Taxpayers Opposed to Useless Roads

Mr. Newton,

I apologize for the late response.

Yes, TDOT is currently preparing an Interchange Justification Study for the I-40 Interchange at Mine Lick Creek.

This study is in same location as the original, however, it has added a southern connector.

This study has not been approved by FHWA to date.

I do not know of any formal agreements between TDOT and the City/County.

If the study is approved and plans preparations can begin then there will be a series of public meetings that will follow this projects progression.

Thank you for the inquiry,

Chester Sutherland

Project Management Division

Region II, Chattanooga

office: 423-510-1229

fax: 423-855-8653

TOUR RESPONDS TO FIFTH INTERCHANGE AMENDMENT

Amendment 238 Putnam County Fifth Interchange

     Unless TDOT has found some magical way of controlling costs, this interchange is not the one that was presented in public meetings. The Federal Highway Administration approved a modified cloverleaf with a connector road to US-70. The project that was approved by the FHWA was associated with the Corridor "J" money, not Interstate Maintenance. Even though Interstate Maintenance money is allowed to maintain capacity of the Interstate, there is no connection or capacity to maintain. This is the use of maintenance money for what is clearly a capital project.

      It is greatly disappointing to me that the Federal Highway Administration has abandoned their federal roll to protect the Interstate from gratuitous Interstate Connectors like this one. Every new exit is a potential threat to the utility of the Interstate. Exits tend to be the most dangerous places along the Interstate and so adding another one will have social costs that have not been discussed. The Interstate is a national defense asset and has been, until recently, a source of prosperity for the average citizen. The economic development aspects of the Interstate flows from increased productivity which means goods, services and people flow faster from point to point and there are new economic possibilities with shorter travel times. The Interstate is being treated like a cash cow that provides spare income for other less deserving projects throughout the state but cannot even raise enough cash to finance its own expansion to a six lane minimum. The incremental economic benefits are declining every year because of lower average speeds and a greater than expected fraction of truck traffic.

      When the original Corridor "J" project moved in March of 2003, so did the theoretical traffic counts and the transportation justification. The traffic across the existing bridges is still bi-modal with morning and afternoon peaks and is about 1000 vehicles per day instead of a daily traffic count over nine times as large when it was associated with Corridor "J". This connector no longer meets FHWA published guidelines for approval because it cannot be demonstrated by a reasonable person that there is no alternative access. An alternative access road was part of the Certificate of Need application and the City /County partnership is building that alternate access road, including a bridge to nowhere over 200 feet long, as a part of the $14 million bond issue that was advertised in the local paper. Tennessee Law (54-5-403.) also mimics the Federal Highway Administrations standard of requiring "no other feasible means" to accomplish the objectives. It goes even farther to discourage frivolous exchanges by demanding local governments pay for the engineering and maintenance.

      TDOT has never been given proper credit for increasing the number of exits per factory worker in Tennessee. From 1979 to 1999, the number of exits per manufacturing worker increased 2.1 % without spending anything on bulldozers or dynamite. From 2001 to 2007, according to Bureau of Economic Analysis Table CA25N, the number of Interstate exits per manufacturing worker increased by no less than 2.8% per year. Again, this expansion was done with no cost to the taxpayer because the apparent expansion of exits per manufacturing worker was accomplished by the shrinkage of that worker population. Since 1979, there is no long term correlation between increased manufacturing employment to any government effort, law or subsidy. The decline in manufacturing employment is due to factory productivity increases that targets high-wage manufacturing jobs. This decline in real inflation adjusted wages and manufacturing employment will continue as long as there is an economic incentive to do so.

      Only willful self deception can permit anyone from recognizing that this project is not supporting the economy of Tennessee or Putnam County as TDOT likes to claim to do. For every dollar flowing into Putnam County there is about $2.27 flowing out of Putnam County according to Bureau of Economic Analysis inflow and outflow data on table CA91 from 2001 to 2007. Inflows plus outflows in 2007 totaled $462 million dollars. The existing system of roads is providing a means of support to adjacent counties and, from anecdotal evidence, beyond the adjacent counties. Supporting these commuters means maintaining a reasonable time required to commute from wherever workers are to Putnam County and return home. The enemy of these commuters is shrinkage of commuting distances caused by creeping congestion, declining safety and an existing road system that could become seriously impaired by weather. This proposed project does nothing for the very large group of commuters that come into or leave Putnam County every day.

