Sarah Freeman, Germantown Citizen, on Discrepanices at Shelby County Election Commission

Sarah Freeman, Germantown citizen and history professor at Arkansas State University, was a poll watcher in the 2018 election. As a result of some of her experiences during that process, she took a deeper dive into the numbers. She acquired the SCEC database showing the voting totals on the machines for each early voting location, and attempted to reconcile them to "poll pad" numbers. The poll pads tally the number of times that a person is looked up on the SCEC data base at each precinct. The poll pads are sealed and locked away securely each evening at each voting location, and unsealed the next day, presumably because these are important for election security.

She discovered that the "poll pad" number totals do not include those voters whose correct address does not match the address on the SCEC records. The voters without matching addresses vote on the machines but are not included on the poll pad tally. At many of the early voting locations she could find little or no attempt to reconcile the poll pad numbers to the machine vote numbers each day. Furthermore, there are wild variations in the number of voters that fall into the "wrong address" category at each voting location, and at each day in some of the early voting locations. 

When Ms. Freeman requested the report of the "auditors", she discovered that there is no "audit". An accounting firm is employed for each election, and, because they have the capability and the credentials to perform audits, they are routinely called "auditors". However, they are only charged with checking a few boxes for a certain number of tasks, and reconciling machine votes to anything is not among their charged tasks. The accounting report specifically states that it does not verify the integrity of the election.

Without further ado, here is Ms. Freeman's report, followed by the email she sent to several parties yesterday: 

Sarah Freeman Report

Politicians, the press, public servants, and citizen activists,

Please read the attached letter which examines some very troubling documents and data collected from the Nov. 2018 Shelby County election. There were many red flags in that election, and I hope this letter will open up conversations about what can and should be changed in the current election process. Unless and until the process is improved with much better security, a real audit, and (I hope) a shift away from voting machines to a verifiable voter hand-marked ballot system, the integrity of our elections will continue to be undermined.

Let me know if you have any questions and/or would like to see the documents mentioned in the letter. 

Thank you.

Prof. Sarah Wilkerson Freeman

Germantown, TN 38138

*************

Here are a few of my past blog posts about elections and the Shelby County Election Commission, as well as a couple from other sources (please note  that the SCEC has billed the City $19,000 for the Barzizza election appeal. I did not write a post about this because it was adequately covered in traditional news sources):  

The aberrant paper ballots, Some Statistics, Barzizza Files Complaint against Election Commission 

Election Commission to Hold Special Meeting Wednesday on Voting System

Ex-Alderman Frank Uhlhorn Appointed as Shelby County Election Commissioner

The Culture of Kindness and the Germantown Values PAC

Here are a few articles from other sources:

Election Commission Bills Germantown $19,000 for Barzizza Lawsuit

How Pay to Play Ballots Landed in Voters' Hands

Alderman Scott Sanders--An Interview

This past Thursday I conducted a phone interview with Alderman Scott Sanders. We discussed several topics, including his vision for the future of the City; school funding and capital expenditure issues post COVID 19; and the final vote on the cell tower at Dogwood School. I used my notes to create a Q and A format. I also note that, for the sake of brevity, I have summarized his answers.

Germantown 2030 Plan, Dense Development, Citizen Commissions, and the Future of the City

Shining a Light: Do you believe that the citizens of Germantown support the Germantown Forward 2030 plan? I ask that because three of us conducted a poll of Germantown NextDoor neighborhoods, and over seventy percent of nearly 1000 respondents want no new apartments in the City. Only seven percent want the full build-out of apartments referenced in a study by City staff members-- that study notes a possibility of adding over 2000 new apartment units. The balance of the respondents on our survey want to keep more or less the same ratio of apartments to single-family homes that the City now has. There seems to be a disconnect between the results of our poll and the “citizen led” Forward 2030 plan.

Alderman Sanders: I stated in my campaign that we need to revisit the 2030 plan. It is not representative of the way citizens feel. In my opinion, the City Administrator and Mayor appoint to the commissions and long range planning committees only those who have the same pro-development mindset that they have. Most citizens do not share that same viewpoint. Also, I've seen many of the candidates that lose elections receive consolation prizes-- appointments to important commissions or committees.  Brian White, who is now on the design review commission, Dave Klevan, who was appointed to the Industrial Development Board, and Greg Marcom, who was a member of the Germantown 2030 Forward planning committee are some examples of that. All of these commissions guide how the city moves forward. The City purports that these commissions represent the views of the greater community, but they actually do not. City departments were highly involved in the Forward 2030 plan, and the members were largely administration supporters. The process was fashioned in a way that insured that the result would be consistent with the administration’s viewpoint. 

