One avenue has closed for residents who are holding out hope that the recent 25-cent property tax hike in Loudon County will be undone.
County Mayor Rollen “Buddy” Bradshaw has signed the resolution to raise the county property tax rate, which had been approved by a 6-4 County Commission vote during a June 24 budget adoption meeting. The increase was made in order to fund a $115 million building program for a new school and other projects at existing schools in the county’s school system.
The possibility of a veto was raised when Commissioner Will Jenkins asked Bradshaw to consider a veto after the increase was first approved. Later that night, Bradshaw said he would consider it over the next 10 business days.
On June 27, according to Commissioner Van Shaver, Bradshaw signed the resolution that fixed the tax levy at $1.7683 on each $100 of taxable property outside the limits of Lenoir City. No public statements about the decision appeared to have been made.
Meanwhile, the county attorney had been asked to issue an opinion to the Commission on the question: “Does a County Mayor ‘have the power to veto the tax levy’ resolution?”
The opinion, issued on July 1, advised against proceeding with a veto.
Bradshaw could not be reached for comment. It is unclear whether he had already been advised by the attorney before signing the resolutions.
Some people learned about Bradshow’s decision not to veto from a screenshot text conversation that was posted in local social media groups on July 1. It shows a text from Bradshaw to 10 others, saying: “The resolutions are all signed. And FYI, (Tennessee Code Annotated) does not grant me authority to veto the tax levy.”
Shaver, who confirmed the screenshot’s authenticity, responded with “Praise the Lord.” Commissioner Bill Geames then texted: “I second that.”
The screenshot was shared on social media by lifelong local Chasey Hachmann, who declined to divulge how she obtained it. The land where the new school is to be built was sold by Hachmann’s family to First Baptist Church in Lenoir City, before the church sold it to Loudon County Schools for $1.85 million.
Hachmann was unsurprised to learn that Bradshaw wouldn’t be vetoing the vote.
“He said in the meeting that he could veto it, and then he refused to veto it and told them to go on. So that … told me that he was dodging that,” she said. “He didn't want to go against Van and the rest of them, and he didn't really want to go against the people because then they would turn around and vote his hind end out.
“So he looked for an easy way of getting out, supposedly, on some sort of technical issue, is what (the attorney) has told him, that he doesn't have the power to veto,” Hachmann said. “That has not been what I have been told by others who have seeked legal counsel.”
LEGAL OPINION
In an interview, Shaver said his “praise the Lord” was referencing the fact that Bradshaw had signed the resolution. The day after the meeting “would have been the optimum time” for him to sign, Shaver said.
“But it was a matter of, you know, the longer it waits … And, of course, I'm sure you read the same things I did: Veto, veto, veto,” Shaver said. “Everybody called Buddy: ‘Veto, veto, veto.’ And so once he did sign it, that pretty well put the veto — I would say argument, the veto, whatever you want to call it — that was going so strong on the social media circles right there, that pretty well put that to bed.”
According to the legal opinion issued by Robert L. Bowman, while the state “statute specifically mentions a County Mayor's power to veto ‘the annual county budget,’ it is silent as to the tax levy resolution.”
“... Moreover, the statute states the veto power is limited to legislative resolutions and does not apply to administrative or appellate matters. Those terms are not defined in the statute … we are unable to find any legal authority stating that a County Mayor may veto the ‘tax levy’ resolution,” the opinion continued. “... Absent some legal precedent authorizing such an act, it would not be advisable for a County Mayor to do so, as it may be unlawful.”
If the mayor did veto the resolution, according to statute, the issue would still return to the Commission. It would only become effective only upon passage by a majority of all the members.
The county’s request for legal advice also asked about another issue that came up during the budget adoption meeting, this one regarding a potential conflict of interest. Jenkins said that Geames, who gets paid for doing lawn work at one of the schools, didn’t read a statement of conflict before voting on Commissioner Rosemary Quillen’s move to “delay raising the tax levy until there is an independent feasibility study, student assessment, and traffic study completed.” A re-vote was taken, but that motion still failed.
The request asked whether it is “legal for an ‘employee’ of the Loudon County School System to vote on the tax levy resolution, without reading a conflict of interest statement.” The opinion advised: “I have not been provided with any evidence that a member of the Loudon County Board of Commissioners is an 'employee' of the Loudon County School System or that the Commissioner's pay or that of a spouse would 'increase' because of the vote. Nevertheless, a conflict is created only if the vote 'would increase the pay or benefits of that member or the member's spouse.'"
None of the commissioners who voted for the increase did it because they wanted to, Shaver said.
“But we were looking at the obvious issues that are coming here now and are going to be coming on as much stronger in the next few years. They're going to continue — enrollment populations — everything continues to increase,” Shaver said.
“We're not planning to build all this stuff to solve the problem today and tomorrow, or even next year. This is a problem-solving step for decades.”
Most Popular
Comments / 0