Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Ben Mallicote’

Kingsport, TN City Officials Exposed

November 6th, 2009 2 comments

A reader of this blog has submitted information below on the series of events that certain Kingsport city officials took to help out their friends.  In my view, the City of Kingsport should keep it’s nose out of other organizations business.  See previous post on Kingsport’s downtown turf battle.  Mayor Phillips photo is on the above left and Vice Mayor Mallicote is on the above right.

Summary: The recent numerous public accounts of continuing disputes in downtown Kingsport are unfortunately the result of extraordinary biased “leadership” by the Mayor and Vice-Mayor of Kingsport, that have emboldened and enabled bully tactics by the very small group of businesses that call themselves the downtown business alliance (dba).

The dba has been grossly misrepresented publicly as having over seventy members; while in reality it is led by two important downtown businesses (Adaptcore and Urban Synergy). The dba only has a handful of strong supporters, none paying membership dues while the Downtown Kingsport Association (DKA) has 160 dues paying members and represents a broad range of downtown interests and has been doing so successfully for 70 years. The leaders of the dba have been key campaign supporters of city leadership preferred political candidates while the DKA board has been perceived as political opponents of city “leadership” The DKA has taken extraordinary measures to accommodate the legitimate interests of the dba; the DKA has met 100% of its contract deliverables to the City of Kingsport, which has not been disputed; yet demands for extraordinarily detailed and unfortunately increasingly stringent organizational changes have been placed upon the DKA by the Mayor and Vice-Mayor accompanied by unwarranted public attacks and bias by them.

The dba has failed to meet its few minor commitments to the DKA, but the city “leadership” has never requested the dba to comply. These actions by city “leadership” have harmed downtown Kingsport and are apparently driven by personal vendettas and agendas by them and not by any desire to improve Kingsport This is the second effort by city leadership to destroy the DKA as the Mayor attempted to force a “merger” with the Chamber of Commerce last year that made no sense.