      The proposed Industrial Park is a "high-end park" with respect to zoning standards thus giving other low-end areas in the county a higher probability of becoming the next factory if the choices have anything to do with keeping the fraction of capital cost per manufactured unit below existing competitors. The probability of getting an important client for an industrial park in Tennessee in the over 1200 available parks or properties is about one in 600 per year. It would be more likely that one might flip a coin 9 times in a row and get all heads or all tails nine times in a row than land a major client in twenty years.

      Speculative interchanges with weak connections to true transportation need should not be built and maintained with transportation money. The chances of concrete and asphaltic concrete deterioration from the day they are laid down due to chemical and physical forces is percent. The provision of excess capacity beyond what is reasonably expected in the future is a manifest waste of tax money. A much better deal would be to buy Pick Three lottery tickets, especially since about 29% of the money lost would return to education. The time to build a major manufacturing facility and the time to build or upgrade an interchange is virtually the same provided that there are no environmental challenges. This interchange has been an ongoing project for over 11 years and as of March of 2009, the Chamber of Commerce can only report in the public County Commission meeting a few "suspects" but no prospects since Katrina blew in ORECK from Louisiana.

      Providing an interchange without a committed industrial client has profound ethical problems when condemnation is used. There is no provision in the law that allows condemnation to be used for non-industrial projects. The temptation to convert speculative property to non-industrial uses or incidental non-industrial uses will be enormous. The government has a moral obligation to provide the service that was promised when they use the power of eminent domain but have only charm and more tax money to make a deal happen against all odds. The government is in a buyer's market and wields no important power to change the economic forces operating on the manufacturing sector of the economy. The fact that everyone else is doing it is emotional, not rational, since the other people are also flailing against the same wave impossible financial barriers. As long as the final use and the speculative use of property is an uncertain possibility, the land should be acquired only by negotiations between the government and willing sellers.

      Federal law permits and encourages the taking of Interstate related property for future high capacity interchanges but only if there is a reasonable expectation of need for that high capacity interchange in 20 years. Changing this interchange from a modified clover leaf to a low volume diamond interchange and the eliminating the connector road to Highway 70 means that there is no real transportation related need in the near or far future. There never was enough technical data available to the public for TDOT to rid itself of the suspicion that of the four leaves of the clover leaf that could have been built, only the one that went through the most resistant owners land was thought to be required by TDOT. TDOT's superior ability to condemn at will would therefore be brought to bear to support the local government rather than be properly used to solve the technical transportation problem of exiting safely from the Interstate.

      In spite of many announcements of success, the government data still says that the losses are exceeding the gains in manufacturing employment. By March of 2009, the number of manufacturing workers should have fallen below the number of government workers in Tennessee. The definition of "success" has been degraded to include pirated factories from other states and projects moved from county to county within the state. This is a dishonest way of pretending that the subsidy created a job when it is more likely that the subsidy helped the industry move and shed workers in a restructuring of its work force. There is industrial property or industrial zoning already at three of the four existing exists in Cookeville and it did nothing to prevent the loss of 2223 jobs in Putnam County from 2001 to 2007. Before building another connector, someone should be tasked to find out why the existing infrastructure has been losing its factory magnetism and then concentrate on that cause in a moral and ethical way.

      The purpose of a road is access to land and all of the dozens of current local manufacturing properties for sale, both public and private, have road access at least to the edge of the property. An Interstate access would be nice to have for anyone trying to sell or lease industrial property but I see no particular advantage to the large numbers of people who have to pay for it. Socializing the cost makes them more bearable but does not make it right or ethical when the benefit goes only to a few. Beyond a certain point, the concept of user-based fees within the transportation tax system is violated when the non-user is so heavily burdened. An upper limit of non users can be estimated by dividing the estimated cost by the average per capita transportation tax in Tennessee. This calculation shows that it takes over 37,000 people to pay for this interchange with a one-year contribution of $300 each.

