mcminn co · 2016. 1. 10. · ,, witness mitchell b. moore index page examination by mr. ayres...
TRANSCRIPT
o ORIGINAL
'1
FIRE INSURANCE CLASSIFICATION
INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE
SWORN STATEMENT
OF
MITCHELL MOORE
January 9, 2007
LESLIE A. OWENSHOOD & McMASTERS
P.O. BOX 1372, KNOXVILLE, TN 37901-1372865-577-5181
,,
WITNESS
MITCHELL B. MOORE
INDEX
PAGE
Examination by Mr. Ayres ------------------------- 3Examination by Mr. Newman ------------------------ 22Examination by Mr. Trew -------------------------- 31Examination by Mr. Ayres ------------------------- 71Examination by Mr. Newman ------------------------ 85Examination by Mr. Ayres ------------------------- 88Examination by Mr. Trew -------------------------- 91Examination by Mr. Ayres ------------------------- 97Examination by Mr. Trew -------------------------- 98
EXHIBITS
NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE
1 January 2006 topic agenda ----------------------- 19
2 August 151 2005 letter -------------------------- 25
3 September 91 2005 letter ------------------------ 30
4 Four pages given to Sheree Hutson --------------- 37
5 April 171 2006 letter --------------------------- 41
6 May 101 2006 letter with attachments ------------ 42
7 October 131 2005 letter ------------------------- 58
8 March 301 2006 letter --------------------------- 61
9 Report on possible annexation Property on 305 --- 68
10 Cost and assessments ---------------------------- 94
11 Calendar ---------------------------------------- III
(Note: Unless provided by counsel to the reporterlall names are rendered as the best phoneticapproximation. )
1 I The sworn statement of MITCHELL MOORE, taken by S.
2 I Randolph Ayres, Richard C. Newman, and H. Chris Trew, before
3 I Leslie A. Owens, Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for
4 I the State of Tennessee, on the 9th Day of January, 2007, at
5 City Hall, 815 North Jackson Street, Athens, Tennessee.
6 MITCHELL MOORE,
7 I Having been first duly sworn, was examined and
8 I testified as follows:
3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TREW: We all know the purpose for why
we're here. This is the investigative committee
designated by City Council to review the I.S.O.
rating change and questions that City Council wants
resolved because of that change and communication
issues between various departments and staff with
the City and the City Council.
So we've decided to do some interviews.
Mr. Moore, you're the City Manager, and we decided
we would start with you.
And the format we have chosen is Mr. Ayres
is going to begin, but he's going to talk to you
for about twenty minutes or so and then we're going
to switch and probably rotate back, but we thought
we would kind of work in twenty-minute shifts. So
there's an indication that you're at least going to
have twenty, forty, sixty minutes worth.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
4
MR. MOORE: I've already told Chris, if I
need to use the restroom, I will have to ask for a
break.
MR. TREW: But we appreciate you being
here. Obviously there is a court reporter present.
She has given you an oath to testify truthfully,
which I know you would do any way.
And she's going to take down all the
questions that are asked and the responses. And
eventually we will ask her to transcribe that and
provide that to City Council along with our report.
We will endeavor to give a report to City Council
by its next meeting, which I understand is next
Tuesday or Monday?
MR. MOORE: Next Tuesday.
MR. TREW: It is very apparent to us it
won't be complete, but we want to give something to
City Council as far as the progress of our
investigation. But with that said, we're going to
20 I begin with this interview session, and I'll let
21 I Mr. Ayres begin.
22 EXAMINATION
23 BY MR. AYRES:
24 Q Mr. Moore, let me say to start with, to
25 I amplify a little bit on what Chris said, he talked about our
1 I purposes and I certainly want you to understand that one of
2 lour purposes is not to embarrass anyone. I don't want to
3 I harass anyone. I don't want anyone to be uncomfortable.
5
4 As you know, I favor public hearings, but I
5 I certainly understand both viewpoints. I know you have a very
6 I difficult job. We live in a competitive society and that's
7 I the very nature of our country, I guess.
8 I And you are the leader of the Athens team that is
9 I competing for all sorts of awards and funds and monies and
10 I tax dollars. You've done a good job obviously in that type
11 I of competitive environment. You have to be aggressive and
12 I you've probably stepped on some toes. And I know you have
13 I many, many supporters in the community and I know there's
14 I some that are critical of you.
15 I But our position is simply the best we possibly can
16 I to find out what happened in what appears to be a breakdown
17 I in communication. If I ask you any questions that you don't
18 I understand, you make sure you --
19 I A Okay.
20 I Q And we're not here going by rules of
21 I evidence. I may ask you two or three questions in the same
22 I question. You feel free to respond anyway you want to.
23 I A Okay.
24 I Q Let me ask you, and if you don't mind, I'll
25 I just keep some formality in terms of referring to you as
1 I Mr. Moore, but give us real briefly your background in terms
2 I of where you went to college and then what your professional
3 I career has been since you graduated.
6
4 A First I was in the military, in the Air
5 I Force. Then after I left the Air Force I went to Austin peay
6 I State University. I arrived at Austin peay in, I believe,
7 I March of '73. I finished my undergraduate degree in December
8 of '75.
9 I then went to work as a pharmaceutical salesman
10 I for Ross Laboratories in Columbus, Ohio, a division of
11 I Abbott. I then decided I wanted to go to graduate school,
12 I and I had a choice of hospital administration or city
13 I management. I chose city management. I don't know why. I
14 I still don't know why.
15 I I applied at five universities, from U.T. to
16 I Memphis to East Tennessee State, and was accepted by all and
17 I chose East Tennessee State because they had a Master's of
18 I City Management Program at that time. As far as I know, it
19 I was the only one in the United States by that title.
20 I As part of my requirement -- I started in January
21 I of '79, I believe. And as part of the requirement for the
22 I degree, you had to do a six-month internship with either a
23 I city or some government organization and Athens was looking
24 for an intern.
25 And so I ended up corning to Athens as an intern in
1 I March -- I can tell you the date, March 24, 1980, because my
2 I birthday was March 23, the day before, and that's why I can
3 I remember when I carne here the first time.
7
4
5
Q
A
Was Mr. Isabell the City Manager?
No, it was Marvin. Mr. Isabell had stepped
6 I down, I think, in '78 or whatever year it was. I carne in
7 I 180. I knew Mr. Isabell.
8 I I did the six-month internship and was asked if I
9 I would stay as the administrative assistant for Marvin
10 I Bolinger. I accepted that and was here from -- I guess it
11 I was September of 1980 until February of '84.
12 I I had applied for and was accepted as the City
13 I Manager for Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia. I was at Fort
14 Oglethorpe for less than a year. I resigned in December of
15 '84.
16 I got a job offer there I'll never have anywhere
17 I else. They said, "What will it take to get you to stay?"
18 I And I said, "You don't understand. It's not about money."
19 I And it wasn't. It was a very political city and it was very,
20 I very difficult. They were in debt when I got there. They
21 had borrowed money to even meet payroll for the first of the
22 year.
23 I When I left they had two hundred and some thousand
24 I dollars in their bank account and they had not had to get a
25 I loan, which had been their mode of operation for the past
1 I several years.
8
2 But I left not having employment. I applied
3 I several places from Florida to the Carolinas to Arizona, and
4 I was offered the position in Belmont, North Carolina, that I
5 I accepted.
6 I I was in North Carolina from -- I hope I'm getting
7 I most of these dates correct. From January of '85, and I left
8 I in December of '87. My wife had received a promotion. She
9 I was with Junior Achievement of Charlotte and she was made a
10 I job offer in Nashville as operations manager for Junior
11 I Achievement of Nashville.
12 I I chose to let her take that position, and I again
13 I moved and moved our son at that time to Lebanon, Tennessee
14 I where we resided. And Sandy, my wife, worked for Junior
15 Achievement.
16 I then went to work for Spectrum, which lS a
17 I software company out of Lexington, Kentucky. And I was an
18 I I.B.M. business agent. And they're a governmental agent for
19 I the State of Tennessee and Western Kentucky.
20 I I got itchy, for whatever reason, and thought I
21 I wanted to get back in the profession. So I started sending
22 lout resumes in '89. I had five job offers at the same time
23 I and chose to go to Melbourne Beach, Florida.
24 I I was in Melbourne Beach, Florida from the Monday
25 I after Thanksgiving of '89 until, I believe, May of '91.
9
1 I Melbourne Beach, again, was a pretty political community. As
2 I it says it's a beach side community.
3 I It was not a community that was going to grow in
4 I the way of commercial or definitely not industrial, and all
5 I that was happening was -- there were only forty vacant lots
6 I on the whole island where it was and it was one square mile.
7 I That's what the city limits was, was one square mile. We did
8 I not have a traffic signal. We had a stop sign that everybody
9 I complained about on AlA.
10 I But anyway, I then decided that I would seek
11 I further employment. Belmont, North Carolina called me and
12 I said, "We've got an opening. Would you consider coming
13 I back?" I sent them my resume, because it was a different
14 council than the one that had been there the first time I was
15 there.
16 I went up and interviewed. They offered the job.
17 I I accepted the position. I had an eighteen-month contract
18 I with Melbourne Beach and that contract was up, so I didn't
19 I have any problems there.
20 I And so from 1991 until I came here in September of
21 I 1999, I was in Belmont, North Carolina. And I came back here
22 I September of '99.
23 Q Let me ask you a question. You were here
24 I for, what, four years under Marvin Bolinger?
25 A About that, yeah.
1 Q Okay. And then you've been here roughly,
10
2 I what, eight years?
3
4
A
Q
Seven, seven plus.
