS OF IVY GLEN AND CALDWELL ESTATES SUBDIVISIONS:
The Board of Mayor and Aldermen of Franklin on 13 September 2005 took the first steps to annex your neighborhoods. This may or may not come as news to you. Apparently some of your neighbors have asked to be annexed. You will NOT be getting a letter from the City of Franklin advising you that there will be a public hearing on the proposed annexation on 11 October 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Alderman Phillips and I tried to have the City send you a letter informing you of this proposed annexation, but the six other aldermen overruled the suggestion. If you want to share your thoughts on this proposed annexation, contact the Members of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen and/or come to City Hall on 11 October 2005 at 7:00 p.m.

Some Good News

2005-09-13T09:57:00.000-07:00

Below please find some good news. The Solid Waste Deparment received a perfect score on a recent inspection by TDEC of the city's transfer station. Note that this is the fifth straight perfect score on inspections of the transfer station. Thanks and kudos to the men and women in our solid waste department.

Conflicts of Interest and Other Issues

2005-09-08T18:22:00.000-07:00

Numerous of the candidates and observers seem very interested in real or perceived conflicts of interest between the "day job" of candidates and the position of Alderman. Others seem very interested in the duration of one's residency in this community or familial connections. I offer no opinion on the position of other candidates or the people currently in office. I will, however, address my own situation for those who may be interested.

I am a lawyer. I practice by myself, no partners or employees. I've been in private practice in Middle Tennessee since I graduated from Vanderbilt Law School in 1993. Since 1998, I have practiced in historic downtown Franklin.

The nature of my practice is litigation, meaning I handle lawsuits. At any time, I have dozens of clients. The nature of the cases I handle range from criminal defense cases to personal injury lawsuits to divorces to the truly bizarre. I have no "permanent" clients. The vast majority of my clients are individuals who have a discreet, singular problem that requires the assistance of a lawyer like me. Occasionally I represent a business, but that turns out to be infrequent. When the problem is resolved, by negotiated settlement, trial or appeal, my representation is concluded.

I do not handle real estate closings. I do not represent builders, real estate developers, or any other "growth-related" entities. My law practice does not benefit in any way from growth or development (in making this claim, I am assuming that as population grows, more lawyers enter the market in proportion to the growth, which has been my experience).

I have found my legal background to be helpful in discharging the duties of Alderman. It has been nice that I work for myself and can, for the most part, set my schedule to accomodate the demands of the office.

My wife works part time for a small, family-owned business in another county. She benefits not one bit from growth, either.

My wife and I moved to Franklin in 1995 because we loved what we found here. Neither of us is from Williamson County and, until my parents moved to Fieldstone Farms this summer, neither of us had any other family here.

When I'm not trying to earn a living or spending time at City Hall, I spend time with my family. I coach baseball and football for my sons, who are 9 and 6. If you really need to see me and cannot find me, go to Jim Warren Park and wait, I'll be there any minute.

I ran for office in 1997 at the age of 29. I had lived here all of two years when I was elected. It has been a privilege and an honor to serve the people of this community, and I have met many, many fine people while serving as Alderman. When I was elected, I promised myself I would leave office with a clean conscience, and I am proud to say I have kept that promise.

Alderman McLendon's Answers to WCAR Questionnaire

2005-09-01T14:59:00.000-07:00

Continued....

2005-09-01T14:52:00.000-07:00

Further Water System Remediation Update:

2005-08-26T11:50:00.000-07:00

The City continues to work with TDEC to resolve and prevent any and all problems with the water system. Below, see the latest correspondence from TDEC on the issue.

CCOF Update:

2005-08-25T13:33:00.000-07:00

Here's my information regarding the pending sale of the Country Club of Franklin to the City of Franklin.

The closing on the battlefield park is tentatively set for late November 2005. At that time, Franklin's Charge will be required to deliver $2.5 million to the City to acquire the property from its current owners (Rod and Kay Heller).

Franklin's Charge continues to raise funds. In July, Franklin's Charge announced that it had reached $2.5 million in cash and pledges. However, Franklin's Charge continues to raise funds to cover anticipated closing costs, cover interest expense on the loan discussed below, and to reduce the principal amount of the needed loan.

Of the $2.5 million in cash to be provided at closing on behalf of Franklin's Charge, $500,000 will be provided by the American Battlefield Protection Program; $400,000 from the Civil War Preservation Trust, and the remainder of the cash directly from Franklin's Charge.

The majority of funds provided by Franklin's Charge will be made available through a loan provided by AmSouth Bank, National City Bank, First Tennessee, Regions Bank, Pinnacle Bank, and SunTrust Bank. The loan is based on the pledges and commitments made by many individuals and businesses in our community. Most of those pledges are payable over five years.

Franklin's Charge is well aware that in order for the battlefield acquisition to be accomplished, Franklin's Charge will be required to deliver at closing $500,000 from ABPP, $400,000 from CWPT, and $1,600,000 in other cash proceeds (a total of $2.5 million).

The Big Shill

2005-08-25T10:33:00.000-07:00

Even a cursory inspection of my physique, such as it is, should lead the observer to be willing to take my word for it when I say a restaurant has good food.

For purposes of this post, let me give you my definition of a meat and three restaurant. At a meat and three restaurant, the parking lot will have some number of trucks that actually go to real work sites regularly. In those trucks will be a truck box and in that truck box there will be real tools. The real tools will be used by men who know how to use them.