      To recover the estimated cost of the connector, $11,210,920, over 40 years at 5% would require a yearly income of $653,351.80. This translates into 26.1 million vehicle miles traveled every year or a daily traffic count of 71,551 over one mile for the next 40 years. That is about 1.5 times the current traffic passing under the Mine Lick Creek bridges over I-40 right now. If the mythical 2000 workers at the mythical factory at the Business/Industrial Park each drove 50 miles or averaged 50 miles per day in a five day week, the incremental Vehicle Miles Traveled would actually pay for the interchange. No new worker could be allowed to quit the current job to get the new ones however and there is also a nagging problem of industrial productivity. If worker productivity continues to increase at 2.8 percent per year for the next 40 years, the mythical workforce at the mythical business park would decline from 2000 to 663. Perhaps the declining worker numbers would accommodate the calculation by moving farther away every year or agree to pay 2.8% more transportation related taxes each year? Even if the park expands from its current 290 acre size, the daily inflow of workers to the site, even if it were to become an auto manufacturing plant, assures that this project is nothing short of welfare for a well-to-do county that can handily afford, according to testimony at the Certificate of Need proceedings this year, to pay $5 million for the land plus $14 million for the internal infrastructure.

      Two thousand workers going and coming to the mythical and imaginary plant on the Fifth Interchange would need to pay a daily toll of $1.25 for 40 years just to pay for this Interchange. Failing to get a client in a timely manner has the same effect as capitalizing the interest or turning the interest payment into principal. A five year delay in filling the park and attempt to recover the initial cost over the same 40 year period would raise the toll to $1.67 per mythical worker. It is easy to find partially filled parks all over Tennessee, some of them along the Interstate and some are 30 years old. There is no greater hypocrisy than a legislature being opposed to real tolling with actual toll booths and at the same time letting TDOT do invisible tolling of non-users to recover losses on unwise projects like this one.

      The social cost of not having this connector is the cost of driving from the closest existing exit and driving on Gould Avenue from Highway 135 or Mine Lick Creek from Highway 56 at Baxter. Even with a new mythical worker population of 2000 accessing the new Business Park five days per week, the difference in the distance to the site from a direct new exit and using the one at Baxter or Cookeville is barely a mile per worker per day if you assume all workers will use the new exit. The social cost borne by these mythical workers in the no-build scenario is still below the cost of construction even if you count driving costs at a dollar per mile. They would be better off without the Connector. The City, the County and Chamber of Commerce however would be inconvenienced by having to do a better job of marketing the community and their property which includes another industrial park on STR 111.

      It is not at all clear how this connector somehow got an exemption from the requirements of the Interstate Connector Act (54-5-507. State-local agreements. ) and the requirement of the requesting entity to come up with matching funds. The law says that there will be an agreement to share costs and nothing has been said about that so far. The lack of public disclosure on this point has, no doubt, contributed to the appearance of public support. The law is attached below the body of this comment. The efforts to purchase this Business Park/Industrial Park property and the infrastructure costs have a history of understating the financial requirements that can not be explained by mere inflation. For instance, on 30 SEPT 1988, the local paper reported the Mayor of Cookeville stating the costs was estimated to at $1 million dollars and the connecting road along Gould Ave was to cost half of that. According to the Amendment 238, there are no local funds involved. The City and County currently do not have a clear title to all of the property required because of court actions that are currently in the State Supreme Court. That problem should disappear in a few months but it does not clear up the question of whether there will be more money required in the future for the local taxpayers to finance this connector. In my opinion, there has been a lot of deception about costs and it would be best to expose any more surprises as soon as possible.