  • In 2008 the Mayor demanded that the DKA enter into “merger” discussions with the Kingsport Chamber of Commerce or receive no funding with no explanation of why this was appropriate This was a bad idea by the Mayor, and after brief discussions between the Chamber and the DKA both parties agreed If the Mayor had been successful, it would have meant the end of the DKA.
  • The DKA negotiated a detailed list of 8 pages of deliverables with the city for the fiscal year ending June 30; and every single deliverable was met successfully. which has not been disputed.
  • Late 2008 an informal alliance of a few downtown businesses (dba) approached the city regarding what that they perceived as problems within the DKA. The Mayor apparently saw this as second opportunity to destroy the DKA. Despite the dba refusing to be members of the DKA and work from within for improvements, the city “leadership” encouraged and emboldened the dba to compete with the DKA, to demand board seats and to further demand a long list of detailed organizational changes still without even joining the organization. The city “leadership” should have advised the “dba” to join the DKA and work from within instead of encouraging the bullying tactics employed by the dba.  If city “leadership” had acted appropriately at this point all the competition and disputes between downtown organizations would have been avoided.
  • In February at a joint meeting attended by the Mayor, the dba and the DKA, the Mayor unfortunately showed his bias by opening the meeting prior to any discussions of the parties by advising the DKA to provide 6 board seats to the dba. He did not advise the dba to join nor make any suggestions to them on how to better work together.
  • Also in February the DKA submitted a funding request with a detailed set of deliverables and at a proposed funding level to address increased downtown marketing as targeted by the dba. The city “leadership” provided no feedback on the proposal and the proposal was not even provided to the rest of the BMA for consideration. No opportunity was provided for the DKA to discuss this proposal with the BMA.
  • Instead the city “leadership” scheduled a BMA work session in May regarding funding for downtown activities; they provided substantial advance notice to the dba who were given an opportunity to make a formal presentation while the DKA was given only one hours notice. This was a blatantly unfair by the city “leadership” The BMA tentatively split funding, which led to further competition between the groups and ultimately to formal mediation. This was a serious mistake as the dba was not a qualified non-profit organization legally able to accept city funding. In fact the dba were not even a legal entity, but only an informal alliance, which is still true today.
  • City “leadership” is well aware that the dba has been grossly exaggerated in public descriptions of its size. In fact it is led by AdaptCore (owners of Bonefire Smokehouse, The Bus Pit, Kingsport Grocery and the apparent failed attempt to renovate the State theater) and Urban Synergy (developers of numerous lofts and business building renovations downtown) and a very small group of other moderate supporters. While these two companies are important to downtown, they do not represent broad interests downtown such as manufacturing, professional services, medical, banking, churches, etc. as the DKA does.
  • Despite its funding cut, the DKA led an effort to have Kingsport’s greatest July 4th concert and fireworks display ever.
  • At the first mediation meeting in July the Mayor and Vice Mayor were not neutral parties, they completely advocated on behalf of the dba; and made extraordinarily disparaging remarks about specific DKA board members. The dba had three pages of specific organizational demands and the DKA placed no demands upon the dba. The mediator stated that certain key corporate sponsorships were threatened unless the DKA met the demands of the dba and city “leadership” This meeting with two BMA members attending may have been a violation of State sunshine laws, which should be investigated.
  • On September 28 at a BMA work session the Vice Mayor presented a completely one sided proposal to the BMA and falsely portrayed it as a “middle of the road” proposal. In fact if it had been accepted that evening by the BMA (which it was not), the DKA would have been required to meet 100% of every onerous demand by the dba, including a ridiculous demand for twelve Board seats or the DKA would receive no funding; and the dba would not have been required to do anything!
  • At a DKA press conference on Oct 2, an extraordinary positive announcement was explained about downtown Kingsport. A joint arrangement had been reached between DKA and the Restoration Church located in the previous Strand Theater to lead to immediate and regular stage performances focused on family based dramas in this currently fully functioning state of the art performing arts facility. Instead of city “leadership” attending the press conference to praise these efforts, the Vice-Mayor attended, had no positive statements to make, and focused all his statements on creating false charges about timing concerns related to these actions. In the Kingsport paper the next day a great positive story for downtown Kingsport should have been the focus, but instead because of the Vice-Mayor’s almost unbelievable anti Kingsport actions another negative story was the focus.
  • Alderman Munsey agreed to work over next two weeks (from Sept 28) to attempt resolution. During that period much real progress was made and only four detailed issues remained to be resolved by the next BMA work session on Oct 5, at which the BMA had targeted for final resolution. Note that while the DKA continued to make concessions in good faith the dba reduced its commitment to bring in new members to 15-20 from the 50-70 they first made in July and from the 30-40 new members promised just two weeks earlier.
  • Well in advance of the Oct 5 BMA work session, the DKA prepared and submitted to the city manager’s office an 11-page presentation to be reviewed with the BMA that clearly laid out the case for the value of DKA and its rationale for funding. Unfortunately the Mayor advised the DKA ten minutes before the meeting that the DKA would be given no opportunity during the alderman discussion of potential DKA funding to discuss or review the presentation. Again this was grossly unfair.
  • At the same meeting Larry Munsey covered the progress he made as described in his Oct 2 report and the four remaining issues were identified (number of board seats, term limits, election procedures this year and nominating committee). One alderman suggested the dba and the DKA representatives go outside the room and see if agreement between the parties could be reached. After a brief meeting, full agreement was reached, and it was explained orally to the BMA. The DKA, the dba and the DKA thought all of the BMA understood final agreement was reached that evening between the dba and the DKA, and that funding would be released right away to the DKA so that a completely unified downtown would be put into place immediately.
  • Unfortunately the next evening the Vice Mayor continued his vendetta and convinced the BMA to impose additional requirements upon the DKA before funding would be released that had not been agreed to the previous night. The vice-mayor publicly criticized the DKA and funding was to be further withheld until the city attorney certified DKA had met its obligations. This was a serious mistake, and the BMA was advised of such as city “leadership” had previously demonstrated on numerous occasions they could not be trusted as described herein.
  • Nevertheless the DKA continued to work in good faith to meet its commitments. Its Board met and made all the bylaw changes that it had agreed to. It added two representatives to the dba to the Board nominating committee and worked in good faith to pick six Board candidates from their list of 12 suggested (as was agreed to). The dba had agreed at the last BMA work session to have all of its board candidates join the DKA, generally for small business at the relatively small cost of $150, but unfortunately the dba did not comply.
  • On Oct 28 a meeting of DKA, dba and city representatives was held. The dba admitted they still had not met their requirement for any of their Board nominees to join, but the dba now pushed ahead attempting to negotiate additional concessions from the DKA. On one issue the city attorney clarified that what the DKA had changed in its bylaws was consistent with the agreement previously reached and the dba position was wrong. On another issue the dba was again wrong as they were citing a preliminary report from Alderman Munsey not the final report. The DKA clarified such that evening to all parties. Despite the fact the dba had not met its meager commitments and the DKA had met 100% of its very demanding commitments, the Vice Mayor requested nothing from the dba, but insisted that the DKA make concessions beyond the agreement previously reached. The dba again agreed they would bring in the promised membership checks by the end of the day.
  • By an Oct 29 called BMA work session, the dba still had not brought in any memberships as repeatedly promised and the DKA had met all its requirements that it agreed to on Oct 5. In fact the dba now was demanding several additional new concessions mostly of a technical nature. Instead of allowing the city attorney to discuss how the DKA had complied with its requirements and allow his certification for funding as the BMA had previously voted, the Vice Mayor convinced the BMA to support (subject to a final vote on Nov 3) funding for downtown through the KCVB, which already receives nearly a million dollars in city funding. There is no logical reason to take away DKA funding for additional funding to KCVB.
  • At the November 3 BMA meeting the BMA voted by 5-2 to fund the KCVB. The two aldermen that voted on principle were Ken Marsh and Larry Munsey.
  • The DKA has fully met all its commitments. The dba has not. The city “leadership” is continuing to deny funding to the DKA despite this, and has demonstrated that the Mayor and Vice-Mayor never intended to negotiate in good faith.
  • It is now clear to the DKA that the Kingsport Mayor and Vice-Mayor are biased regarding the DKA.