Shining a Light: Why are people attracted to Germantown as a place to live? 

Alderman Sanders: Traditionally, people have been attracted to the City because of the tight knit neighborhoods, mature trees, strict zoning restrictions on signs and building height, aesthetics, and the peace and quiet away from the hustle and bustle of Memphis. One hundred percent the two most important factors are great schools and public safety. 

Having said that, although Germantown has always been the premier city in West Tennessee, we are losing our edge, and we may be losing our desirability because of the way we have changed. There is a lot of jockeying going on between Germantown and Collierville now. Their new state-of-the-art high school is attracting a number of families who see concrete evidence of that City’s support of the new school system. Also there is now a commitment there to limit dense development. The aldermen that I have talked to from Collierville regret the number of apartment units that they have approved in the past, and they pledge not to approve any more other than those in the pipeline. In Collierville, the aldermen are all respected by the administration. There is not any infighting. The board there holds regular work sessions, open to the public. Heck I just saw an article in the Daily Memphian and saw even with their hiring of their new police chief that they held open interviews of the candidates where the public and press could attend. Here there seems to be a great lack of trust in the government by our residents, and I feel it is because the administration does not seem to value the opinions of all the aldermen and the residents can see that. Instead of listening, our viewpoints are suppressed.  

School Funding Issues

Shining a Light: I want to talk a little bit about the school system since you brought that up. At a recent School Board meeting, it was announced that the annual $355,000 payment pledged to Shelby County Schools would no longer be paid by the City because of budget concerns arising as a result of the novel coronavirus pandemic. In the future it will be paid by the school system. This is at a time when GMSD is facing its own funding problems. How did this decision come about? 

Alderman Sanders: I have no idea. I was not consulted in any way about that. The aldermen vote on the budget, and that payment was always included. The first time I heard about it was when I listened to the school board meeting. I'd like to see the original settlement agreement to see who the parties were, was it the City of Germantown or the Germantown Board of Education? Perhaps it was their responsibility all along and the City chose to handle the payments for them in the early years due to lack of funding and starting a new district. I don't know at this point. This is not the only time we have not been consulted on something regarding GMSD. As you likely recall, the administration required GMSD to pay $232,000 extra for a utility sized pipe for a potential water tower when the new elementary school was built. All utility fund expenditures must be approved by the BMA, but the administration totally skipped that step. We never even heard about a water tower until after GMSD incurred the expense, and sought to be reimbursed. Because the water tower location has since been moved, the extra $232,000 spent for the pipe was wasted. The City had to reimburse GMSD for the funds by retroactively approving the expenditure. Yet there is no state statute allowing for a retroactive approval from the utility fund since GMSD has no authority to spend funds from that account. The end result of this mismanagement was $232,000 of taxpayer money down the drain. 

As for the payment to SCS, I prefer that the GMSD spend its budget on educating the students rather than making payments to Shelby County. I have always been supportive of everything the school system needs, whether it is money for increased security or for renovations at the middle school. I also heard for the first time that the City has taken the middle school addition off the capital improvements budget for next year. The capital improvements portion of the budget approved issuing a bond in the amount of $5 million this year and has already passed the BMA. The City Administrator apparently contacted Superintendent Manuel and said that was off the table now due to budget concerns. I am not sure the City has the authority to make this decision without a BMA vote. And I was neither consulted nor informed about the decision. We should have had a work session about all this to hear from the City the reasoning for their decision. The board may have agreed to delay or postpone this capital project due to the potential for lost revenues from the pandemic, I don't know. 

All of these things are typical. Often I am the last to find out about things, as I am not kept in the loop at all. I often read about something in the newspaper, and then see another alderman quoted. I wonder of course, about the lack of communication between the administration and at least some of the aldermen.  

The City Budget

Shining a Light: As a result of COVID 19, the City's sales tax revenue has been severely reduced, and GAC and GPAC are receiving no revenues at all. The City obviously must make some budget cuts somewhere. The Planning Commission gave the administration a pass on presenting a budget for next year.  How do you feel about all this? 