      TDOT is opening a Pandora's Box of future projects like this by abandoning its own rules, set by the legislature, which mimic FHWA federal guidelines. This Business Park project is seeking to exploit a weakness in the law that permits creeping toward incidental non-industrial use of the property. The current City Manager of Cookeville has stated in an open meeting that was recorded, that the City and County intend to sell the property for $50,000 per acre. There is Industrial property all over Tennessee that is out there for much less than that and some of it is on existing Interstates and near existing exits. If the entire state inventory of 84 square miles were sold to a manufacturer or multiple manufacturer's who had capital cost at the national average of 3.5% of the product cost, it would cost over $161 million dollars to buy it at a bargain basement price of $3000 per acre and those manufacturers would have to produce products valued at $4.6 Trillion to support the capital costs. The Tennessee GDP from manufacturing was measured in current dollars in 2008 at only about $40.6 Billion dollars. Tennessee manufacturing GDP would have to grow over 113 times the 2008 estimate provided by the Bureau of Economic Analysis to afford to occupy and pay for the existing stock of empty land that we had in 2008. There is a glut of these properties and TDOT cannot sustain the effort to serve one percent of them with ideal conditions.

      In marketing this site, and application for Certificate of Need, the local governments never miss a chance to tout its visibility from the Interstate. This is not something that traditional manufacturing needs but it is highly prized by road side service and commercial enterprises that have a superior capacity to recover the cost of high land prices at exits. The loose definition of an industrial park or business park and the poorly limited "incidental use" exception means that others will demand parity and that the demands for completion of the grossly unwise Interstate Connector projects will proliferate for the purpose of being fair to local governments. Being fair to local governments has overwhelmed the concept and consideration of being fair to the taxpayer however.

      The cost of this project and the associated loop connecting SR 111 is more than the costs of the current three year work program for I-69 projects in Obion County, about $268 million, or Cumberland County, $234 million. The only reason these counties have such generous allotments is due to earmarking. While TDOT may be forgiven for building its way to the poor house because of federal mandates and federal earmarks, there is no rational excuse for this project now, especially in this era of low reimbursement per vehicle mile. The gas tax has declined in inflation adjusted terms to Depression levels. Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, Cash for Clunker legislation and a demographic change in driving habits makes future increased consumption of Vehicle Miles Traveled a minimum requirement for just a flat yearly income. The County Seat Connector Legislation by the state was never funded to a level that was adequate for the task and is a constant drag on building and sustaining a reasonable system with a tax rate that is competitive with adjacent states. Even the federal government, with larger resources and the ability to reach into general funds was never able to finish the Appalachian Highway program for the same reason. Some of the most difficult terrain and the highest cost roads have been saved until last.

      The ability of the employer and the employee to connect to each other via a financially sustainable infrastructure is shrinking because of projects that cost more than they reasonably can be expected to bring in as yearly income. Instead of supporting the current need, the project supports a need that cannot possibly materialize. In an odd way, the mirage of the bird in the bush is worth more than the one in the hand. The tens of thousands of people who pass under Mine Lick Creek Road every day and those who will never or rarely pass under Mine Lick Creek Road are better off without this exit. TDOT is trading a very large pile of 2010 and 2011 cash for an inadequate flow of future revenues that cannot possibly replenish the state Highway Fund with the income from transportation taxes.

      TDOT is already rationing asphalt by limiting the size of a project. A five or ten mile section of improved road may not compensate for the rate of decline in average speeds in the rest of the trip to work. Projects like the Fifth Interchange and perhaps a hundred other projects that have similar financial short comings are proof of a lack of fiscal discipline and concern for financial stability. TDOT looks no farther into the future than what is in the cash box next year. Building this connector is the greatest leap of faith since Jack traded the family cow for magic beans.

Danny L. Newton

Cookeville,

Tennessee 38501

54-5-403. Industrial highways authorized. -

      (a) In order to facilitate the development and expansion of industry and to provide access to industrial areas, the department, with the approval of the governor, is authorized to use any powers granted under any general law to construct and maintain industrial highways when there is a finding by the department that the highways are clearly necessary to secure the development of an industrial site or park or lessen serious congestion and hazards or facilitate the movement of persons, commodities or raw materials, and no other feasible means exist for accomplishing these objectives.