What is the relationship between the City
5 I Manager and the Mayor in terms of how you all interact? And
6 I what I'm getting at, Mr. Moore, is this -- and feel free to
7 I go back to Marvin's time even.
8
9
A
Q
Sure.
Does the City Manager and the Mayor sort of
10 I act as an executive committee, for lack of a better word,
11 I when the City Council is not in session, which obviously
12 I they're only in session for a limited number of hours a
13 month?
14 Does the Mayor have -- I'm trying to get at, does
15 I the Mayor have a greater say so as a matter of practice and a
16 I matter of historical practice, going back to Marvin's time,
17 I than the other members of Council?
18 A I would say only in that you probably see
19 I the Mayor more than you see any of the other Council Members
20 I during the time between this Council meeting and this Council
21 I meeting. That Mayor probably comes to City Hall more than
22 I most Council Members come to City Hall during that month
23 I between meetings.
24 I As far as acting as an executive committee, I don't
25 I look at it that way. But, again, simply because you see one
111 I individual more, you're going to talk to that one individual
2 I more than you talk to the remaining Council, unless they too
3 I choose to have a schedule that comes in and chats with you or
4 I visits with you or whatever. I hope that answers your
5 I question.
6 Q Let me go to the question about the I.S.O.
7 I What has been your experience over the years as to how
8 I frequently, at what intervals, I.S.O. rates a municipality?
9 A I've been a city manager for twenty-five
10 I plus years. This is my first I.S.O. inspection. That's not
11 I to say that they don't come in and inspect, you know, on some
12 I kind of schedule, because they do.
13 I But if you would check, I believe I would be
14 I correct in saying, in this particular part of the State of
15 I Tennessee, I.S.O. for the last twenty or so years has not
16 I come very regular. That being true in Cleveland, that being
17 I true of course here, and I also believe in Niota and in
18 I Englewood. I'm not sure about Englewood, I just think
19 I that's --
20 I Now, you can request that I.S.O., number one, come
21 I in and give you guidance, if you will, because you have done
22 I a lot of things to improve your fire department as an
23 I example. You can then call upon them and give you an
24 I informal inspection. And they can't hold that against you or
25 I use that in whatever your rating is at the time you call them
12
1 in.
2 But what you're trying to do there is find out,
3 I okay, we were a five -- no, we are a five. We think we've
4 I made enough improvements that we can become a four but we're
5 I not real sure, so you can make that request. They will come
6 I in and inspect you and give you whatever that numerical
7 I number is.
8 And you know what the categories are. You look at
9 I that and say, "Well, we were short here, here, and here. So
10 I if we improve this, by doing this at minimal cost, we can
11 I become the four." Then you make an official request for them
12 I to come and do an inspection.
13 Q Well, let me ask you, it looks like prior
14 I to the 2005 survey that the last time that I.S.O. was here,
15
16
17
18
was in 1986.
A
Q
A
Is that -- nineteen years, does that seem -
Yeah.
Does that strike you as being unusual?
Again, I've been in this twenty-five years
19 I and I've been to however many different cities I've named and
20 I this is the first time I've seen the I.S.O.
21 Q All right. Now, let me ask you, when
22 I I.S.O. came in 2005, do you remember the circumstances by
23 I which they came? That is, was it an unannounced visit? Did
24 I they contact you and say, "We're coming, II or did someone from
25 I the City of Athens --
1 A This is just as I remember it. I believe
13
2 I they contacted the fire chief and said, "We'll be in town,"
3 I and gave a date.
4 Q But nobody from Athens requested that
5 I informal survey?
papers, when did the discussions start about the annexation
of
-- what do we call it,the Mt.Verd Road annexation?
A
Uh-huh.
Q
I noticed that you've gotten up a report,
but when did the Council start seriously thinking aboutannexing the Mt.
Verd area?
when it was looked at, but I mean it's been discussed.
was looked at before I ever came here in '99.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
A
Q
A
No, not that I'm aware of.
As you're aware of what's been in the
My understanding was annexation of Mt. Verd
I don't know
It's
17 I been, I believe, in Planning Commission as far as them making
18 I a recommendation either two or three different times.
19 I That's where an annexation logically begins is for
20 I the planning group to look at it to say, you know, that makes
21 I sense, let's do a study, let's see if it works. Then they
22 I make a recommendation to Council.
23 I I can't tell you the -- it's been looked at through
24 I the Planning Commission at least twice since I've been here,
25 but I can't tell you the actual years. I don't remember.
1 Q Now, was it 2004 that you all started
14
2 I actively pursuing this as a --
3 A I think that's correct, with some vigor,
4 I let's put it that way.
5 I Q With what?
6 I A with some vigor.
7 I Q All right. What group was pushing it, so
8 I to speak? I mean, was it you, the administration, was it the
9 I City Council, or was it the Planning Commission?
10 A The initial studies carne out of the
11 I Planning Commission.
12
13
Q
A
What period --
I'm not saying that somebody in planning
14 I wasn't saying why don't we look at Mt. Verd.
15 Q Do you remember when the last time that the
16 I Planning Commission formally recommended this? And I assume
17 it would be sometime before you all vigorously started in
18 2004.
19
20 know.
21
A
Q
I don't. I don't know that. I do not
What was your recommendation to the City
22 I about the annexation, to the Council?
23 A If I was asked, I would have made a
24 I recommendation that it go forward after the State did -- the
25 I State Planning Offices did the study.
15
1 I Q Did they ask you for --
2 I A I honestly do not remember if they asked me
3 I formally or not. Had they, I would have recommended it.
4 I Q What was your understanding of the sense of
5 I Council before the formal vote when they were asking you to
6 I study and maybe make a recommendation?
7 I Did you sense that this was the direction that the
8 I Council wanted, and was that a unanimous consensus or not
9 about the annexation? I'm not asking about the vote. I'll
10 I come to that in just a moment.
11 A As I remember informal discussions and
12 I formal discussions, it was always positive on the annexation
13 I as a group. Now, I can't tell you an individual said, IIYes,
14 I I'll vote for it,ll or whatever.
15 Q Then you take and, Mr. Trew, 1111 have
16 I to rely upon him more, but I think you adopt on the first
17 I reading -- I'm not sure how many readings you had.
18 I A We have two readings.
19 I Q And the first reading
20 I A Public hearing is at the second reading.
21 I Q So the first reading is usually a
22 I formality. Do you remember when the first reading was on the
23 I annexation?
24 A We had two. We had two first readings.
25 I No, I can't give you dates. We had a reading -- and, again,
1 I'm pulling all of this out of memory. We had a reading.
16
It
2 I was discovered that the description and map, there was a
3 flaw. We corrected that and went back and had another first
4 reading and then had a second reading.
5 Q Well, can you give me, I guess, then the
6 I second reading, a rough time frame?
7
8
9
A
Q
A
As to when it was?
Yes.
Oh, gosh. August, September of this
10 I year -- I mean, '06. July, August. Somewhere in that time
11 I period.
12
13
14
Q
A
Q
Approximately the Summer of '06?
Dh-huh.
And I understand there's litigation
15 I involved and others might be interested. I'm not
16 I particularly concerned about that right now.
17 I Do you remember Sheree Hutson coming down here and
18 I wanting some information? It's in our packet and there's a
19 I note. I wanted to ask you whose -- that document right there
20 I was in our packet.
21 A 11m not sure if that's Kaye's -- typically
22 I that would be Kaye Burton's note to me, typically. When
23 I would have been during this time period. But as far as an
24 I actual date, I don't know.
25 I This was probably requested when I was out of the
17
1 I office and that's the reason she made the notation. That's
2 I the only thing I can think of. Ms. Hutson has never came in
3 I and asked me for it.
4 I This is probably following a Council meeting that
5 I she had made a statement about I.S.O. But, again, Kaye would
6 I be a lot better at remembering dates and being able to find
7 I dates.
8 Q The question that obviously is on
9 I everybody's mind is, how did this letter of September the
10 19th, 2005, how did that letter that you sent to I.S.O. -- no,
11 I I'm sorry, it's your letter of April 17th of 2006. And this
12 I is jumping ahead because I'm sure we all have a lot of
13 I questions in between.
14 I But how did that letter get -- what prompted you to
15 I make that decision to say to I.S.O. that we're not going to
16 I be able to make the necessary improvements or enhancements to
17 I retain the Class three designation? You know the letter I'm
18 I talking about?
19 A Yes, sir. I had to make a response to them
20 I because, if I'm not mistaken, they had either called me or
21 I written a letter and said, you know, we need to have a
22 I response from you. That was the reason for the response.
23 As I said publicly in Council meeting, I accept
24 I full responsibility. I made some mistakes on not
25 I communicating directly in whenever the letter came in that
18
1 I said you're going from a three to a four. And I don't
2 I remember dates. I don't have that in front of me.
3 I I thought that I made a copy of that and placed it
4 I in Councils' boxes. We had it scheduled for the planning
5 I session with City Council that takes place in January of
6 I every year. It was on the agenda. We never got to that, for
7 whatever reason.