Comments are welcome on this blog.

Kingsport, Tennessee High Crime Rate

October 19th, 2009 No comments

image Below is data that was obtained form the website NeighborhoodScout which gives some interesting data concerning the high crime rate in Kingsport, Tennessee.  Kingsport is ranked as having a high crime rank by NeighborhoodScout and states that  Kingsport’s crime rate is higher than the average for the State of Tennessee and  United States.

Are our city officials more concerned about putting in a new swimming pool, expanding the convention center, building more hotels, annexing more property, getting more restaurants, etc. than reducing the high crime rate in Kingsport?

Kingsport, TN Elected Officials – Board of Mayor and Alderman

If you have a concern about the crime in the city of Kingsport, click on the city officials names above to send them an email.

NeighborhoodScout

With a crime rate of 89 per one thousand residents, Kingsport has one of the highest crime rates in America compared to all communities of all sizes – from the smallest towns to the very largest cities. One’s chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime here is one in 11. Within Tennessee, more than 90% of the communities have a lower crime rate than Kingsport.

Separately, it is always interesting and important to compare a city’s crime rate with those of similarly sized communities – a fair comparison as larger cities tend to have more crime. NeighborhoodScout has done just that. With a population of 44,560, Kingsport has a combined rate of violent and property crime that is very high compared to other places of similar population size. Regardless of whether Kingsport does well or poorly compared to all other cities and towns in the US of all sizes, compared to places with a similar population, it fares badly. Few other communities of this size have a crime rate as high as Kingsport.

The crime data that NeighborhoodScout used for this analysis are the seven offenses from the uniform crime reports, collected by the FBI from 17,000 local law enforcement agencies, and include both violent and property crimes, combined.

Now let us turn to take a look at how Kingsport does for violent crimes specifically, and then how it does for property crimes. This is important because the overall crime rate can be further illuminated by understanding if violent crime or property crimes (or both) are the major contributors to the general rate of crime in Kingsport.

For Kingsport, we found that the violent crime rate is one of the highest in the nation, across communities of all sizes (both large and small). Violent offenses tracked included forcible rape, murder and non-negligent manslaughter, armed robbery, and aggravated assault, including assault with a deadly weapon. According to NeighborhoodScout’s analysis of FBI reported crime data, your chance of becoming a victim of one of these crimes in Kingsport is one in 107.

In addition, NeighborhoodScout found that a lot of the crime that takes place in Kingsport is property crime. Property crimes that are tracked for this analysis are burglary, larceny over fifty dollars, motor vehicle theft, and arson. In Kingsport, your chance of becoming a victim of a property crime is one in 13, which is a rate of 80 per one thousand population.

Click here to see the data below as well as a map showing where the safest places are in Kingsport.  At the top of the page you can get data for a different city.

image

image

Shocking News About Sullivan County Aging Population

October 8th, 2009 1 comment

I have done many posts concerning the median age and population in Sullivan County, Tennessee and  Sullivan County has one of the oldest populations in the state (click here to view the data).

The data below is from the state and I hope will help illustrate exactly what will happen if Sullivan County continues as it has in the past.

Below in the graph is a breakdown on the population for the different age groups in Sullivan County for the census year 2000 and projections for year 2025.  Sullivan County population in year 2000 was 153,048 and is projected to be 161,262 in year 2025.