54-5-507. State-local agreements. -

      (a) The department will receive proposals from local agencies, either city or county, for the construction of a connector. Proposals shall contain an agreement on the part of the local agency to participate in the amount of fifty percent (50%) of the cost of the project, and to maintain the connectors at its own expense after completion of the project. The department shall receive the proposals on the basis of coordinated development of access to the various sections of interstate highway routes or fully controlled access highways as they become open to traffic, and in accordance with established departmental criteria for priority of construction and in accordance with the availability of funds.

      (b) In no event shall the engineering phase of a connector project be begun by the department until the entire cost of the engineering, as estimated by the department, is deposited with the department by the local agency.

      (c) After the engineering phase of the project has been completed, the right-of-way phase of the project shall not be begun by the department until fifty percent (50%) of the cost of the right-of-way phase of the project, as estimated by the department, is deposited with the department by the local agency.

      (d) (1) After the right-of-way phase of the project has been completed, the construction phase of the project shall not be begun by the department until fifty percent (50%) of the remaining cost of the project, as estimated by the department, is deposited with the department by the local agency.

      (2) In arriving at the amount mentioned in subdivision (d)(1), the local agency shall receive a credit of fifty percent (50%) of the amount deposited by the local agency for the engineering phase.

      (e) In the event the local agency does not deposit with the department fifty percent (50%) of the cost of the right-of-way phase of the project, as estimated by the department, within sixty (60) days after the completion by the department of the engineering for the project, or should the local agency not deposit with the department fifty percent (50%) of the cost of the construction phase of the project, as estimated by the department, within sixty (60) days after the completion by the department of the right-of-way phase of the project, the department may, at its option, terminate any agreement with the local agency with respect to the local connector, and any funds deposited with the department by the local agency for the engineering phase or the right-of-way phase, or both, shall become part of the general highway fund free from all claims by the local agency.

      (f) In the event the local agency does not deposit with the department fifty percent (50%) of the cost of the construction phase of the project as provided for in subsection (d), and the department exercises its option to terminate any agreement with the local agency with respect to the project, the local agency shall pay to the department, upon written demand, the actual amount necessary to reimburse the department for expenditures made in accomplishing the engineering and right-of-way phases after deducting the amounts previously deposited by the local agency as the entire estimated cost of the engineering phase and as fifty percent (50%) of the estimated cost of the right-of-way phase.

      (g) In the event of the failure of the local agency to fully comply with this section, the department shall be authorized to receive any funds, excluding rural roads and federal-aid secondary roads funds, that would otherwise be payable to the local agency for highway purposes from the state, until the department has recovered the amount necessary to result in the fifty percent (50%) financial participation in the actual total cost of any phase, or reimbursement in full, as provided for in subsection (a), (c) or (d).

      (h) Following the completion of the project, the department shall determine the actual total cost of the project and either pay to or receive from the local agency an amount that results in the equal financial participation by the parties in the total cost of the project.

      (i) It is the intent of this part for the local agency to participate in the cost of connector projects with road or street funds of the local agency that shall, in no event, include in any part funds from the rural roads program or the federal-aid secondary roads program.

      (j) The maintenance of any road designated as a connector under this part shall be the responsibility of the local agency that participated in the cost of the project.

[Acts 1965, ch. 159, § 7; 1967, ch. 19, § 1; 1968, ch. 577, § 3; 1971, ch. 93, § 1; impl. am. Acts 1972, ch. 829, § 7; T.C.A., § 54-575; Acts 1981, ch. 264, § 12; 1991, ch. 133, § 4; 1999, ch. 249, §§ 5, 6.]

21 JAN 2005   City of Cookeville announces taking an option on property to be in future industrial park. Mayor Doubts that Fifth Interchange will be built. Sam Salee says more industrial properties needed.WARNING! HERLD CITIZEN VERSION OF THE TRUTH

23 MAR 2003    TDOT report reccommends using SR 111, not Mine Lick Creek Road for Corridor J intersection with I-40.

24 MAY 2006    Tennessee Legislature removes protection from land owners when government acts to build roads or build industrial parks. Bill allows transfer of property to private concerns. Charlotte Burkes listed as a sponser.

29 JUNE 2006    Putnam County loans Cookeville $2,452,685 for their share of the Business Park.

14 DEC 2006    TDOT Signs the Environmental Assessment FHWA concures later on 18 APRIL 2008. The connecting road is to have a design speed of 70 MPH and 250 foot wide controlled access right-of-way.