8 We had thirty items as I remember, give or take.
9 I And they were listed in priority, the agenda was, of what the
10 Council wished to discuss.
11 I had sent the list to them and asked them to rank
12 them as to what you would like to discuss first, second,
13 I whatever. And whatever that vote came back, that's the way
14 I the agenda was drawn up. As I remember I.S.O. was somewhere
15 I on the second page toward the bottom.
want to go ahead or wait?
MR. TREW: Just wait.
MR. MOORE: Here it is, right here.
MR. TREW: Let's make that an exhibit while
we're talking about it.
The last item on the second page?
We never got that far.
MR. NEWMAN: Do we have a copy of that
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q
A
agenda?
MR. MOORE: I made the mistake -- do you
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
19
MR. AYRES: Let's make that then an exhibit
to your testimony.
MR. TREW: Can you identify that document
for us, Mr. Moore?
MR. MOORE: Yes. That is the 2006 topic
agenda.
MR. TREW: Would you mark this as Exhibit
Number 1 for us please.
9 I (Exhibit NO.1 was filed.)
10
11
MR. AYRES: When you sent out this -
MR. TREW: Wait just a moment. I think
12 I it's important at this stage, and you can ask him
13 I or I can, I don't want to interrupt you, but he
14 I started talking about how this documents was
15 I generated but he didn't give any specific details.
16 I Would you mind if he goes ahead and identifies how
17 I that document was generated?
18 I BY MR. AYRES:
19 Q when you asked the Council to rate, did you
20 I give them a list of items to rate or
21 A Yeah, this was the list. This was the
22 I list. What we do or what I do is I try to solicit topics
23 I that they wish to have discussed as individuals.
24 Q That's what I'm asking. When you solicited
25 I that, was that by orally or was that by written
20
1 I communication?
2 A That I can't tell you. I don't remember.
3 I Typically it would probably have either been like at a work
4 I session and I would have stated to the group, you know, "Be
5 I thinking about topics you need to -- wish to have discussed.
6 I Get those to me by a date so I can prepare the agenda so we
7 I can have the back-up material for whatever the discussion or
8 I the topic might be."
9 I As a matter of fact, we're doing that right now
10 with the one that's upcoming. In this case, I believe I'm
11 I correct, I sent out an e-mail to them and said, "Are there
12 I any topics that you wish as an individual to make sure we
13 I have discussed on the upcoming planning session?"
14 Last night we had a work session. I, again, asked
15 I the four members that were present last night, "Do you have
16 I any topics that you want to make sure that are discussed for
17 I this upcoming meeting?"
18 I I can't remember how this -- however many items on
19 I here, thirty or whatever this number is. I can't remember
20 I how many of them came from Council versus how many of them
21 I came from staff. You know all topics that are discussed are
22 I not just generated by City Council.
23 I They're items that I maybe have put on there
24 I because we've discussed them in the past or there's something
25 I that needs to be discussed. And keep in mind, this meeting
21
1 I is structured to be a strategic planning process for the long
2 I range, although we do have a lot of short range topics.
3 Q Well, what I'm getting at, to be honest and
4 I fair with you, there's been a lot of talk about what you knew
5 I and when you knew it and what you did, but it also seems to
6 I me important to know what the members of the Council knew and
7 I when they knew it.
8 I And for that reason I'm trying to find out how
9 I I.8.0. got rated as the twentieth item and who suggested that
10 I it be discussed. I mean, was that your suggestion, was it
11 I Chief Miller, or would it have been members of the Council
12 I say, "wait a second. We're aware that we've got a problem
13 I with I.8.0. We need to talk about that on the agenda"?
14 I A As I remember it, I'm the one that put
15 I I.8.0. on the agenda, as I remember. I do not believe anyone
16 I from Council said to me, "What about r.8.0.?" or, "I want
17 I I.S .0. discussed." I do not remember that. I think I was
18 I the one that put that on there.
19 I I know like I was the one that put "Staffing" on
20 I there. I know that the "Families Inclusiveness T.W.C. Clean
21 Up," would have been from a particular Council Member. "Long
22 I Range Planning" was from a particular Council Member.
23 I "Report on Employee Survey" was from a particular Council
24 I Member.
25 I 80 we have a combination of staff topics suggested
22
1 I and then Council topics suggested. And then the list is
2 I given to them to put in priority, which do you want to hear
3 I first, second, third, fourth, whatever. From that list then
4 I came this list in their ranked priority.
5 Q Maybe I missed it, but did you send them
6 I something that said rate these items, including I.S.O.?
7 I A Everything that's on here was sent to them.
8 I These three pages. They were sent a list, and I don't
9 I remember how the list was, you know, laid out, if you will.
10
11
Q
A
Right.
And what was asked of them was, "Put a
12 I priority beside each topic that you have here and tell me
13 I what you feel is most important." Then from that we can
14 I compile the five to come up with this list. In other words,
15 I annexation was at the top of everybody's list.
16 MR. AYRES: I understand. My time is up.
17 EXAMINATION
18 BY MR. NEWMAN:
19 Q My question is a follow-up to what has been
20 I asked you is, is how would the -- if you just put I.S.O. on
21 I there and this is not something that had been discussed, how
22 I would I, as a Council Member, even know what I.S.O. means?
23 I And you hadn't seen it in twenty-six years you said.
24
25
A
Q
Right.
Did they know what that was or was that
1 I something that they just said, "Well, I don't have any idea
2 I what that is. I'll just put it at the end"?
23
3 A Well, no one asked me a question about it,
4 I you know, "What is this?" Or on the other side, they didn't
5 I say, "I know what this is." To my memory no one ever asked
6 I me about I.S.O., one way or the other.
7 Q Okay. I guess the follow-up to that is,
8 I within your knowledge did anyone on the City Council in
9 I January of 2006 know what I.S.O. meant or certainly the
10 I issues that you were dealing with, with I.S.O.?
11 A I think -- I would assume that all of them
12 I knew what I.S.O. meant. Whether they -- I can't say that
13 I they would have know what the issues were at that time.
14 Q Let me ask some specific questions if I
15 I can, just with the paperwork that we got. The original
16 letter that was written September 9 I'm sorry. The
17 I original letter was August IS, 2005 to the Honorable John
18 I Proffitt.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TREW: Richard, can I interrupt you
just a minute?
MR. NEWMAN: Sure.
MR. TREW: Let me get it out of my pack so
you can -- so the first one is going to be
MR. NEWMAN: The August IS, 2005 letter to
the Honorable John Proffitt from I.S.O. Services,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
24
Ms. Jean D. Martin.
MR. TREW: August 15, 2005?
MR. NEWMAN: Right.
MR. TREW: Richard, what I'm going to mark
has got my handwritten notes out on the side, so I
don't know any way to get out of that.
MR. NEWMAN: Well, maybe you ought to
introduce this one because the question I have is
whose writing is this. That was in your packet, so
maybe we ought to introduce that one.
MR. MOORE: If it was in my packet, I'm
sure it was mine.
MR. TREW: Wait a minute. This is the
material that we were provided earlier. Hold on.
I've got a clean copy.
MR. NEWMAN: But mine didn't have that note
on it. The one that was originally given to me
didn't have that note on it.
MR. MOORE: Last week when Kaye said that
you guys wanted everything that might -- that you
might have in your file that was written on, notes
and everything, that's out of my file. That's out
of something I had.
MR. NEWMAN: Okay. Well, we need to get it
introduced.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
25
MR. MOORE: Although I can't see what it
says.
MR. NEWMAN: Well, I'll be glad to give it
to you.
MR. MOORE: Yeah, that's my note. I just
wanted to be sure that it was mine.
MR. TREW: This is two pages, August 15,
2005 letter from Jean Martin at the I.S.O. to the
Honorable John Proffitt, Mayor at P.O. Box 849,
Athens. It's two pages with a note at the top.
11 I Would you mark that as Exhibit Number 2.
12 I (Exhibit No. 2 was filed.)
13
14 I note?
15
Q
A
Okay. Do you know when you wrote that
When we were having a meeting with Steve,
16 I it starts with an S, from I.S.O.
17
18
19
20
21 I 15th.
Q
A
Q
A
Stross?
Stross.
Do you recall when that meeting was?
No. Of course, it was after August the
22 I Q It's addressed to the Honorable John
23 I Proffitt, Mayor. Who opened or who has the authority to open
24 I mail addressed to the Mayor by name?
25 A Both my administrative assistant and
1 I myself.2
3
4
Q
A
Q
Do you know who opened this letter?
I do not.
Do you know what the policy is when it is
26
5 I addressed directly to the Mayor, what do you do with it after
6 I you open it?
7 A What we typically do is make a copy of the
8 I document for whoever it pertains to, put it in councils'
9 I boxes and put the original back in the Mayor's box.
10 Q Do you know from your own personal
11 I knowledge whether or not the Mayor got this letter and when?
12 A I cannot guarantee you that he got it. I
13 I feel he did, but I cannot --
14 Q It talks about, "We wish to thank you Chief
15 I Robert Miller, Jill Davis, Charles Ziegler for cooperating
16 I with our representative during our recent survey." I would
17 I assume that that means that there was a communication,
18 I survey, maybe even visits before August of 2005?
19 A Yes. When Mr. Stross did his actual survey
20 I of our fire department and our community.
21 I Q Are there communications before this 2005
22 I letter as to, "Hey, we're going to come and see you"?
23 I A Again, not to me, and to my knowledge, not
24 I to the Mayor, but I believe that Mr. Stross contacted the
25 I Fire Chief.
1 Q Okay. From your own personal knowledge
27
2 I when -- how long a process was that? How long was I.S.O.
3 I visiting and communicating prior to this letter?
4
5
6
A
Q
A
He was probably on-site two or three days.