Note that in the graph below that the 2025 population for all age groups are less for age groups that are under the 55 to 59 age group.  The year 2025 graph shows that the population numbers shows the population growing for for ages group 55 and up.  The largest single age group with the largest population is the age group 75 and up and the larger part of them are females.

Sulivan-County-2000-to-2025

Is Sullivan County equipped to handle the aging population?  There should great demand for those businesses offering services to the elderly.  But, if you are a pediatric physician, you might want to start your practice elsewhere because of the low birth rate in Sullivan County.

The table below gives the actual population numbers for the different age groups.  I have added the year 2010 which is not plotted in the above graph so you can see what is projected for 2010.  The data from the state is given as number of males and females for each age group and I have added the male and female population numbers together in the table below and the graph.

Population Projections for Sullivan County, TN



Year
Age Group 2000 2010 2025
0 to 4 8,542 8,593 7,897
5 to 9 9,411 9,012 8,498
10 to 14 9,709 8,697 8,538
15 to 19 9,204 8,330 7,514
20 to 24 7,778 8,692 7,638
25 to 29 9,625 9,751 8,180
30 to 34 10,420 8,669 9,154
35 to 39 11,534 10,078 9,887
40 to 44 11,873 10,864 10,597
45 to 49 11,543 11,697 9,357
50 to 54 11,241 11,644 10,368
55 to 59 9,776 11,501 11,410
60 to 64 8,066 10,981 11,817
65 to 69 6,919 9,112 11,197
70 to 74 6,358 6,981 9,705
75 and up 11,049 13,960 19,506
Total 153,048 158,560 161,262

You can view the data for other Tennessee Counties which includes projections for every five years up to year 2025.  Click on the link below to go to the Tennessee webpage

Demographic Information on Age-Gender Composition

In addition to the population projections for each Tennessee city and county contained in the report above, you may access more detailed cohort-component data for a city or county below. (Please note that updated demographic projections will be forthcoming.)

Please either click a county on the Tennessee state map or click a county name in the alphabetical list below the map to access the cohort-component data. Note the Word of Caution following table listed below.

Click here to view state data for Tennessee Counties


I am one of the older population and am concerned about the future of Sullivan County.   No, you can’t move us out of the county, but you should be concerned about the future of the county when we have left this world.  There must be something in place to keep young people in Sullivan County.  A good start would be get companies that have good paying jobs to locate here.   If you too are concerned, talk to your elected officials.  You can email them at the following links.

email Kingsport BMA

email Candidates for Tennessee Governor

email Tennessee Legislators for area

email Sullivan County Commissioners

See list for

or

Comments are welcome.

Kingsport’s downtown turf battle

October 2nd, 2009 6 comments

image There is a turf battle occurring between the DKA (Downtown Kingsport Association) and DBA (Downtown Business Alliance).  These two competing organizations are trying to get funding from the City of Kingsport.

It is documented that Mayor Dennis Phillips has in the past attempted to merge the DKA into the Kingsport Chamber of Commerce.

image image The Kingsport Times-News reports that Mayor Phillips stated that at the Oct. 6, 2009 BMA meeting they would vote on Vice Mayor Mallicote proposal to withhold funding to the DKA if the DKA did not change their board leadership guidelines.  To me, this sounds like blackmail and it also points out that Mayor Phillips and Vice Mayor political allies are in the DBA organization.

If the DKA has a problem with the current BMA decisions, they could band together and vote out the current BMA in the next election.

There has been much that has been written on this dispute in the last few years.  See the links below.

Drama unfolds at DKA press conference on old Strand Theater

Kingsport leaders seek resolution to DKA, DBA dispute

Merchants air concerns over concert stage, moving concert location

Concerts causing friction between downtown organizations

DKA, DBA at loggerheads over best way to promote downtown Kingsport

DKA leaders set for merger meeting with chamber

City may consider buying State Theater building

DKA to partner with Restoration Church on Strand Theater project

Kingsport Developer gets in over his head, thinks old theater may be haunted and wants city to bail him out

Comments are welcome.

Kingsport, TN continues to buy up property in a recession

September 25th, 2009 7 comments

Since the City of Kingsport, Tennessee is buying up real estate, I have included a sample classified ad that could be used by the city.  You can see a list of properties that the city owns by clicking here.  Copy the following in bold, kingsport city of and paste into the Owner Name on the Real Estate Assessment Data form.

Hint:  If you are serious about selling property to the city, then it would be a good idea to become a political ally first with the City of Kingsport elected leaders.