05 JUNE 2006    Tennessee Governor signs bill limiting the ability of the state, county and city to condemn property. PDF FILE HERE

16 JAN 2007    County Commission votes to listen to Mrs Lynch's side of the story and votes down condemnation request.

05 FEB 2007     Center Hill Regional Planning Meeting votes on transportation projects

06 MARCH 2007     TDOT Holds a public Meeting on the Fifth Interchange

29 JUNE 2007   $5 million transferred out of Putnam county Debt Service Fund to by 400 Acre Business Park.

01 NOV 2007     Condemnation of Pyle Property on the City Council Agenda. The vote was unanimous.

12 NOV 2007   The County Planning Commission in a voice vote decides to condemn the Pyle Property.

13 NOV 2007    The Cookeville Chamber of Commerce Refused Tour Editor Access to Engineering Report on the Highland Business Park.

14 NOV 2007     The Chamber of Commerce called a little after 5 PM to advise the Tour Editor that they had prepared a copy of the report that is being used to justify the condemdation of the Pyle Property and that it would be available at the front desk.

12 FEB 2008    The Sheriff Served Mrs. Lynch a summons this morning to initiate the condemnation process on her land.

17 MAR 2008   The City and the County ammend their condemnation suit. This will push back the court date into April 2008.

17 MAR 2008   The Herald-Citizen quotes TDOT spokesperson Jenifer Osborne Flynn as saying that the Fifth Interchange and the Northern Connector are "non related." This suggests that the useless road attached to the interchange can be built later.

18 APRIL 2008    Federal Highway Adnistration, Charles J O'Neil, signs Finding of No Signifigant Impact Statement For Mine Lick Creek Interchange Road And Northern Connector Road.

25 APRIL 2008    THE LYNCH FAMILY ANNOUNCE THAT THE COUNTY AND THE CITY HAVE WITHDRAWN FROM LEGAL ACTION TO PRESS THEIR OUTRAGEOUS EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE UPON THE LYNCH FAMILY

01 MAY 2008    TDOT puts up a partial electronic copy on their web site of the FONSI. This describes the staged construction of the connecting road from two to four lane but on a four lane right-of-way.

08 MAY 2008    The Lynch Family files a petition for Partition in Kind in Circuit Court. Attorneys ask for legal costs and damages.

09 MAY 2008   Herald-Citizen prints Finding of No Signifigant Impact or FONSI claiming that the Northern Connector and the Fifth Interchange are Connected.

18 JUNE 2008   The City Attorney suddenly discovers that he has to go on vaction on the same day that the City and County are scheduled in court to continue their campaign of eminent domain abuse. The Judge rescheduled the next court date to 21 JULY 08.

03 JUL 2008   City announces on the radio that they are paying $16 million to the Upper Cumberland Electric Membership Corporation to compensate them for land annexed in the past few years.

21 JUL 2008   Judge Turnbull permits the city and the county to witdraw from their previous motion to withdraw from the suit. The judge further suggests that the two parties settle the matter out of court in a judicial confrence in November. The Judge allows further delay, until next year for the city and the county to obtain a Certificate of Public Purpose.

03 OCT 2008      The Herald Citizen reported that The city of Cookeville and Putnam County are seeking a certificate of public purpose and necessity from the state Building Finance Committee of the Tennessee Board of Economic Growth. The Cookeville City Council approved a resolution authorizing City Manager Jim Shipley to apply for the certificate during its meeting Thursday.

09 OCT 2008    the Cookeville City Council applies to the Building Finance Committee of the Tennessee Board of Economic Growth for a certificate of public purpose and necessity for the proposed Highlands Business Park."

14 OCT 2008     County Planning Commission approves petition for Certificate of Public Purpose and Necessity at the regular meeting. Kim Blaylock announces that the Business Park is on a "Fast Track." Linda Owens was denied chance to speak at the County Commission Meeting.