Just one person?
Yes, Mr. Stross. And he had a meeting, and
7 I I don't remember the date, with Chief Miller, Jill Davis,
8 I Chuck ziegler and myself, prior to his starting, if you will.
9 I I guess we were the starting point for his inspection.
10 I And he had this ream of paper that he would ask
11 I maybe Jill questions about the water system, he would ask
12 I Chief ziegler about communications -- that's the reason
13 I different people were in the room.
14 Q Okay. Any idea -- I mean, can you give us
15 I a ballpark figure when the initial contact with I.S.O. was
16 I before this August 15 letter, or approximately how long had
17 I the survey and communication been going on?
18
19
20
21 I months.
22
A
Q
A
Q
A month, month and a half, two months.
A couple of months?
I wish I knew, but I don't. Maybe three
In the last paragraph it says, "If you
23 I desire additional information," this is after they told you
24 I that you're going to be classified a four, "we will be
25 I available for a conference."
1 A And that's what happened, and that's the
28
2 I reason this note is on this page.
3
4
Q
A
Okay.
We had a meeting with Steve Stross after
5 I this letter, after we received the letter. And this
6 I handwritten notation that you see on this particular page is
7 I where I made a note where he had stated that we did not need
8 I a third station and that the training was good, because I had
9 I questions about what I felt was a low score on training as it
10 I relates to the way he graded us. And that's the reason I
11 I underlined it. He said training was good.
12 I Q Stross said that when you had a grade of
13 I four points out of nine, less than fifty percent, in
14 I training?
15
16
17 the--
18
A
Q
A
Whatever the numbers were.
I mean, it was one of the worst scores on
Yes, and that's the reason I asked him that
19 I particular question.
20
21
Q
A
Okay.
Can I elaborate on maybe what some of his
22 I reasons or answers were?
23
24
Q
A
Sure.
Was because we have a volunteer section of
25 I the fire department. And they are expected to receive the
29
1 I same amount of training as your full-time fire department
2 I staff receives.
3 We just couldn't do that. We've not been able to,
4 I number one, have that kind of volunteerism, and then they
5 I have the ability to devote that kind of time to training.
6 I And that is one thing welre trying to figure out is, is the
7 I best way to keep them trained, knowing what the requirements
8 I are with 1.S.0.
9 Q The letter of September 9, which is
10 I Ms. Martinis letter back to you, says, liTheCity of Athens
11 I respectfully request that we be allowed to review the
12 I document until February of 2006." She said you needed to get
13 I a response to her quickly.
14
15 I planning.
16
A
Q
And that was so I could get it on the
My question is, is did you unilaterally
17 I make that decision to request that extension to February 1st
18 I of 2006, which is, 1 guess, about five or six months?
19
20
A
Q
Yes, sir.
Okay. That was not communicated to the
21 I Mayor or anyone else?
22 A Not that I remember as far as me saying
23 I that. Again, 1 thought I had put the letter in there.
24 I MR. TREW: You thought what?
25 MR. MOORE: 1 thought I had placed the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
letter in the Councils' boxes.
MR. TREW: Which letter?
MR. MOORE: The one where I asked for the
February --
MR. NEWMAN: The September 9 letter.
MR. TREW: This is just a copy. It's got
my handwritten notes out to the side, but theY're
not that important. Let's mark this as Exhibit
Number 3. This is the September 9, 2005 letter
30
10 I that Mr. Moore sent to Ms. Jean Martin that's just
11 been discussed.
12 (Exhibit Number 3 was filed.)
13 Q I understand this because I asked a
14 I question from other sources, but I would like for you to
15 I explain briefly, I don't want to -- but when you say, "the
16 I City of Athens respectfully requests," what in your words
17 I gives you the authority to represent the City of Athens?
18 A Because the fire department answers to the
19 I City Manager. And on a day-to-day basis, it is up to the
20 I City Manager to make sure that the city of Athens operates in
21 I a functional, correct manner. And this, if you will, was
22 I trying to get time to discuss this with the elected
23 I officials.
24 Q Let me ask you this, Mr. Moore. Concerning
25 I that letter, it's copied to Chief Bob Miller. The original
31
1 I letter, and I assume you think that you, in fact, put this in
2 I the City Councils' boxes. Why, if the original letter had
3 I copied to the fire chief, the water superintendent, the
4 I police chief, you, and it was addressed to Mayor Proffitt,
5 I why did you only send a copy to Chief Bob Miller on September
6 I 9?
7 I A I honestly can't tell you why it was only
8 I copied to Bob. I don't know.
9 I Q Well, don't you feel like that something of
10 I this nature would have been -- since it was originally
11 I addressed to the Mayor, it would have been important? I
12 I mean, looking back don't you think it would have been
13 I important to get a copy to --
14 A In hindsight, absolutely. And that's the
15 I reason why I stated in the public meeting that I made some
16 I mistakes and that was one of them.
17
18
19
MR. NEWMAN: I think my twenty minutes is
up, so I'm going to be candid and pass on because
this is a nice place to take a break for me. I
20 I have other questions, but --
21 I EXAMINATION
22 I BY MR. TREW:
23 Q I'm going to continue forward and let's get
24 I in the record all of these letters that carne out. But before
25 I that let me back up just a little bit and then I'll pick up
32
1 I with this.
2 I Mr. Moore, it appears from looking at all of these
3 I documentations and listening to you this morning, that I.S.O.
4 I came in and did a survey in May of 2005; is that correct?
5
6
A
Q
In that time period, I would agree, yes.
And after that survey, that is when I.S.O.,
7 I through Ms. Martin, first sent notice of this change from
8 I Class 3 to Class 4 in August of 2005?
9
10
A
Q
Correct.
And, in fact, with this August 15, 2005
11 I letter, I think we need to go ahead and put this in too, did
12 I that letter include the actual survey itself to show and
13 I justify why I.S.O. was moving the City from a Class 3 to a
14 I Class 4? Were these documents attached to that August 15
15 I letter to the best of your recollection?
it?
scores.
MR. TREW: Yeah, that's what was attached.
MR. MOORE: Yeah, that should probably be
the first page. That's the one with the numerical
As I remember it, yes, they were.
Okay. Do you guys have a problem if we
their actual survey to Exhibit Number 2?
MR. AYRES: No. As a matter of fact, isn't
there a lot more -- it starts right here, doesn't
Q
A
attach this
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
MR. AYRES: I think you tore it off just
because we were concentrating on this note up here
on Exhibit 2. Why don't we just make
MR. NEWMAN: Yeah, just attach all of that
because that was all part of the letter.
MR. TREW: Okay. Let's make sure I've got
it all. This is the information that we got from
Shannon Alvey.
MR. NEWMAN: I understand.
MR. AYRES: But the question is when they
received it were all of these documents attached
with it? I assume they were.
MR. TREW: I would have to think so. Off
33
14 the record.
15 (A discussion was held off the record.)
16 I BY MR. TREW:
17 Q We were just discussing attaching the
18 I I.S.O. survey to the August 15, 2005 letter. But now from
19 I discussions off the record, the actual documentation from
20 I I.S.O. that changed the rating survey may not have been part
21 I of the original letter sent to Mayor Proffitt August 15,
22 I 2005; is that correct, Mr. Moore?
23
24
A
Q
I really don't know.
Okay. So for that reason, we're not going
25 I to attach the documents that appear to be the survey
34
1 I documents from I.S.O., hydrants, low data summary,
2 I classification details, et cetera, at this point. We'll
3 I attach that to another letter later.
4 Okay. With that said, what I want to talk about
5 I before we get to these letters, Mr. Moore, when do you recall
6 I that this controversy -- how did this become an issue with
7 I Council, this I.S.O. report and the fact that maybe some
8 I information hadn't been disclosed to Council? How did all of
9 I this transpire, the best you remember?
10 A Something was said during a discussion
11 I about the annexation at a Council meeting.
12
13
Q
A
At a Council meeting?
And I do not remember dates, but at a
14 I Council meeting.
15 Q And from that point, was there a request
16 I made to you to provide some documents about the I.S.O.
17 I rating?
18 I A As I remember it, Ms. Hutson made a request
19 I for some letters. I do not remember what the direct request
20 I was. That then goes back to the letter that I saw a while
21 I ago that showed like four pages maybe that were together.
22
23
24
25
MR. AYRES: Was this request at the City
Council meeting?
MR. MOORE: Yes. And as I remember now,
she came in the next day or two days later and,
1
2
35
Kaye, my administrative assistant, made the copies.
And that's where the note --
3 Q So the best you recall then, at a City
4 I Council meeting Ms. Hutson stood up and started talking about
5 I the I.S.O. fire classification rating; is that correct?
6 A Yes, as it related to annexation and being
7 I able to service the annexation at 305.
8 Q And at that meeting, was there any
9 I discussion in the open session of that meeting about what the
10 I City of Athens fire classification actually was?
11 A I believe it was said that -- no, I
12
13
14
15
16
can't -- I don't know.I can't remember that.I know at one
time something was said about a three to a four,
but I
honestly can't tell you what meeting that was. Q
That was going to be my next question.So
at
some point then,at an open public meeting,notice was
17 I provided to City Council and the public that the fire
18 I classification rating has changed?
19
20
21
A
Q
A
Uh-huh.
Do you remember when that was?