Merriam-Websterally

Meaning: someone associated with another to give assistance or moral support <in trying to convince his parents to send him to soccer camp, Toby had a real ally in his coach>

Synonyms abettor (also abetter), backer, confederate, supporter, sympathizer

Related Words well-wisher; accessory, accomplice, collaborationist, collaborator; adjunct, assistant, coadjutor, helper; associate, cohort, colleague, fellow, partner; buddy, chum, companion, comrade, confidant, crony, familiar, friend, intimate, mate, pal

Will Buy Real Estate
We Buy Commercial and Residential Real Estate – Fast CASH!!!
Any Condition.
Will Pay More $$$$$$ than It Is Worth.
Have Taxpayer Money to Waste Invest.
Relocation $$$$$$$ is available.

Call Mayor Dennis Phillips
or
Vice Mayor Mallicote
City of Kingsport, Tennessee
(423) 229-9447

Famous Quotes from the Kingsport Board of Mayor and Aldermen

Mayor Dennis Phillips – ‘We need MeadowView to keep from reducing fire, police protection, and reducing trash pick-up to every two weeks.” October 21, 2008

Mayor Dennis Phillips –“We need to annex so we don’t have to raise taxes”  February 5, 2008

Alderman Munsey – “We need to do the MeadowView expansion to keep from raising taxes” September 15, 2008

Alderman Munsey – Debt is neither good or bad,”   June 3, 2008

Vice Mayor Mallicote – “I do not believe all of the doom and gloom about the economy”.  June 3, 2008

Mayor Dennis Phillips – “If the taxpayers wanted the city to cut the spending, then we could collect garbage every other week”  June 3, 2008

Mayor Dennis Phillips – “If there were no money to spend, then you would not need politicians”  October, 2007

Kingsport Developer gets in over his head, thinks old theater may be haunted and wants city to bail him out

September 24th, 2009 No comments

image A developer comes from another state and buys the old State Theater on Broad Street in Kingsport, Tennessee.  This developer (Douglas Beatty) starts work to renovate the State Theater building and finds that with the economy and his other investments that it might be better to sell his unfinished State Theater building to the City of Kingsport.

Doug Beatty, the developer has stated that he wants to get out what he has so far paid for the building and renovations which is about $450,000.  He further states that the entire cost to renovate the building would be about $900,000.

It appears that Doug Beatty is well connected with Mayor Phillips, Vice Mayor Mallicote, BMA members and the Kingsport Economic Development Board recently voted to spend nearly $10,000 to fund a study to determine the economic impact of a restored theater in downtown Kingsport.

The Kingsport Times-News reports that Bob Feathers with the Kingsport Economic Development Board believes some type of investment can occur to complete the theater project — regardless of what the economic development study shows.  I guess the question is, why is the city of Kingsport spending $10,000 for a study when they are going to do what they want to do to make this developer happy.

image Let the private sector take care of this. The city of Kingsport has no business bailing out someone who got in over his head.  I am sure that there are many folks in Kingsport would like for the city to bail them out of their current financial situation.

image During the renovation process, Doug Beatty became aware of apparently paranormal occurrences inside.  According to L.E.M.U.R Paranormal Investigation website, Doug Beatty met with L.E.M.U.R and permitted an investigation.

Kingsport Times-News

“I need to,” he said. “I want to at least get what I’ve got in it so I can satisfy the bank note.”

The theater is now appraised at $1.6 million by private professional appraisers, and at $1 million for county tax purposes.

Beatty said work is still progressing on the theater. But he doesn’t want to invest in any more big-ticket items such as $30,000 in sheet rock or new theater seats, until he’s in a better position or the city moves forward with an acquisition.

“I’ve got two restaurants that I really have to tend to and make sure that they’re able to pay their bills and stay open. That’s really distracting me financially and time-wise from the theater,” Beatty said.

“I really want to get it done, but I’m at a point right now, because the economy has taken so long to come back, that I’m not sure how much more I can plow ahead without putting myself at risk. I want to make sure that I’m acting responsibly and cautiously as it relates to all the development we’re doing downtown,” he said.

Feathers said he believes some type of investment can occur to complete the theater project — regardless of what the economic development study shows.

“I sincerely doubt it will be dropped altogether. But you never know,” Feathers said. “Economies could drive something different from our perspective and what we’re trying to do from an economic development perspective.

“But from a priority standpoint, this is a very important component to what we see as a good fit for the community.”