Alderman Sanders: Memphis is submitting a budget on time, and the County is submitting a budget on time. These budgets are much more complex than ours, so why can't we approve a budget for the coming year? I have written an email to Patrick Lawton saying, among other things, that there should not be an open ended time extension on submitting a budget. When will we see it? I also asked him some additional questions about possible cuts to the budget.

Shining a Light: Do you mind sending me a copy of that email?

Alderman Sanders: I would be happy to send you a copy. [The copy is included at the end of the interview.] 

Capital Expenditures- Road Projects

Shining a Light: Since you brought up the issue of the school renovation, let’s talk a bit about some of the other capital expenditures that have been planned. I noticed on the agenda sheet for the meeting Monday that some previously approved capital expenditures for various road projects are being cut. Do you have any feelings about those?

[Alderman Sanders expressed regret about losing the 80% of state funding on the Wolf River/Germantown Road intersection project, but he was unsure as to whether or not the project had been dropped by the state. After the interview Alderman Sanders let me know that he got a response from the city administrator about this project. Alderman Sanders was told that the bids came in over the state budget. The budget was $4 million and bids came in at $8 million so the state agrees that the bids on the agenda for Monday should be rejected. At this point Germantown is not sure how the state will proceed.]

Shining a Light: How much have we spent on that project to date? 

Alderman Sanders: There are so many different parts to it that I can’t even estimate. I would probably have to submit an open records request to find out.  

Capital Expenditures, Water Tower, Sports Complex, School Expansion

Shining a Light: What about other capital expenditures planned for next year? Besides the school expansion, there are plans to buy a property south of Winchester for a sports complex, and of course there is the water tower. Do you know anything about those? 

Alderman Sanders: No, I don’t. They do not keep me informed. I expect the administration will try to go forward with those at some point. 

Shining a Light: Citizens may push back if the City goes forward with the sports complex while at the same time  postponing the expansion of the middle school. The sports complex would be the third major enterprise the City supports, the other two being GPAC and GAC. That may be a bit unusual for a City our size. And we can all see now that City-supported enterprises, while they can provide great benefit for the citizens, may also present financial risk for the taxpayers during an economic downturn. I also have never seen a real cost/benefit analysis for the sports complex, which I believe is essential before undertaking a project like this.

Alderman Sanders: Well, I think the sports complex is a priority for the administration, so I expect it to come up at some point. Let me tell you a story to demonstrate the way things are done. I have had to start a spreadsheet on projects that we pass so that I can keep up with them. We vote on something and then we don’t know what happens. I happen to live near Cameron Brown Park, and one day recently I saw a number of cars parked on Farmington. I remembered that the BMA passed a measure to add sixty parking spaces at the park for the events that are held there, specifically so there would not be overflow parking on Farmington. The next time I saw Pam Beasley (Parks Director) I asked her what happened to the parking places the BMA voted for. She said that she placed the project on hold after talking to the city administrator because she may need that money for the sports complex if the land comes in over budget. That is not right. That should be a BMA decision. We had already voted on the funds for the parking places. Those funds are committed That leads me to believe they are determined to purchase the land for a sports complex. We’ll see. 

GPAC Cost Overruns

Shining a Light: What is your take on all the GPAC cost overruns?  I remember listening to a person speak at a BMA meeting in “Citizens to be Heard”. He said he was a supporter of GPAC who donated his time as an usher. He supported public funding for the arts, but he was concerned about the cost overruns. He concluded with this: “GPAC is not DaVinci and Germantown is not the Medicis.”

Alderman Sanders: Yes, Holy cow! The City leaders had to talk State Senator Brian Kelsey into extracting $2.5 million dollars grant money from the state to take care of some of the cost overruns. I kept voting for more funds for the overruns since the state provided the additional funding, and then finally for the last $900,000 requested, I had enough and voted against approval of the additional expenditure.  That vote against the final funding was mostly because some of the work had already begun before the proper approvals had been sought from the BMA. 

Cell Tower at Dogwood

Shining a Light: The vote for the final approval of the cell tower is scheduled for a vote on Monday.  Some citizens feel there should be a public meeting so their feelings can be heard. How do you feel about this? 