No, I really don't. I'm pretty sure it was
22 I during the annexation time period between -- what was that we
23 I decided? May of '06 through August or September, sometime
24 I during that time period, but it could have been October.
25 Q So at some point during the annexation
36
1 I discussion, someone mentioned in a public meeting that the
2 I City's fire classification rating had changed from a three to
3 I four?
4
5
A
Q
Yes.
And do you recall -- you don't recall what
6 I particular meeting that was?
7
8
A
Q
No, I do not.
Do you recall whether that was a work
9 I session meeting or a regular City Council meeting?
10
11 meeting.
12
A
Q
As I remember it was a regular City Council
Who disclosed that change? Did you
13 I disclose that change or did Sheree Hutson or did somebody
14 I else?
15 A I remember it coming out of the audience.
16 I I don't remember who said it, but I remember it coming -- and
17 I there was a newspaper article written that might have
18 I something to do with it.
19 Q At that meeting, whenever it occurred,
20 I after somebody from the audience said something maybe to the
21 I effect that, "Well, do we all know and appreciate that the
22 I rating has changed from a three to four and how are you going
23 I to service this area out there?", what do you remember being
24 I said among City Council Members at that time?
25 A I don't remember really a discussion. It
37
1 I was just coming from the audience.
2 Q And then to create a time line, after that
3 I occurred is that when Ms. Hutson came in and actually
4 I requested some documents or had she already obtained these
5 I documents?
6
7
8
A
Q
A
I don't remember the sequence.
Okay.
I will tell you that at a work session,
9 I Council Member Alvey asked for the information that was given
10 I to Ms. Hutson, which was supplied to her. Again, I can't
11 I remember exactly
12
13
14
15
16
MR. AYRES: After it had already been given
to Ms. Hutson?
MR. MOORE: I believe that to be correct.
Yes, Slr.
MR. TREW: Let's mark as Exhibit Number 4
17 I then four pages of materials that at least by a
18 I note reflect that this information was given to
19 I Sheree Hutson, and we've been discussing that.
20 I Let's mark that as Exhibit Number 4.
21 I (Exhibit NO.4 was filed.)
22 Q And in with this material, Mr. Moore, the
23 I first page is the cover sheet of a Management Operation Study
24 I in February of 1997. And it appears that the author may have
25 I been Ray Crouch that we've been talking about?
381 I A Correct.
2 I Q And we'll get to that actual document in a
3 I few minutes. Behind that is what I think is part of
4 I Mr. Crouch's efforts with this 1997 report, correct?
5
6
A
Q
uh-huh.
And in the very bottom of it, it indicates
7 I as far as recommendations, fire stations, and this is on Page
8 I 2, it says, "The City does not meet the I.S.O. Class 3, which
9 I you now hold, in the area of fire station distribution"?
10
11
A
Q
Correct.
And then the next page -- the next two
12 I pages are the August 15, 2005 letter from Ms. Martin to Mayor
13 I Proffitt advising that the survey is complete and it appears
14 I that it's appropriate to change from a Class 3 to Class 4
15 I rating?
16
17
A
Q
Right.
So at this point, whenever it was,
18 I Ms. Hutson has the August 15, 2005 letter saying that I.S.O.
19 I is going to change the City from a three to four, correct?
20
21
A
Q
Correct.
And after this was given to Ms. Hutson,
22 I it's your recollection that maybe the next work session,
23 I Ms. Alvey asked for more information regarding the I.S.O.
24 I change in classification?
25 A My recollection is she asked for what
39
1 I Ms. Hutson received which is what was given to her.
2
3
Q
A
Okay.
At no time has any Council Member asked,
4 I "Can I see the file for I.S.O. or can I see all the
5 I documentation for I.S.O.?" That was never asked.
6 Q And to the best of your recollection, after
7 I Ms. Alvey requested what was given to Ms. Hutson, that was
8 I done?
time?
MR. MOORE: Yes, sir. If she had asked for
the file, if she had asked for all correspondence,
that's what she would have received.
MR. NEWMAN: Why wouldn't you ask, liDoyou
want the whole file? She obviously was asking
about a specific -- I'm sorry, but --
Yes.
Who did she make that request to?
Me.
In a work session?
In a work session.
Okay.
MR. AYRES: Could I clarify something?
MR. TREW: Yes.
MR. AYRES: Did she just ask what was given
to Ms. Hutson? Is that all she asked for at that
Q
A
Q
A
A
Q
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3
4
40
MR. MOORE: She said I want -- I don't have
a copy of that -- no, wait a minute. She said,
"This mentions attachments. I do not have the
attachments." She asked for whatever went with
this letter. If there's ten pages --
MR. NEWMAN: My question, Mr. Moore, is
obviously she was interested in the I.S.O. rating.
As City Manager why wouldn't you say, "There's a
big file on this. Do you want the whole file?"
Richard, I wish I could tell you. I've gone back.
I've gone through my head. I've done everything.
attachments, and I don't have the attachments." It
was my mistake not to ask her, "Do you want the
entire file?" But I did not.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Why would you not do that?
MR. MOORE: I honestly
I gave her exactly what she said.
you know,
"This notes
18 I BY MR. TREW:
19 Q Now, obviously, at least to me, Exhibit 4,
20 I the materials that were given to Ms. Hutson, that certainly
21 I include the August 15, 2005 letter, this material was given
22 I to Ms. Hutson after the -- I think we've already marked it.
23 I Maybe we haven't. We don't have it in, the last letter.
24 I'm handing you a document authored by you, dated
25 I April 17, 2006. It's a letter to Ms. Martin, telling
41
1 I Ms. Martin that the City of Athens will be unable to make the
2 I necessary improvements to retain our Class 3 designation.
3 I Did you send that letter to Ms. Martin?
4
5
A I did.
MR. TREW: Okay. Let's mark this as
6 I Exhibit Number 5.
7 I (Exhibit No. 5 was filed.)
8
9
10
Chris?
Q
MR. AYRES: What's the date of that letter,
April 17, 2006. Let's go ahead and do that
11 I too. And then after you sent that letter to Ms. Martin, she
12 I sent back to you a letter dated May 10, 2006; is that
13 I correct?
14
15
A
Q
She sent a letter to the Mayor.
I'm sorry, to the Mayor, with copies to
16 I Robert Miller and Jill Davis and Chief Ziegler, and we'll go
17 lover that later in more detail. But that letter was sent by
18 I I.S.O. to the Mayor dated May 10, 2006, saying that the
19 I Classification 4 now applies?
20
21
A
Q
Right.
And with this letter were all of the
22 I attachments that we were talking about a little earlier,
23 I which would actually be the survey, apparently?
24
25
A
Q
(Witness nods head.)
It says, IIEnclosed is a summary of the
42
1 I I.S.O. analysis of your fire suppression services," and
2 I unless you tell me different, I'm going to assume these some
3 I ten, eleven pages -- well, it's four through fifteen by fax
4 I number, so that's eleven pages, that is the summary that was
5 I included with the May 10, 2006 letter?
6 A I would assume, but I would also assume
7 I that we had already received this prior to that letter.
8
9
MR. TREW: Okay. But it looks like it was
attached. So let's mark the May 10, 2006 letter
10 with attachments as Exhibit Number 6.
11 (Exhibit No.6 was filed.)
12 Q Now, back to my question. Is it a fair
13 I assumption that Exhibit Number 4, the material given to
14 I Ms. Hutson, was given to her after May 10th of 2006?
15
16
A
Q
Yes.
Now, at the time that this request by
17 I Ms. Alvey occurs in a work session, to your knowledge who, as
18 I a member of City Council, knew that the City's classification
19 I had changed from Class 3 to Class 4?
20 And I know we're asking you to guess, speculate, or
21 I whatever. We'll ask them directly. But based on your
22 I recollection, when Ms. Alvey made that request and she
23 I subsequently was given these documents, who on City Council
24 I knew that that rating change had already occurred?
25 A I think all of them.
1
2
Q
A
Why do you say that?
Because I think prior to that meeting it
43
3 I was discussed at a Council meeting prior to that work
4 I session.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. AYRES: Chris, is there some way that
we could ask Kaye to give us just in chronological
order the dates of the City Council meetings during
this year period of time, 2005 to 2006,
interspersed with the work session meetings so that
we've got something in front of us?
Because I'll be honest, I'm a little bit
disappointed that Mitch doesn't have any of these
dates, and I think it puts us at a disadvantage not
knowing exactly what dates City Council met and
when they met in regular session and when they met
in the planning session, I believe they call it.
Could we ask her to do that?
MR. TREW: She can get the minutes for us
for all of those meetings. Rather than generate a
new document, we'll just request her to give us the
minutes of the meetings, because that was going to
lead to my next question since he's now said what
he did.
MR. MOORE: There are no minutes kept at
work sessions.
44
1 I BY MR. TREW:
2 I Q But you just mentioned that -- and maybe I
3 I misunderstood, that this rating classification was discussed
4 I with City Council -- had been discussed with City Council by
5 I the time Ms. Alvey made her request to see these letters or
6 I see the material that was given to Ms. Hutson?
7 A It is my recollection that it was discussed
8 I from the audience at a previous Council meeting.
9 Q Okay. I follow what you're saying because
10 I we had talked about that a few minutes ago. Somebody shouts
11 lout from the audience during the annexation discussion, "Hey,
12 I the fire rating change has already gone from a three to a
13 I four. II And then after that discussion Ms. Hutson came up and
14 I got these documents?
15
16
A
Q
Correct.