The owner of the State Theater is DB3 Development Company, LLC and is North Carolina company.  DB3 Development Company, LLC is listed as a FOREIGN company according to the Tennessee Secretary of State.  Below is from the State of Tennessee website

Name
I.D. Number
DB3 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC
0533682
Business Type*: LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
Profit/Nonprofit: FOR PROFIT
Status*: ACTIVE
Date of Formation/Qualification: 11/07/2006
Domestic/Foreign: FOREIGN
Place of Incorporation/Organization: NC
Duration: PERPETUAL
FYC(Fiscal Year Closing) Month: DECEMBER
Principal Office:
Address Line 1: 11346 TOOLE CREEK RD
Address Line 2:
City: ABINGDON
State: VA
Zip: 242108626
Other than USA:
Registered Agent:
Name: DOUGLAS BEATTY
Address Line 1: 501B E. MAIN ST.
Address Line 2:
City: KINGSPORT
State: TN
Zip: 376600000

According to Sullivan County, DB3 Development Co LLC also owns property at 227-229-23 Sullivan St.  It appears that there is construction work occurring at this location and the 2008 Sullivan County property taxes are not paid.

Let your Kingsport Board of Mayor and Alderman know your concerns about bailing out one of their pals.  Keep in mind the money spent to buy the State Theater will be your tax dollars.

email Kingsport BMA

    Feel free to leave a comment.

Vice Mayor Mallicote first was against and now is for aquatic center location

September 6th, 2009 2 comments

Vice Mayor, prior to his re-election, was very vocal and voted with Alderman Marsh and Shull against putting the Kingsport Aquatic Center in the MeadowView area.  He made the following statement below.

Kingsport Times News Published August 27th, 2008

“Kingsport needs an aquatic center to be downtown. It’s more convenient for more Kingsport residents than Meadowview. If the goal is to make the center only accessible to the affluent and tourists, then absolutely it should go to Meadowview. If it’s something for the entire community, then it needs to go downtown,” Mallicote said. “Supermarket row is blighted, rundown and ugly. If the city doesn’t redevelop it, who’s going to do it? If the city can’t afford to do it, point to the developer who could do it. The reasons stated why we can’t do it downtown are the reasons why Kingsport should put it downtown.

“It’s the heart of Kingsport, and 20 or 30 years down the road, we’ll live or die by the strength of downtown.”

However in the short video clip below you can hear Ben Mallicote state that he will be excited to put the shovel in the ground.  I guess he can change his mind because he got re-elected.  So much for his conviction about putting the aquatic center downtown.

At an BMA meeting in early 2009, Kingsport stated that they would do the following in the quote from the Times-News below.    .

Kingsport Times-News Published February 14th, 2009

Kingsport plans to solicit input from the public through the city’s Web site, Channel 16 and public meetings. The Web site will also be updated periodically with updates and notices of meetings.

Construction was to start around the third quarter of 2009.  It looks like none of the above has happened or maybe won’t happen.  If it does happen, it will more likely be, here it is and this is how it is going to be.

Chris McCartt in the video talks about future expansions and the citizens of Kingsport should be prepared to spend more money to fund the expansions.  The cost for the first phase of construction is about $15 million.

Email an Elected Official

August 26th, 2009 Comments off

Taxes

August 24th, 2009 Comments off

Against Building Taxpayer Funded Denominational Medical School in East TN

King College, a denominational college located in Bristol, Tennessee, has been in discussions with Kingsport, Bristol, and Sullivan County officials to build a medical school in Kingsport and Bristol.

The cost for the medical school would be about $150 million.  King is looking for $50 million to come from the cities of Kingsport ($40 million) and Bristol ($10 million), $50 million from the State of Tennessee, and the remaining $50 million from private donations.

At the July 7, 2009, Kingsport, Tennessee Board of Mayor and Alderman, a resolution was passed on first reading to endorse the King College Medical School Initiative, and pledged its commitment to work with Bristol, Sullivan County, and King College to advance the project.

While it does sound like a good project for the area, there will be a major impact on the taxpayers if this is funded via a property tax increase. Mayor Dennis Phillips has stated that if Kingsport were to fund $40 million for the project, property taxes would have to be raised 25 cents.

Below are tax rates that have been extracted from the Tennessee Property Tax Rates that show the top 20 cities that have the highest tax rates in Tennessee from 406 different tax rates for the different cities and counties.

I have added 25 cents to the tax rates for the two Kingsport line items (Kingsport-Sullivan and Kingsport-Hawkins) in the table below.  Kingsport, with the 25 cents added, would have a rank of 10 and 12 as having the most expensive tax rates in the state.  Bristol has a rank of 14 and I have no knowledge if they would increase property taxes.