Alderman Sanders: I hate that it is on the agenda during this time when we are meeting on-line, and city hall is closed. However, this has been going on for 18 months, and after the last hearing (design review) it's been known that the issue would be presented to the BMA in April (tentative date) even before the virus. Everyone has been expressing their viewpoints by email and telephone calls. I've already received hundreds of pages of information over the last 9 months to a year, and read every single page of what has been sent. I continue to conduct my own research, and have answered every citizen email (except those received in the last 48 hours) and will do so up until Monday afternoon.   

You know I campaigned on improving our poor cell service, and no matter how I vote I am going to make a large number of citizens unhappy, yes or no. I'm just going to have to do what I figure is best for the overall population, our businesses, and visitors to the city. I will get criticism on social media either way, but I think the majority of citizens realize I evaluate each agenda item independently and vote my conscience.

Shining a Light: Thank you for your time. Don’t forget to send me your email to Mr. Lawton. 

Alderman Sanders: No.problem. I will do that.  

The email that Alderman Sanders referenced in the text is below. To date, he has received no response.

Shelby County Election Commission to Vote Wednesday on Contract for New System

The above notice was put on the SCEC Facebook page. Unfortunately the email address in their graphic left out the "c" in county, so please try this address: 

 carol.collinsworth@shelbycountytn.gov 

This is a wonderful opportunity to have your comments read into the record without having to physically attend the meeting or speak at a podium. Please do it!

Election Commission to Hold Special Meeting Wednesday on Voting Machines

I refer you to my past posts on the beleaguered Shelby County Election Commission. As previously discussed, our current voting system is outdated, and has no paper trail. Thus it cannot be adequately audited. It must be replaced, hopefully in time for the election next fall.

Ex-Alderman Frank Uhlhorn Appointed as Shelby County Election Commissioner

Shelby County May Get New Voting System in November After All 

I am no expert in voting systems, but when I researched the subject, I was unable to find a single election security expert that favors the type of electronic system that Linda Phillips, administrator of our elections, is promoting. She vehemently favors an electronic system that spits out a receipt for each voter. That receipt would be retained and could later be matched to electronic votes in a recount. Unfortunately, the system can still be hacked, because of the ability to insert a rogue program with a flash drive. Additionally, studies have shown that voters do not check their receipts to verify their accuracy. It is also more expensive and can easily become outdated.

The less expensive alternative is a paper ballot that is scanned at each precinct. The software is much simpler, not subject to hacking, and it is less costly. It has been used successfully for years in Chattanooga, and recently Knoxville chose to implement this system. Because the SCEC did not include that type of less expensive software in the original bidding process, the Shelby County Commission did not approve the SCEC's original monetary request for the more expensive system. The bidding process was sent back to the SCEC for another round of bidding that included the less expensive paper marked system.

Besides being less expensive, and less prone to hacking, the paper system does not require touching a screen, which of course can spread pathogens. 

The bids are in, but, according to sources, the public is not allowed to see them prior to the vote on Wednesday. Joe Weinberg calls the new bidding process "deeply flawed".  In an email sent to all the Shelby County Election Commissioners, Weinberg calls for a consultant to be hired to review the entire process, and reorganize it. According to him, security issues are ignored, as is the solvency and track record of the companies bidding. Another issue is that there was no request for bids for a system that could print out paper ballots at each precinct as needed, a capability that would more easily allow the administration of a scanned paper ballot system. Additionally, the RFP (Request for Proposal) disallowed the bidders from including items other than those specifically listed in the RFP, so bidders were not even allowed to suggest such a system.

Again, I urge everyone to use this easy process to make your opinions known.

Germantown and COVID 19

COVID 19 is now the talk of the world, but hopefully soon it will be just a bad memory. Hold onto that thought while I muse on the effects on our City. First of all, looking at a map of diagnosed cases in the county, the hot spots for the virus center on East Memphis and Germantown. Whether that is because we travel more than people in other parts of the County, or merely have greater access to testing, is yet to be determined. But in any case, take care out there.

The newspapers have done a great job with local stories, which I link below-- what do you want to hear first, the good, the bad, or the ugly?

Since Kroger is such a big chain here, I will start with the wild-cat strike at the Kroger distribution center. The company generally has a difficult time keeping things stocked, and this surely won't help. This is also a reminder that our gratitude needs to go out to all the workers that keep our City functioning, albeit at a lower level than normal  I pray for a full recovery of the person with COVID 19, and wish our Kroger employees the best. All the while I am crossing my fingers that this will not disrupt the already fragile food delivery systems.  