And then after that occurred Ms. Alvey
17 I formally asked for what was given to Ms. Hutson at a work
18 I session or a public meeting?
19 A And that's when she said -- I can't
20 I remember the terminology, IIButthey mentioned attachments,
21 I and I don't have any of the attachments."
22 Q Okay. So you now told us that City Council
23 I would have known about the fire rating change when somebody
24 I mentioned it from the audience during an annexation
25 I discussion, correct?
1
2
A
Q
Yes.
In looking back at minutes or approving
45
3 I minutes for a City meeting, do you think that that comment or
4 I that discussion is reflected in some official City minutes?
5
6
A
Q
I honestly don't know.
We'll look and see. Now, prior to somebody
7 I shouting that information out at a meeting, your recollection
8 I or your knowledge or your speculation, did anybody from City
9 I Council, on City Council, know about this fire rating change?
10
11
A
Q
Prior to that?
Prior to that being shouted out from the
12 I audience during a public meeting.
13
14
15
16
17
A
Q
A
Q
Stross before
Mayor Proffitt would have known.
And what do you base that on?
He was at a meeting with Steve Stross.
Okay. Was he at a meeting with Steve
let's just go back to the beginning. Was
18 Mayor Proffitt, to your knowledge, involved in the survey
19 process?
20
21
A
Q
No.
The initial letter, which we've marked as
22 I Exhibit Number 2, the August 15, 2005 letter to Mayor
23 I Proffitt, I guess it was asked, did you ever discuss this
24 I letter after receiving it? The August 15, 2005 letter, did
25 I you ever discuss this letter with Mayor Proffitt?
1 A The only time that Mayor Proffitt and I
46
2 I formally or informally discussed the I.S.O. letter was when
3 I we met with Steve Stross.
Q4
5
6
7
Okay.
MR. AYRES: Do we know the date of that
meeting? How do you spell his last name?
MR. MOORE: I think S-T-R-O-S-S. Something
8 close to that.
9 BY MR. TREW:
MR. AYRES: Do you know the date of that
meeting though?
MR. MOORE: I do not know the date of the
meeting. I have gone back to look at my calendar
10
11
12
13
14
15
Q
A
And Steve Stross is with I.S.O.?
Correct.
16 and I cannot find anything on the calendar.
17 BY MR. TREW:
18 Q But that meeting would have taken place
19 I after August 15, 2005?
A20
21
22
23
24
25
Yes.
MR. NEWMAN: Is that when you made your
notes on your cover letter there about training?
MR. MOORE: I honestly cannot remember if
Mayor Proffitt was in the room when I made these
notes with Steve Stross. But these notes were made
47
at, even if he wasn't in there when you made those
1 canlt tell you that.
MR. MOORE: Yes.
MR. NEWMAN: Was that the meeting he was
MR. MOORE:
when 1 was in a meeting with Steve Stross, but 1
cannot remember
MR. NEWMAN: And Mayor Proffitt, you say he
was at a meeting?
notes?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 I BY MR. TREW:
11
12
13
Q
A
Q
But you remember being at a meeting?
Yes.
After August 15, 2005 with Mr. Stross, with
14 I 1.S.0. in which Mayor Proffitt participated?
15 I A 1 canlt guarantee that it was after or
16 I before that date. 1 honestly can't tell you 1 got that after
17 I we met with Steve Stross or 1 got this before we met with
18 I Steve Stross because 1 could not find it on the calendar.
19 Q But the point being, Mayor Proffitt did
20 I participate with a meeting with Steve Stross in which the
21 I subject of the meeting was the fact that the 1.S.0. rating
22 I was going to change from three to four?
23
24
A
Q
Yes.
Do you think that meeting occurred with
25 I Steve Stross, and the Mayor and whoever else was in
48
1 I attendance [ before you generated your reply letter in
2 I September -- on September 9th of 2005 back to Ms. Martin
3 I requesting additional time to consider this rating change [
4 I requesting till February the 1st of 2006?
5 A Do I think the meeting took place before or
6 I after that letter?
7
8
9
10 letter?
11
12
Q
A
Q
A
Q
Yes.
I think after that letter.
You think the meeting took place after this
I think.
And I believe you indicated to us that you
13 I sent this letter of September 9[ 2005 to Ms. Martin because
14 I you wanted to discuss this rating change with City Council?
15
16
A
Q
Yes[ sir.
And then you're thinking that after you
17 I made this request for additional time there was a meeting set
18 I up with Steve Stross in which you and Mayor Proffitt
19 I participated?
20
21
22
A
Q
A
Yes.
Who else participated in that meeting?
As I remember it[ I believe it just was the
23 I fire chief.
24
25
Q
A
Just the fire chief?
I think it was the three of us that met
49
1 I with Mr. Stross.
2
3
Q
A
And what was the purpose of that meeting?
To go over all of those fifteen pages and
4 I for him to say, you know, this is why you ranked here for
5 I training, this is why you ranked here for communications,
6 I this is why you did whatever.
7 It gave me an opportunity to say to Mr. Stross, "Do
8 I you feel like we need a third fire station to improve the
9 I rating? No. " But we did need a ladder company that we
10 I didn't have. And, you know, it was that kind of discussion.
11 I Q Okay.
12 I A And he reiterated with the Mayor during
13 I that meeting, "You've got a good fire department."
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
MR. NEWMAN: I think that date is very
important, and I would appreciate it if you would
go to Kaye and -- I mean, does Kaye keep a calendar
for your meetings? Somebody has got to have a date
when Mr. Stross comes.
MR. MOORE: Well, Fire Chief Miller may
have it in his files. Like I say, I have gone back
and looked at mine and it is not in my -- now, when
22 I I say calendar, that's on the computer.
23 I BY MR. TREW:
24 Q Let me ask you this: That meeting that
25 I we've been talking about with you, Fire Chief Miller,
50
1 I Mr. Stross, and Mayor Proffitt, I think you should be able to
2 I tell us whether that occurred before your January planning
3 I session in 2006. Did it occur before that January 2006
4 I planning session?
5
6
A
Q
I believe it did.
Okay. Now, if I understand you correctly,
7 I your policy is with this Exhibit Number 2, August 15, 2005
8 I letter, this would go in certainly Mayor Proffitt's box for
9 I him?
10
11
A
Q
Yes.
Would a letter addressed to Mayor Proffitt
12 I and the such, because this seems to be important, changing
13 I the rating to Class 4, would this letter have by policy and
14 I practice been put in the boxes of the other Council persons?
15 A It would be by practice instead of policy
16 I during that time period.
17
18
19
Q
A
Q
But you don't know
Typically, yes, it would have been.
But you cannot tell us whether this first
20 I letter was put in Council persons' boxes?
21 A No. I can tell you I thought it was. But,
22 I no, I can't tell you it was.
23 Q Then when you generated the September 9,
24 I 2005 letter that we've marked as Exhibit Number 3, this is a
25 I letter and you copied that to Chief Bob Miller?
1
2
A
Q
51
Correct.
Do you know whether this letter was put in
3 I the boxes of Council persons?
4
5
6
7
8
A
Q
A
Q
A
I do not know.
But by practice should it have been?
Yes.
But you donlt know?
I don I t know.
9 I Q Okay. And when you generated the August
10 I 17, 2006 letter, Exhibit Number 5, telling Ms. Martin that
11 I we're not -- the April 17, 2006, telling Ms. Martin on behalf
12 I of the City that we're not going to be able to make the
13 I improvements to retain our Class 3 designation, there's a
14 I copy to Bob Miller shown. Do you know whether this letter
15 I was furnished to any of the Council persons?
16 A I do not know. It should have been, but I
17 I do not know.
A
Q18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
It should have been, but you donlt know?
Exactly.
MR. NEWMAN: Who would have been
responsible for doing that?
MR. MOORE: If I had instructed someone it
would have been Kaye, but if I didn't instruct her
it would have been my responsibility.
MR. TREW: Okay.
1
2
3
4
5
52
MR. AYRES: Just physically put them in the
box?
MR. MOORE: Yes.
MR. NEWMAN: To notify Council Members.
MR. MOORE: Because what has happened in
happened in the past prior to all of this was she
might get it and make copies and put it in their
boxes. I might get it and make copies and put it
in their boxes.
6
7
8
9
10
the past it's not happening now. But what has
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
There was no set procedure that, "Kaye, you
will mark everything and put it in their boxes."
Which we have now started, hindsight being real
good, a process where we have a stamp that says,
"Put in your box" on such and such a date and we
keep a file of that now.
In the past, if this letter went in
everyone's box, there would be not necessarily a
notation on it that said we had done that, even
though we did.
MR. NEWMAN: But Kaye would not have
routinely done that unless you said, IIKaye , put
this in all Council Member's boxes"?
MR. MOORE: Correct.
MR. AYRES: Can I ask a question?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
53
MR. TREW: Sure.
MR. AYRES: Does the Fire Chief have a box?
MR. MOORE: Every department has a box, but
not his own fire chief box. It's a fire department
box.
MR. AYRES: Okay. Fire department box?
MR. MOORE: Yes.
MR. AYRES: All right. And you show a copy
to the fire chief, Bob Miller, and that would go in
the fire department box?
MR. MOORE: Yes.
MR. AYRES: Well then, how is anyone to
know to put this in the councils' boxes if you
don't show a copy to the Council?