In a meat and three, there are no sandwiches cut into fourths. There is no fruit tea. One is not likely to find a table of nice ladies in purple dresses and red hats. Any kind of _______ salad on the menu is most likely potato salad, and it won't come on a bed of lettuce with grapes next to it.

In a meat and three, the green beans will be dark green (as in cooked, not bright green and stiff) and there will be pork of some kind in with the green beans. Most often, one could expect to find corn bread on the menu. If you cannot get mac and cheese, it is because they ran out, not because they didn't make any.

If you like a meat and three as I have defined it, you must try COOL CAFE at 1110 Hillsboro Road, Suite B200 (at the corner of Hillsboro Road and Mack Hatcher Bypass behind the Mapco and the bank). I've been there three times in the last week. Trust me, this is real and really good food.

I wouldn't normally be such a shameless shill in a forum such as this, but the place is new, the owners (Tim Ness and Susie Hughes) seem like good people and, in case you missed the point, the food is great.

On any given day, they have two or three meat choices and about eight vegetable choices. A meat with two vegetables and a glass of water comes to $7.50. The portions are very generous. The menu changes day to day, but you can call to find out what is on the menu (599-0338). They do sit down lunch in a clean environment 10:30 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. weekdays and they do takeway service until 7:00 p.m. weekdays and Saturdays 2:00 - 6:00. Every day I've been there, the customer mix has ranged from suits like myself to the guys in the real trucks to groups of women, sans red hats.

If you think you like a meat and three but you don't like Cool Cafe, let's you and me never have lunch together.

The Devil Is In the Details

2005-08-23T10:56:00.000-07:00

The vast majority of people who have expressed an opinion to me about the City's purchase of Harlinsdale Farm to create a public park have been very excited about the concept of having that landmark open to the public and preserved as green space. Support for the notion of Harlinsdale as a park is overwhelming when Harlinsdale as a 2.2 units/acre PUD as an alternative is contemplated.
Last night, the City hosted a forum for the public to see a preliminary concept plan rendered by the consultants. Almost 200 people showed up for a meeting that lasted nearly three hours. Again, most people present really liked the idea of the property becoming a park.
However, there are numerous legitimate concerns. Foremost among the concerns expressed last night were the sentiments of neighbors in Chestnut Bend and Harpeth Meadows regarding the idea of pedestrian trails through their neighborhoods linking, via pedestrian bridges, to Harlinsdale. See the map below from the Harlinsdale Master Concept Plan.

For the complete Master Concept Plan, visit this link: http://www.franklin-gov.com/.

A couple of points are in order. First, the Master Concept Plan is just that, a concept. There have been no commitments, express or implied, to any of the results that are presented as concepts. There is no funding in place for the pedestrian walkways or bridges, or any of the rest of the concept plan. From my perspective, I wanted the planners to think big, ignore the potential politics of the deal, and render a hypothetical, perfect-world concept of what could be done.

With that in mind, I think we must acknowledge that pedestrian access to Harlinsdale Park is paramount. We would be doing a disservice to the users of the Park if they all had to drive on site to enjoy the park. So the planners, I presume, contemplated as many ways to deliver pedestrians to Harlinsdale as possible.

Now we have the concept plan in hand. Now the real world intersects with the hypothetical world. Residents of Chestnut Bend were quick to point out, and fairly so, that the trails in Chestnut Bend are privately owned by the homeowners' association there and many Chestnut Bend residents are not ready to embrace public trail linkages to their private trails, particularly not with the potential volume of pedestrians that Harlinsdale could bring. Parking, too, is a problem. Likewise, the residents of Harpeth Meadows were fairly unanimous in their opposition to a trail cutting through their neighborhood to link the Bicentennial Park to Harlinsdale. They, too, are not amenable to becoming a parking area for users of Harlinsdale Park. All of these points are fair and reasonable.

The concept plan now begins to be revised. I would imagine that the numerous and very strongly held opinions registered last night will have an impact. I, as the alderman in which Chestnut Bend, Harpeth Meadows and Harlinsdale are all found, and the chairman of the committee that oversees the Parks Department took note of the opinions expressed.

I believe the concept plan should be revised to accomodate pedestrian access to Harlinsdale in a way that does not unduly burden the residents of the neighborhoods adjacent to the park. Specifically, I believe the trail through Harpeth Meadows is very problematic and perhaps even unnecessary. I would far rather spend that same money creating a nice sidewalk link from downtown to Harlinsdale by way of Franklin Road. This would be an amenity to the neighborhood, a benefit to downtown and the Factory, and serve people who might have no interest in Harlinsdale.

I also believe that the Chestnut Bend trail system should be respected as private property and that any trail linkages from the west side of the Harpeth River into Harlinsdale should be done, if at all, with minimal intrusion into Chestnut Bend. Various suggestions for moving the pedestrian bridge on the west side of the park were given, and I think in some fashion the property rights and concerns of Chestnut Bend homeowners can be addressed while still creating a pedestrian link to the west side of the river.

In sum, I was very pleased to see so many residents interested in the plan and participating constructively in the process. I am optimistic that the revisions to the concept plan will improve the plan and mitigate the legitimate concerns of the nearby residents.

Six Days a Week

2005-08-19T17:36:00.000-07:00

One or both of my sons have football practice Monday-Friday. I coach my younger son's team. Saturdays, they each have a game.

Update: Franklin Water System Remediation

2005-08-18T17:41:00.000-07:00

Alderman McLendon's responses to the Franklin Firefighters Association Questionnaire:

2005-08-18T13:17:00.000-07:00