Memphis Teamsters Wildcat Strike at Kroger’s Crucial Southern Warehouse 

There are also a couple of feel-good stories coming from our area. I have to hand it to the Java Cafe owner who ordered N95 masks for his employees before most people even heard of coronavirus. If only he had a high position in the federal government! For those who say he should turn them over to hospitals, well, I disagree. Having food prepared by people wearing N95 masks serves a public health purpose. His stash would not make a dent in even an hours' worth of need for masks at hospitals, and in the meantime lots of people can order food that is unlikely to be contaminated.

Germantown Cafe takes extra measures to protect employees, customers 

On to a story about a couple of Dogwood teachers who are  neighbors in Poplar Estates, written by Geoff Calkins, the award winning sports reporter at the Daily Memphian.  Somehow I knew he would come up with some great coronavirus public interest stories. Who else could find the deeper meaning in the jokes fashioned out of construction paper and put in the window panes? I may search out these homes.

In a time of pandemic, Can Construction Paper Save us All?  

Abigail Warren reports that all City-employed part-time workers have been fired. Ms. Warren says she hates stories like this, and I certainly understand that. The employees were notified by letter this past week. Mayor Palazzolo could not be reached for comment. If I could interview Mayor Palazzolo, I would inquire whether senior employees were going to give up their vacation buybacks, which allows them to take not only two weeks of actual vacation time, but up to two weeks of extra pay, depending on years of service. All those perks would probably save the City a lot more money than taking the jobs away from the people who need them the most. 

Germantown Lays Off Part-Time Employees

I am sure I missed a lot of other interesting local coronavirus stories. Please mention any other ones in the comments. I would like to see how more stories on the availability of hospital supplies here. The national stories are horrifiying. Without mentioning names or particular hospitals, I know of an ICU nurse here who has chronic asthma who was given a coronavirus patient and no mask. Now N95 masks at the hospital are being reused with regular filters on top. The N95 masks underneath are not changed for several days. That seems unhealthy both for the nurses and the patients they serve. This is anecdotal but I would welcome a real news story on it. 

The Future

 

Our City has decisions to make, and it looks like laying off part-time employees was the first one. How will this affect us economically? Obviously this depends on the length of the quarantine, and the subsequent behavior of the citizens. Right now this is costing us sales-tax dollars, and probable loss of value of the employee pension fund. The City was already in the midst of making up a shortfall in pension funds, and this epidemic is quite unhelpful. In Memphis, Mayor Strickland has said to expect a cutback in services. Where will Germantown cut? Will we still plan to buy athletic fields for regional tournaments? I have always thought that was an unneeded boondoggle, meant to prop up development interests in the City. What about our multi-year plan to address drainage issues?  Will the water tower go forward? Will GPAC need yet more subsidies?

More importantly, how will this affect major developments being planned around town? I have already warned of the overbuilding of hotels in the area. I doubt they will have much business for the foreseeable future. Will this affect bank lending for various projects? Will the new "work at home" initiatives become a permanent fixture, limiting the need for new office construction? Will on-line ordering trends become so great that retail space is not needed?

And, it could even be a blow to the heart of "live, work and play".  Dense development is an admitted cause of the rapid spread of the coronavirus in New York City. Germantown has "health" as one of the top goals in its 2030 plan. Right now a home with a backyard seems a lot healthier than an apartment with common spaces.

According to New York Governor Cuomo, quoted in Politico: 

"We have one of the most dense, close environments in the country," he said Wednesday. "And that's why the virus communicated the way it did. Our closeness makes us vulnerable."

Fresh air and sunshine are good for those with influenza viruses. Even here in Shelby County there are threats of closing the parks. Single family housing seems like the best idea for healthy living in the future.

Stay well!

Public Financing? More "rooftop event spaces" and public (??) garages-- new Thornwood plans

Once again I am grateful for all the coverage of our City from both the Commercial Appeal and the Daily Memphian. I was able to sit at home last night and not even think about all the goings on at the BMA meeting. No, I don't really eat Snickers bars, (see my explanatory post about this blog from July of 2016), but I do have other interests outside of Germantown governance. It is much easier for me to provide a bit of insight rather than tackling every single fact.

Here is the video of last night's meeting:  

And here is the Commercial Appeal article:

Shouting, accustations, name-calling precede vote on Thornwood

The Daily Memphian: 

Germantown aldermen approve Thornwood amended outline plan

Alderman Massey was the only alderman who voted against Thornwood's revisions.