Top 20 Cities with the most expensive property tax rates
R a n k County City Total County and City Tax Property Tax for $150k Home Household Median Income % Taxes from Household Income Median Home Value
1 SHELBY MEMPHIS $7.29 $2,734 $32,285 8.47% $130,695
2 SHELBY GERMANTOWN $5.63 $2,111 $113,733 1.86% $278,800
3 SHELBY BARTLETT $5.63 $2,111 $74,091 2.85% $164,600
4 KNOX KNOXVILLE $5.50 $2,063 $32,538 6.34% $102,300
5 ANDERSON OAK RIDGE $5.45 $2,044 $45,474 4.49% $120,100
6 SHELBY COLLIERVILLE $5.37 $2,014 $99,239 2.03% $255,400
7 HAMILTON CHATTANOOGA $5.36 $2,009 $35,913 5.59% $121,100
8 SHELBY MILLINGTON $5.32 $1,995 $43,753 4.56% $124,144
9 MADISON HUMBOLDT $5.30 $1,988 $50,007 3.98% $181,800
10 HAWKINS KINGSPORT $5.11* $1,916 $34,391 5.57% $99,900
11 SHELBY ARLINGTON $5.09 $1,909 $59,131 3.23% $233,597
12 SULLIVAN KINGSPORT $5.08* $1,905 $34,391 5.54% $99,900
13 ROANE OAK RIDGE $5.04 $1,890 $45,474 4.16% $120,100
14 SULLIVAN BRISTOL $5.03 $1,886 $36,454 5.17% $94,000
15 MORGAN OAKDALE $4.98 $1,868 $32,174 5.81% $47,502
16 COFFEE MANCHESTER $4.96 $1,860 $36,674 5.07% $112,275
17 HAMILTON LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN $4.95 $1,858 $117,767 1.58% $515,354
18 HAMILTON RIDGESIDE $4.95 $1,858 $103,995 1.79% $293,387
19 LAUDERDALE HENNING $4.95 $1,856 $23,407 7.93% $65,212
20 HAMILTON SIGNAL MOUNTAIN $4.93 $1,848 $78,175 2.36% $283,948

* The current city and county combined tax rate for Kingsport-Sullivan County is $4.86 and Kingsport-Hawkins County is $4.86.  Twenty-five cents has been added to each of the Kingsport tax rates in the above table.


The table below again shows the top 20 cites and the effect on the taxpayers’ Household Median Income.  There appears to be a disconnect with those cities having a high tax rate, lower Household Median Income and the percentage of Household Income needed to pay property taxes.

The household median income for Kingsport is $34,391 and the Kingsport majority of Kingsport property owners would pay over 5.5 percent of household income ($150k home) for property taxes if  the 25 cents is added to the Kingsport tax rate.  The Kingsport rank is 6 and 7 and Bristol comes in at a rank of 8 in the table below for the largest percent of household income needed to pay property taxes.

A taxpayer funded medical school would reduce the already low Kingsport household income and would reduce the standard of living for the majority of Kingsport citizens so the city could reap the benefits of increased revenue to spend on other pet projects.

Top 20 Cities that take the highest percentage of income for property taxes
R a n k County City Total County and City Tax Property Tax for $150k Home Household Median Income % Taxes from Household Income Median Home Value
1 SHELBY MEMPHIS $7.29 $2,734 $32,285 8.47% $130,695
2 LAUDERDALE HENNING $4.95 $1,856 $23,407 7.93% $65,212
3 KNOX KNOXVILLE $5.50 $2,063 $32,538 6.34% $102,300
4 MORGAN OAKDALE $4.98 $1,868 $32,174 5.81% $47,502
5 HAMILTON CHATTANOOGA $5.36 $2,009 $35,913 5.59% $121,100
6 HAWKINS KINGSPORT $5.11* $1,916 $34,391 5.57% $99,900
7 SULLIVAN KINGSPORT $5.08* $1,905 $34,391 5.54% $99,900
8 SULLIVAN BRISTOL $5.03 $1,886 $36,454 5.17% $94,000
9 COFFEE MANCHESTER $4.96 $1,860 $36,674 5.07% $112,275
10 SHELBY MILLINGTON $5.32 $1,995 $43,753 4.56% $124,144
11 ANDERSON OAK RIDGE $5.45 $2,044 $45,474 4.49% $120,100
12 ROANE OAK RIDGE $5.04 $1,890 $45,474 4.16% $120,100
13 MADISON HUMBOLDT $5.30 $1,988 $50,007 3.98% $181,800
14 SHELBY ARLINGTON $5.09 $1,909 $59,131 3.23% $233,597
15 SHELBY BARTLETT $5.63 $2,111 $74,091 2.85% $164,600
16 HAMILTON SIGNAL MOUNTAIN $4.93 $1,848 $78,175 2.36% $283,948
17 SHELBY COLLIERVILLE $5.37 $2,014 $99,239 2.03% $255,400
18 SHELBY GERMANTOWN $5.63 $2,111 $113,733 1.86% $278,800
19 HAMILTON RIDGESIDE $4.95 $1,858 $103,995 1.79% $293,387
20 HAMILTON LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN $4.95 $1,858 $117,767 1.58% $515,354