MR. MOORE: That's why I say, by practice
we typically do that. If I say, "Kaye, put that in
the Councils' boxes," then that's what was done.
Typically you're correct. I mean, if we were going
to for sure make sure it got in the Councils'
boxes, we would have put "C.C. City Council, C.C.
Fire Chief Miller," or C.C. whoever.
MR. AYRES: Well, I mean, to me it's hard
to understand when a decision of some magnitude -
and I understand that hindsight is better, and I
also understand that things may get blown out of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
54
proportion in the aftermath of various things that
have come to light.
But it seems to me that this decision to
forgo any effort to keep the Class 3 designation is
a decision that certainly deserves the immediate
attention of the City Council.
MR. MOORE: And I would not disagree.
MR. AYRES: What?
MR. MOORE: And I would not disagree with
10 your statement.
11 BY MR. TREW:
12 Q Now, in going forward with what we were
13 I talking about, so by the January work session or planning
14 I session of 2006, as far as persons that knew about this fire
15 I classification change, you, Bob Miller, and Mayor Proffitt?
16 A I believe Mayor Proffitt. I cannot
17 I guarantee Mayor Proffitt, but I believe that meeting was held
18 I before that. I'm not going to say for sure.
19 I Q And his notice about this change would have
20 I been because if he received the August 15, 2005 letter, and
21 I because he attended a meeting with Mr. Stross?
22
23
A
Q
Yes.
And now, other than the letter and the
24 I meeting with Mr. Stross, before that planning meeting, did
25 I you discuss personally with the Mayor the fire rating change?
1
2
A
Q
No.
Did you discuss with any other member of
55
3 I City Council the fire rating change?
4
5
A
Q
Not that I remember.
Did you discuss the fire rating change with
6 I anybody other than Chief Miller and Mayor Proffitt in the
7 I sense he was at this meeting with Mr. Stross? Did you
8 I discuss it with anybody else?
9 I A I'm sure Chuck and Jill would have been
10 I involved. But as far as -- you know, like with Jill it would
11 I have been, you know, "We got a great rating on the water
12 I supply."
13 I With Chuck, it would have been, you know, "Why did
14 I we not do as well here in communications as we did?"
15 I Because, in fact, if 11m not mistaken, if you go back to the
16 I 1986 classification and you compare our communications at
17 I that time with our communications on this latest rating, we
18 I did not improve. As a matter of fact, we went back a little
19 bit.
20 One reason -- and thatls the reason I asked
21 I Mr. Stross what happened here, one reason is because we have
22 what is now called one-button transfer on 911 calls. The 911
23 call goes into McMinn County's center. If it's for an
24 I emergency inside the city limits of Athens, they hit a button
25 I and it transfers it up to our dispatchers located across the
56
1 I hall for execution. They then ring the bell for the fire
2 I department and those kind of things. And because of that, we
3 I lost points in communications. So Chuck probably knew a
4 I little bit.
5 Q All right. Kaye Burton, did she know about
6 I the fire rating change?
7 A Other than correspondence that she handled
8 I we didn't discuss it with the exception of -- I do remember
9 I talking about making sure it was on the agenda for the
10 I planning session so that I could answer the letter that I
11 I penned to Ms. Martin and asked for whatever the extension was
12 I or the date was. That was so I could get it on the planning
13 I session for January.
A
Q14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Okay.
And she would have been aware of that.
MR. AYRES: Is this the planning session
for January or the -- what do you call this one?
MR. MOORE: This is a planning session.
MR. AYRES: That was the planning session
for January?
MR. MOORE: Yes.
MR. TREW: Before I move to that, let's see
if there's some more letters we just need to get
in.
MR. AYRES: While he's asking that, most
This is a letter from her, October 13,
2005, requesting that you send by March I, 2006 a
57
planing sessions are here at the City Hall, right?
MR. MOORE: The annual one?
MR. AYRES: Well, I'm coming to that, but
most of them are here?
MR. MOORE: If there's a Planning
our annual City Council planning session, that is
held at the Red Brick House at the Regional Park.
MR. AYRES: Right. But don't you all meet
once a month in some sort of planning session?
MR. MOORE: We have work sessions.
MR. AYRES: Work sessions. Okay.
MR. MOORE: We have work sessions the
Monday prior to the regular scheduled Council
meeting the third Tuesday of each month. I.e., we
had a work session last night for the Council
meeting coming up next Tuesday.
MR. TREW: All right. We've put in so far
the August 15, 2005 letter. The next letter was
September 9, 2005. It looks like the next
correspondence was a letter back from Ms. Martin in
response to your request to extend it to February
I, 2006.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commission meeting, they're all held here. If it's
1
2
list of possible improvements. That's in essence
what this letter is about. Let's mark that as the
58
3 next exhibit.
4 (Exhibit No.7 was filed.)
5 I BY MR. TREW:
6 Q And between that date and March[ do you
7 I feel that's when this meeting with field representative [
8 I Mr. Stross[ occurred? It would seem that would be the time
9 I line.
10 A I would think so. But[ again[ because I
11 I can't find it on my calendar I can't
12 Q All right. Maybe this will help us.
13 I Here's a letter generated March 30[ 2006 from Insurance
14 I Services Office to Mayor Proffitt. And in the body of it[ it
15 I says [ "I have not received any information subsequent to the
16 I meeting between the City Manager [ Fire Chief[ and our field
17 I representative on December 14[ 2005."
18
19
A
Q
Right.
Now[ that leads me to ask[ do you remember
20 I more than one meeting with the field representative [
21 I Mr. Stross[ or just the one in this time frame?
22 A Where the Mayor would have been involved or
23 I just any meeting?
24
25
Q
A
Any meeting.
I probably met with Mr. Stross one other
1 time with probably the Fire Chief as he was leaving. In
59
2 I other words, after he had accumulated all of the information
3 I from his inspections I feel pretty sure that we had a meeting
4 I and we'll call it in an exit interview, if you will, or
5 I whatever, as he was leaving to go back to Ohio to put all of
6 I the report together. I'm pretty sure we had a meeting.
7 Q So that meeting more than likely would have
8 I been before August 15, 2005?
9
10
A
Q
Yes.
And then it seems to indicate that there
11 I was a meeting December 14, 2005 here somewhere?
12 A It would have been in this room. This is
13 I where the meeting was held.
14 Q And this letter, of course, as I mentioned
15 I before, is back to the Mayor, and you know as a fact that
16 I Mayor Proffitt did attend a meeting?
17
18
A
Q
Yes.
And it mayor may not have been this
19 I December 14, 2005 meeting?
A
Q
20
21
22
23
24
25
Right.
Okay.
MR. NEWMAN: Can I ask him a question about
that letter?
MR. TREW: Yes.
MR. NEWMAN: Do you specifically remember
MR. MOORE: No.
MR. MOORE: I don't remember. I'm not
saying I didn't. I don't necessarily remember this
letter. If it's in my stuff, if you will, of what
60
seeing this letter, because you're not a copy to on
that letter?
I had in my file
MR. NEWMAN: Then you have a copy of it,
but you don't know when you got a copy?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 I BY MR. TREW:
11 I Q But the practice from Mr. Ayre's questions
12 I to you were, if a letter comes in to the Mayor, addressed to
13 I the Mayor, at this P.O. Box 849, either you or Kaye open it?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And then you disseminate wherever it's
16 I going to go?
17 A Yes.
and then put it wherever you're going to put it,right?
A
Yes.
Q
If Kaye opened it,would she necessarily by
practice give it to you before she puts
it in the Mayor'S
box? A
She would typically give itto me and I
would give it back to her,
or I would throw it back in the
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q Obviously if you opened it, you read it,
61
1 I Mayor'S box.
2 Q And, again, by practice this letter, it
3 I says it was addressed to the Mayor dated March 30, 2006,
4 I should have been put in his box?
MR. NEWMAN: Which letter is that?
MR. MOORE: That's March 30, 2006.
A Yes.
MR. TREW: Let's mark this as Exhibit
Number 8.
5
6
7
8
9
10 I (Exhibit No. 8 was filed.)
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. NEWMAN: For continuity can I ask a
question about that letter?
MR. TREW: Sure.
MR. NEWMAN: That letter is written ln
March of 2006. In October of 2005 you were written
a letter by Ms. Martin saying, "Thank you for your
letter dated September 9, 2005, acknowledging the
change. "
Then she said, "If any verification of the
community's intent to review within a month, since
you requested the time frame extended, I would
request that you send me by March I, 2006 a list of
possible improvements."
So she said normally thirty days. She's
giving you November, December, January, February,
62
of Athens respectfully requests that we be allowed
to review this document until February." Okay?
MR. MOORE: Right. And the reason for that
was so we could discuss it at the planning session.
MR. NEWMAN: But my question is, back here
March 30. That's six months earlier than that.
She said normally we do thirty days, but we're
going to give you till March 1st. You don't even
give her the respect, in my opinion, of a reply by
her deadline. She has to come thirty days after a
March, five additional months. She writes you
March 30th, actually six months, saying I
received -- I have not received any information
from you.
What was going on? I guess what was going
on and, secondly, in your opinion were you derelict
in not responding? She says normally thirty days,
but because you request it we'll give you six
months. six months later she hadn't heard a word
from you.
MR. MOORE: I'm looking for the letter that
has been mentioned that says -- I'm looking for one
that I wrote.
MR. NEWMAN: You wrote one on October 13 --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'm sorry, you wrote one on September 9. liTheCity
12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
63
five-month extension and say I've not received
anything.