So far, at least, there seems to be no real "work" component of "Live, Work, and Play" of Smart Growth, unless you count the workers at the hotel. Will the workers be renting the apartments, providing walkability? Perhaps the next phase will add offices.

I have two takeaways on the proposed changes in the Thornwood plan:

1. On the bright side, I guess, is that the number of proposed apartment units in this plan is reduced from the former plan. It really isn't any secret that there are still many units (specifically 60 total available apartments listed today on its website) to select from at the Thornwood "residences".

Naturally the development does not want to overbuild its "luxury apartments", but, doing what developers do, they  keep building. The Commercial Appeal points out that Alderman Sanders supported the plan because it reduced the number of apartments planned by 114.

At the same time, the development added a Marriott branded hotel with 114 rooms. Presumably, the Hampton Inn at the development has been more profitable than the residences.

I do like the idea of increased tax revenues from hotels. Keep in mind, though, that much of this increased tax revenue goes to the bloated budget of GPAC. I love government support of the arts, mainly because I see the benefits from my past work experience, but there is something a bit too cozy about the City and its funding of GPAC. I would rather see our tax money for the arts go to a separate organization that solely supports artists in the area.

All that aside, Shelby County is seriously overbuilding not only apartments, but also hotels.  And in our City alone, there is one being built at Travure, and another planned at Carrefour. This article lists a lot of the plans:

Dozens of Hotels are in the works for Memphis Suburbs

Not sure if the BMA should be questioning developers' marketing projections, but this smells like a boom part of a boom and bust cycle. I also believe that the reduced business travel that has come about as a result of coronavirus may become a trend. Businesses will be able to ascertain which business travel is actually necessary. Much of the current business travel can be eliminated, due to the reduced costs and efficiencies of video conferencing. 
 
2. How many rooftop event spaces does Germantown need? 

REALLY? It isn't as if a rooftop here looks over anything but streets and shops and houses. Folks, this is not a rooftop event space with a view. Comparing our area with something like Mud Island is a  joke. I mean, the rooftop gardens planned at Carrefour and now at Thornwood make me a bit crazy. They don't even look out over the Wolf River.

But, of course, a rooftop garden is a "public" space, and of course a "public space" needs a public "parking garage." Why is that significant? BECAUSE THAT MAKES THEM ALL ELIGIBLE FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING. I am not sure how this could be telegraphed more clearly.

Next item on the agenda, perhaps AFTER the next election-- creation of areas of town where developers have their own little slush funds, comprised of the funds that otherwise would go to the general tax revenues. We are in the stage where the ordinary taxpayer here is like the frog in the water, who does not notice as the heat is being turned up slowly.

Look for tax incentives being requested by the developers of Carrefour and Thornwood. Do you want the City to support hotels and apartments and retail with tax increment financing? I don't. See my explanation of tax increment financing at this blog post Smart Growth and Tax Increment Financing. This is administered by an appointed "Industrial Development Board." Tax increment financing was approved by Germantown in early 2017 (reported in Germantown seeks to bolster development with TIF).

BMA, PLEASE stop approving projects with fake "public spaces." Undoubtedly this is what Alderman Forrest Owens means when he says "special places" (that is a favorite mantra of his--it could almost be a drinking game while watching a BMA meeting)-- tax incentives for developers.

The End Game- Water Tower, Athletic Fields, Land Swap, Campaign Donors

Corinne Kennedy of the Commercial Appeal, reported yesterday afternoon that the City revealed an agreement on a proposal for a far less onerous location for the water tower  than the one discussed by the BMA. Now the tower would be on Poplar Pike rather than by Forest Hill Elementary School, a move that I actually suggested in my last blog post on this subject. 

The City seems to be favoring the Commercial Appeal lately, as Germantown's controversial (prestigious, or pay-to-play?) Baldrige award was also first reported by her. I have no problem with Ms. Kennedy. Both she and Abigail Warren of the Daily Memphian are doing excellent reporting. In particular, Ms. Warren's in-depth reporting on school system issues and this land swap deal is appreciated. Again, I urge readers to support both news sources by subscribing to their publications, as both make my job so much easier, and you will benefit from reading about the City from their articles. 

Having said that, the release of this "deal" to the Commercial Appeal ignores the BMA. Apparently at least some of the aldermen had not been told about these dealings, and had to find out about the new proposed location of the water tower from the newspaper. That is emblematic of the dysfunctional nature of our City government. I will leave it at that.