23 OCT 2008    The Lynch Family Attorney, Bob Anderson's Appeal to alter the discretionary finding by Judge Turnbull earlier in the year was denied. The Judge also denied a request that the money held in escrow be held in an interest bearing account.

14 NOV 2008     Centerhill RPO moves Fifth Interchange back down to 2011/2012 time frame after voting 11 projects ahead of it in 2010. Project Manager states that this was at the request of local officials.

17 NOV 2008    The county Commission agan refused Linda Owens a spokesperson for Mrs Lynch and the family to address the county commission or accept a written summary of her intended remarks. A resolution to issue general Obligation bonds was passed for the county portion of the $14.28 million of infrastructure costs.

20 NOV 2008    The Cookeville City Council approved a resolution to move forward with a PILOT program of tax incentives and to issue General Obligation Bonds to fund the $7.2 portion of the work in the Business Park. The City Council voted to pay the consultants for their work on water, sewer, gas and road design in the new park.

03 DEC 2008     The city of Cookeville let it be know publicly that contacts with TDOT have been made that suggest that use of connector road that was approved by FHWA and shown to the public in the public meetings could be elimiminated and instead, they wanted a road built by the city and the county to be considered as the connector road. The connector road in the original design was originally designed as a four lane that was part of the Corridor J project. It also was a fragment of a half loop around Cookeville that went from SR111, south of Cookeville to SR111 North of Cookeville.

8 DEC 2008    Recently elected state Representative Henry Fincher criticizes the City of Cookeville for lobbying TDOT to alter the plan for the Fifth Interchange.

27 JAN 2009 City of Cookeville and County Officials request secret meeting with the Department of Economic and Communbity Development to discuss their application for a Certificate of Need.

05 MARCH 2009 Cookeville and Putnam County gets certificate for an industrial park and a business park for a reduced footprint of about 290 acres. This excludes land under contention because of the partition and condemnation suits.

30 APRIL 2009 Deadline for City/County to respond or withdraw from suit passes. State Supreme Court to hear the case and make a decision, possibly in six months.

03 JUNE 2009 Tennessee Supreme Court hears Eminent Domain Abuse case concerning the government land grab at the Fifth Interchange.

29 JULY 2009 TDOT posts Amendment number 238 and revises the cost of the Fifth Interchange upward to $11,210,920. The Right of Way is estimated at $815,000 and scheduled for 2010. Construction is scheduled for 2011. The construction costs is $10,195,920. No local funds are scheduled.

17 AUG 2009 Project Manager, Chester Southerland, confirms that the Fifth Interchange has been resubmitted to the FHWA as a new interchange but with a Southern Connector rather than a Northern Connector.