* The current city and county combined tax rate for Kingsport-Sullivan County is $4.86 and Kingsport-Hawkins County is $4.86.  Twenty-five cents has been added to each of the Kingsport tax rates in the above table.


I have heard some members of the Kingsport BMA express their desire to have a college located in Kingsport.  They should keep in mind that there are very large number of cities that have been successful without having a college and who also have a better standard of living than Kingsport.

College Cities

Household Median Income

Knoxville $32,538
Bristol $36,454
Chattanooga $35,913
Johnson City $35,746
Memphis $35,181

The above cities that have a college appear not to have increased the standard of living and have a low household median income.

Below is the household income distribution for Kingsport and the household median income for Kingsport is $34,391.  In the graph below there are 2,636 people who earn less than $10,000  classifying them as living in poverty. I challenge the elected officials to venture outside of their social and political groups and try to understand the plight of the majority of wage earners in the Kingsport area.  The medical school would bring jobs, but some of these jobs will be imported jobs and the common folks would not have the background or training for these jobs.  Ask what you can do to raise the standard of living (higher income) for Kingsport citizens without imposing a property tax burden.

I feel that the taxpayers should not be taking the risk of funding a medical school when there already is a state funded one in Johnson City.   The need for doctors in this area is questionable since the population is declining in Sullivan County.  If they area has trouble attracting doctors or keeping doctors, then take a hard look at the reason.

Quality of Life issues are important, but a good Standard of Living for local folks just might make the area prosper by increased spending by the majority of citizens. The bottom line is that the area needs good paying jobs without the additional burden on the taxpayers.

I need to point out that no funding has been voted on so far, but projects such as this grows legs very fast and then its then to late to react.  The intent of this post is to make you aware of the issues so you can make your views know.  Update:  Many elected officials have expressed their support of this project including Lt. Governor Ron Ramsey who may make it a part of his campaign for governor.  Again, I must point out that I am not against the project but am very concerned about it being funded by taxpayers.

Please contact your elected officials and tell them NO to a taxpayer funded denominational medical school.  Click on the email links below and add your comments in your own email program.

email Kingsport BMA

email Candidates for Tennessee Governor

email Tennessee Legislators for area

email Sullivan County Commissioners

See list for

or

BMA Members

August 21st, 2009 Comments off

The City of Kingsport, Tennessee is governed by a seven member Board of Mayor and Aldermen, elected at-large and on a non-partisan basis for four-year staggered terms. The exception to this rule is that the Mayor is elected at-large for a two year term. Elections are held in May during odd numbered years. The new Board of Mayor and Alderman is seated on July 1 of each election year. The Vice Mayor position is selected from an Alderman position and voted on by the elected BMA members.  Each BMA member has one vote (7 members = 7 votes).

The current Board of Mayor and Aldermen is comprised of the following individuals:  Click on “More Info.” button for all posts for a given BMA member.

Mayor Dennis Phillips

Term Expires 30 June 2011

Email: PhillipsD@ci.kingsport.tn.us


Vice Mayor Ben Mallicote

Term Expires 30 June 2013

Email: mallicote@ci.kingsport.tn.us


Alderman Larry Munsey

Term expires 30 June 2011

Email: Munsey@ci.kingsport.tn.us


Alderman Jantry Shupe

Term expires 30 June 2011

Email: shupe@ci.kingsport.tn.us


Alderman Valerie Joh

Term expires 30 June 2013

Email: joh@ci.kingsport.tn.us


Alderman C. Ken Marsh, Jr.

Term expires 30 June 2011

Email: marsh@ci.kingsport.tn.us


Alderman Tom Parham

Term Expires 30 June 2013

Email: parham@ci.kingsport.tn.us