Here is a link to the story:

Water Tower Would Have New Location in Revised Land Exchange  

After the story came out, the City released the packet for the aldermen for BMA meeting on Monday.

Abigail Warren of the Daily Memphian reported on the story last night: Germantown to Vote on Revised Land Swap

Graphic from the Facebook Group Developments in Germantown, TN-DIG

From what I understand, Mr. John Duke, who owns property by Forest Hill Elementary, approached the City and suggested a land swap after the original proposal passed the BMA. He would give up five acres of land on Poplar Pike in exchange for three acres of land owned by GMSD adjacent to his planned upscale home development. Twelve acres of GMSD land by Forest Hill Elementary would be transferred to the City for a "nature preserve." The other part of the deal, the transfer of land to GMSD for the high school athletic fields, would remain the same as reported here. Therein lies the rub. 

First of all, the new location of the water tower is exactly what I was hoping for at this point. Keep in mind, though, that the administration has screwed up just about everything that led up to this.The original insistence by the City was that the new elementary school property be on Winchester. There was no formal land search, no public input, and only three days notice before a BMA vote. And at no time did the City reveal publicly that there was to be a water tower by the school. When asked why 30 acres was needed for a school site, Mayor Palazzolo simply said it was traditional to have a public park by our schools. Because of citizen pushback against the Winchester School site, a task force was appointed to conduct a formal property search. The Winchester site that had been touted as the only site available by Mayor Palazzolo did not even make it into the top three sites selected by the task force.

It was only a deep dive into open records requests by citizens that first revealed that a water tower by the elementary school was planned by the City.-- again, there was no public announcement, and certainly there were no public meetings, only private conversations between GMSD and the City (no surprise, the City leaders live and breathe secrecy). 

A water tower in the midst of an upscale, settled neighborhood and directly by a school is and was completely unacceptable and never should have been an option. Nevertheless, without appropriate authorization, the City built now useless infrastructure for the water tower. This industrial-sized water pipe cost citizens over $232,000. The payment for the pipe was all so underhanded that the Comptroller of the State had to be contacted to figure out how correct the fiscal mess that was created. This is all discussed BMA Meeting Reveals City Illegally Ordered GMSD Utility Pipe. Given all that, I am happy and relieved about the new proposed water tower site. Yes, it would have been far less costly and caused less angst to be upfront about the water tower from the get go, but, the City only knows how to operate behind the veil. 

But is a water tower needed at all? Taxpayers are funding it, but the need for a water tower is due to land development in the Forest Hill area, not for current taxpayers. In his election campaign, Mayor Palazzolo promised to look into fiscal impact fees for developers, but of course nothing has been done on this front. Furthermore, no studies were undertaken to determine if water pumps would be a more viable and palatable option than a tower.

The Athletic Fields by HHS and a Taxpayer Squeeze

Although I laud the new proposed water tower location, GMSD should not allow itself to be bamboozled into accepting the  offer for the transfer of land. It is offered exclusive use only one field by HHS for Girl's softball in exchange for a total of 15 acres of GMSD land by Forest Hill Elementary School.  GMSD would only be able to use other fields when the City is not using them. GMSD will likely need another field for lacrosse in the near future. Yes, the plan includes an eventual transfer of all the property involved by HHS to GMSD, but the school system will likely need more fields sooner rather than later.  

This proposed contract is so lopsided that GMSD should not even consider it. The City is forcing on GMSD a shortage of fields. Why? BECAUSE THAT IS PROBABLY THE ONLY WAY THE CITY PLAN FOR AN ATHLETIC COMPLEX COULD BE PASSED! All of this has to do with the Parks Plan proposal for a tournament level athletic complex south of Winchester. This was likely a promise to various large campaign donors that own property in the area. Please see Candidate Financial Disclosures in the 2018 election. That part of the City has been slow to develop--hence a few years ago the City created a "Smart Growth" zoning district in the area, so that apartment complexes could be built. Viridian, a proposal on the border with Collierville, is exempt from recent zoning changes that ban "stand-alone" apartment complexes. Of course, a water tower was needed for all the planned developments! Since the City has no fiscal impact fees for developers, the taxpayers foot the bill.   