CONTACT YOUR TENNESSEE

STATE TRANSPORATION OFFICIALS

House Committee on Transportation

District 37 — Sequatchie, Van Buren, Grundy and Marion Counties

Phone (423) 949-5100

Fax (615) 253-0264

Phone (615) 741-6849

CONTACT:Sandy Sain

District 30 — Part of Hamilton County

Phone (615) 741-1934

Fax (615) 253-0271

CONTACT: Joan Achuff

District 39 — Franklin, Moore, and part of Lincoln Counties

Phone (615) 741-8695

Fax (615) 741-5759

CONTACT: Stephanie Peterson

District 77 — Obion, Lake and part of Dyer Counties

Phone: (615) 741-0718

Contact: Audrey Jenkins

District 64 — Part of Maury County

Phone: (615) 741-3005

CONTACT: Connie Phelps

District 42 — Part of Putnam County

Phone (615) 741-1875

Contact: Jennifer Murphy

District 27 — Part of Hamilton County

Phone (615) 741-2746

Fax (615) 253-0304

Contact: Cheryl Goodson

Phone: 615-741-2251

District 7 — Part of Washington County

Contact: Carol Burroughs

District 78 — Cheatham and part of Montgomery and Williamson Counties

Phone (615) 741-7477

Contact: Celeste Thomas

District 21 — Parts of Loudon and Monroe Counties

Phone (615) 741-3736

Contact: Brenda Moore

Phone: (615) 741-6890

District 94 — Fayette and parts of Hardeman and Tipton Counties

CONTACT: B. L. Rhodes

District 2 — Part of Sullivan County

Phone: (615) 741-2886

CONTACT: B. L. Rhodes

District 74 — Houston, Humphreys, Perry, and parts of Hickman and Maury Counties

Phone (931) 535-2619

Phone (615) 741-7098

Fax (615) 741-4324

Contact: Debra Webb

District 60 — Part of Davidson County

Phone (615) 889-0801

Phone (615) 741-6959

Fax (615) 253-0331

Contact: Mary Adair

You can find all bills, fiscal notes, bill histories and co-sponsors, U.S. mail legislative and district office addresses and streaming video of committee and subcommittee meetings HERE

SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE:

All legislators may be reached at 1-800-449-8366, then enter the last five digits of their nashville office phone number listed below.

SENATOR JIM TRACY, CHAIRMAN

District 16 — Bedford, Moore, and part of Rutherford Counties

Phone 615-741-1066

Fax 615-741-2255

CONTACTS: Christina Barber Warren Wells, Research Analyst

SENATOR STEVE SOUTHERLAND, VICE CHAIR

District 1 — Cocke, Greene, Hamblen, and Unicoi Counties

Phone (615) 741-3851

Fax (615) 253-0330

CONTACTS: Carolyn Newman Loudene Gee, Research Analyst

SENATOR TIM BARNES,SECRETARY

District 22 — Cheatham, Houston, and Montgomery Counties

Phone: (931) 648-9400

Phone: (615) 741-2374

Fax: (615) 253-0193

CONTACT: Megan Callis

SENATOR MAE BEAVERS

District 17 - Cannon, Clay, DeKalb,Macon,Smith, part of Sumner, Trousdale and Wilson County

Phone: 615-741-2421

Staff Contact: Patti Saliba, Alexander McVeagh, Research Analyst

SENATOR ANDY BERKE

District 10 - Parts of Hamilton and Marion County Counties

Phone (615) 741-6682

Staff Contact: Sam Neel

SENATOR LOWE FINNEY

District 27 - Madison, Gibson, and Carroll Counties

Phone (615) 741-1810

Contact:Lynette Morris

SENATOR DELORES GRESHAM

District 26 — Chester, Crockett, Fayette, Hardeman, Hardin, Haywood, McNairy, and Wayne Counties

Phone (615) 741-2368

Staff Contact: Linda Klingman Nathan James, Research Analyst

SENATOR DOUG JACKSON - D - Dickson

District 25 - Dickson, Giles, Hickman, Humphreys, Lawrence, and Lewis counties

Phone (615) 741-4499

Fax (615) 741-8745

Staff Contacts: Kim Baldwin

SENATOR KEN YAGER

District 12 — Campbell, Fentress, Morgan, Rhea, Roane, and Scott Counties

Phone (615) 741-1449

Fax (615) 253-0237

Staff Contacts: Zach Bates

YOU MIGHT HAVE A USELESS ROAD IF...

1.    The road cost more money than it could ever hope to generate in taxes in a lifetime.

2.    The local Chamber of Commerce says it will be good for the economy

3.    The Chamber of Commerce organizes a pilgrimage to the Governor's office to tell him that everyone wants it.

4.    The local paper tells everybody that if you don't want it your are a NIMBY

5.    The local Chamber of Commerce is telling everyone that we have to do this because everyone else is doing it too.

6.    The local Chamber of Commerce is claiming that we have to do this to get ahead of everyone else who isn't doing it.

7.    TDOT says that it will cure the traffic problems.

8.    TDOT says it won't cure the traffic problems.

9.    The Chamber of Commerce claims that it will be good for the quality of life.

10.    The Chamber of Commerce says it will help get the next factory

11.    Your State Representative just thinks you are against it because of a pre-existing oppositional character flaw.

12.    The Chamber of Commerce is in secret negotiations with the next whiz-bang company that only needs this road to make the whole deal come together.

13.    TDOT is building a four-lane road when a two-lane would still have a high life cycle service level.

14.    TDOT is building a road that will damage your business but does not go through your business. (No blood, No foul)

RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKS
web counter