AND the City wants to buy land for an athletic complex, likely from Forest Hill Associates, an LLC. Most citizens are skeptical about the financial viability of such a complex, particularly because the much larger Mike Rose complex is so near. The easiest way to get the athletic complex passed is to put the squeeze on GMSD athletic space. There will thus be public pressure from GMSD supporters for the athletic complex, so that HHS will no longer have to share fields with the City. The taxpayer cost for all the plans to benefit landowners in southeast Germantown is enormous-- the water tower, the unneeded pipe, the land for the athletic complex, plus all the the ongoing expenses of development and the complex. Please keep in mind that the citizens have not been shown a cost/benefit analysis for the athletic complex. Please also keep in mind that the planned $2.5 million dollar outdoor addition to GPAC has burgeoned to $7.5 million dollars, so I  would NOT trust City estimates in any case. The City has a very poor record in containing costs.

As a confirmation that the City is forcing GMSD into a shortage of fields, astonishingly, the new plans for Riverdale Park actually include removal of the softball field located there!  Why can't there be continued use of that field, so that the use of more fields by HHS is available for the schools?

Plans for Riverdale Park Remove the Softball Field

Our City leaders are putting the squeeze on GMSD athletics and City taxpayers by trying to force upon us a tournament level athletic complex in order to benefit landowner campaign donors in southeast Germantown. 

  

Shelby County May Get New Voting System in November After All

Election reform advocates were disheartened earlier this week when there was an announcement at the 
Shelby County Commission that a referendum is needed for the purchase of a new voting system from bond funds. It was thought that there would thus be no new voting system for the November election, as had been promised. Here is a news article about the legal issues around the referendum requirement: 

County Attorney: Funding for new voting machines only through referendum 

That announcement already is out of date, because we were told yesterday at a Shelby County Election Commission meeting that a voting system can be purchased without a referendum because sources of funding are available that will not require the issuance of bonds. It is likely that the new system could be in place by the November Election.

Please see Steve Mulroy, law professor, at Citizens to be Heard at the Shelby County Election Commission yesterday.

 
What type of Voting System will Shelby County Purchase?  

Will New Voting Machines that include hand-marked ballots be bought this year for Shelby County?    

The current system is outdated, and insecure, because it has no "paper trail" for audits and recounts. In a divided vote earlier this year, the Shelby County Election Commission requested funding for a computerized system that spits out a paper receipt. Detractors of this type of system believe that this system can still be hacked by a quick insertion of a flash drive, and that studies show that most voters do not check their paper receipt for accuracy. It is also considerably more expensive than a hand-marked, scanned ballot system.

The County Commission meeting on Monday, in a 7-6 vote, approved only enough funding for a hand-marked paper ballot system that can be immediately scanned and tabulated at each election site. The ballots would then go into a secured box which could be hand-counted for recounts. The system is in use in Chattanooga, and is the system that is the consensus choice among election security experts. A grass roots group which includes Republicans, Democrats, and independent voters has been vocal in pushing the hand-marked system in Shelby County. See Hand-marked Paper Ballots are Cheap and Secure  

So where does this leave us? Rinse and repeat. The Election Commission is seeking new bids on voting systems, and will have to approve another request after staff finishes analyzing the new bids and submitting their request to the Election Commissioners. 

It is pretty much guaranteed that Linda Phillips, administrative leader of the Election Commission, will still not recommend approval of the hand-marked paper ballot system, as she has refused to accept the consensus view of election experts that the scanned, hand marked ballots are more secure. She did not even entertain any bids on hand-marked systems in the first set of bidding. In fact, according to Mulroy (see above), she announced after this week's Shelby County Commission vote for funding of the hand-marked system that she intended to sue the Shelby County Commission over the decision.

To top it all off, citizens who attended the Election Commission meeting Wednesday accused the Linda Phillips of still excluding hand-marked ballot systems in the language of the request for bid proposals. She immediately denied this. When citizens were not satisfied with this answer, Election Commissioner Bennie Smith, an advocate of the hand-marked system promised to read the document and confer with Ms. Phillips about the matter if it does not include hand-marked systems.

The bottom line? Expect more drama. I urge everyone to continue to contact the Shelby County Election Commissioners and the Shelby County Commissioners, and urge them to accept the consensus-choice of election security experts- scanned, hand-marked paper ballots that provide an accurate paper trail for recounts. Here is a screenshot from a Fox 13 video on the Shelby County Commission vote which urged a hand-marked voting system.