What would you do to somebody, you know,
Mr. Moore, that responded to you in that fashion?
What would you do if you went to Chief Miller, as
your department head, and said, "Okay, Chief, I
know that we normally do this in thirty days, but
I'm going to give you five more months to get this
information to me. You have an answer to me by
March 1st."
And on March 30th you still haven't heard
from him. And it's involving thousands of dollars
and equipment. How would you handle that
situation?
MR. MOORE: I would for sure be upset. I
would discuss with Chief Miller what the problem
was and why he didn't meet his deadline. And
depending on what it was, handle it, you know,
either reprimand him or whatever.
MR. NEWMAN: Do you have an explanation why
you didn't meet her courtesy to you of extending
the deadline by five months?
MR. MOORE: No.
MR. AYRES: Are we through with twenty
minutes? Are we rotating?
MR. NEWMAN: I'm sorry.1
2 I BY MR. TREW:
3 I Q Well, let me continue and then you all
64
4 I interrupt me. I'm just trying to get this in a time line.
5 I This planning session that we talked about in
6 I January, Mr. Ayres asked you and we've talked about it,
7 I I.S.O. is on the list. Do I understand that you just did not
8 I get to it?
9
10
A
Q
Yes.
What was done about discussing this I.S.O.
11 I issue after this planning session in January of 2006?
12 A There was no further discussion about it.
13 I There should have been.
14
15
Q
A
My question is why.
And, again, I'll take responsibility
16 I because it was my responsibility for taking it forward.
17 I Again, I have gone back and racked my brain. I made a
18 I mistake. I made several mistakes. I mean, I should have
19 I taken that to a following work session. Whether that work
20 I session was February or that work session was March, it
After that January planning session,
21
22
should have gone forward to a work session.
Q
It did not.
23 I between that date and what Mr. Newman has been asking you
24 I about, March of 2006, was anything done with respect to
25 I analyzing, studying, or making a decision about this I.S.O.
65
1 I change?
2 A Other than maybe the Chief talking
3 I with M.T.A.S.
4 Q And then as Mr. Newman has pointed out,
5 I they write you a letter and wanted to know what you were
6 I going to do, and then I guess the next thing that happened
7 I was --
8 A Well, they wrote the letter to the Mayor
9 I and then I responded in April.
10 Q And I donlt want to be too repetitive, but
11 I who was involved in the decision to accept this change from
12 I Class 3 to Class 4?
-- about writing this April 17, 2006
No.
~
)Mayor -- AQletter? ~)
19 I 1
16
18
15
17
21 I the other Council persons?
22 A No.
23 Q Did you have any discussions with Bob
24 I Miller?
25 A About writing that letter?
1
2
Q
A
Yes.
No. We had discussions during that time
66
3 I period about what it would take, what we felt it would take,
4 I to get back to a three.
5 Q And maybe this has been asked, but while
6 I I'm on this, this April 17, 2006 letter, Exhibit 5, who was
7 I this letter provided to?
8 A I'm going to have to assume it was provided
9 I only to who it was copied to.
10 Q So you don't know whether this was put in
11 I anybody's box?
The questions I asked you a while ago, if the shoe
were on the other foot and you were the supervisor
and Chief Miller were responding this way -- we're
up to March 30th now, and you inform your
department head by giving a five-month extension,
you haven't responded to me, I want the
information.
The next question is he doesn't say boo to
letter, Mr. Moore.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A
Q
A
No, I do not.
We would just have to ask Council?
(Witness nods head.)
MR. TREW: Okay.
MR. NEWMAN: A question concerning the
I've got to ask the question.
67
understand.
discipline him and whatever
that situation with your subordinate?
additional months. I want it now. And he doesn't
MR. MOORE: Again, some type of discipline.
MR. MOORE: Say it again, so I'm sure I
MR. NEWMAN: Okay. You said that you would
look at it,
whatever, if you had requested something and said
thirty days. He didn't do it. You had to go back
for six weeks after you said I'm giving you five
speak to you for six weeks. What would you do in
And for six weeks he doesn't -- he doesn't speak to
and ask five months later to give it to me. You
know, you haven't provided it to me, give it to me.
you for six weeks. What would you do in that
situation?
you for six weeks. He doesn't communicate with you
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 I BY MR. TREW:
19 Q Mr. Moore, in with the material that you
20 I provided to the committee, there is a collection of documents
21 I and pages with a cover page that says "Report on a Possible
22 I Annexation of Property on Highway 305."
23
24
A
Q
Right.
Now, there are some dates -- you can get to
25 I some dates by looking at some of the materials, but this
68
1 I document does not appear to be dated on its face. I'll let
2 I you look at that.
3
4
5
6
A
Q
A
Q
I would assume that that would be the date.
And you're looking at August --
-- 31st, 2004.
There's a memorandum to Mitch Moore from
7 I Bob Miller dated August 31, 2004, Fire Management Operation
8 I Study, Insurance Study. It says what it is says. But do you
9 I think this report on possible Annexation of Property on
10 Highway 305 was generated sometime around August 31st of
11 2004?
12
13
14
A
Q
A
Yes.
What was the purpose of this report?
To see how the possible annexation of
15 I Mt. Verd or Highway 305 would affect the fire department and
16 I its ability to --
17 Q Let's mark this and then I want to go over
18 I it with you.
19 I (Exhibit No. 9 was filed.)
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. AYRES: Are we going to follow the
twenty-minute rule, because I'm purposefully trying
not to interrupt.
MR. TREW: Well, let's do it this way. Do
you want to go back and -- do you want to go back
and talk about the --
169
MR. AYRES: I just thought we were rotating
2 I twenty minutes and so that's why I haven't tried to
3 I say anything.
4 I BY MR. TREW:
5 Q Okay. I'll finish this and then I'll be
6 I quiet. You've told us what this document is. What was done
7 I with this report on possible annexation around August of
8 I 2004? What was done with this report?
9 A It was given to me by the fire chief. That
10 I was one of his goals.
11 Q All right. And my question is what did you
12 I do with this report?
13
14
A
that we met
Reviewed it and looked at it to make sure
make sure that we didn't have any problems
15 I with the fire department and the annexation. And the fire
16 chief and fire department said from this we're saying we did
17 not.
18 Q Now, you mentioned that maybe something
19 I back here wasn't part of it. You look at it and tell me what
20 I was a part of this report on the possible annexation.
21 A I just saw a fax sheet in here that I
22 I wasn't sure would have been part of it.
23
24
Q
A
Look at every page.
See, that is -- I mean, that could have
25 I been part of the report, but that is the Ray Crouch study of
70
1 I 1997, which you all already have, at least parts of it.
2 I That's all his study.
3 I And then again you've got the same memo that you
4 I had on the front side that said that that's their study.
5 I That's still talking about the annexation.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. NEWMAN: Okay. That's dated what date?
MR. MOORE: March 20, 2002. And that,
again, is a performance goal of the Fire Chief.
And that's the reason the notation is in regard to
my 2001 and 2002 goal. Number two, I submit the
following report. And that probably was not part
of the 2004 report.
MR. NEWMAN: See, I'm trying to figure out
what was attached when you had this. Are you
saying that everything below this was probably not
attached to this?
MR. MOORE: Probably. That's the reason
11m still going through this.
MR. NEWMAN: I'm sorry. The dates jump
back and forth, that's why I'm asking you.
MR. MOORE: Right. And I think what you've
got here is things that I gave Kaye and I said,
"Copy these for the committee," and they just all
got copied together.
Because now you're back at the actual --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
71
which is what you all referred to when you first
got here this morning was the 1986 inspection and
all the scores of it. Now, this looks like it
would go back with the report because of the date
that's associated with it.
MR. NEWMAN: Okay.
MR. MOORE: Because it's talking about the
8 I insurance companies and what happens if you go from
9 I a three to a five or a five to a seven or whatever.
10 I MR. AYRES: Can I -- I guess the only way
11 I I'm going to get in here is just start asking
12 I questions.
13 EXAMINATION
14 BY MR. AYRES:
15 Q And you hit on something that's been
16 I bothering me a long time. When did you become aware that
17 I there was the very distinct possibility that we might go not
18 I from a three to a four, but from a three to a five?
19
20
21
A
Q
A
When did I know that?
Uh-huh.
Until I saw the actual numbers I didn't
22 I know how close we were going to be to a five.
23
24
25
Q
A
Q
Nobody ever discussed with you, Steve -
-- Stross.
Whatever his name. He didn't talk to you
72
1 I that not only were we not going to be able to keep a three,
2 I but we may have a problem even maintaining a four?
3
4
A
Q
He never made that statement to me, no.
Did you ever discuss with them what the
5 I possible downgrading, they call retrogression, might be?
6
7
8
A
Q
A
You mean prior to getting the report?
Yes.
No, we wouldn't have known that. He came
9 I in and he did his inspection and he did his exit interview.
10 I Then he went back to Ohio or wherever he assimilated that
11 information.
12 Then at that time, whenever that came back to us,
13 that's when we would have found out what the numbers were.
14 We would not have known the numbers prior to that time.
15 Q Well, again, we've switched -- and I don't
16 I mean this derogatory, but we've switched these attachments
17 I around. The first letter, the August 15 letter, they advised
18 I you at that time that it was -- if nothing was done, it was
19 I going to be a Class 4; is that right?
20
21
22
23
A
Q
A
Q
Correct.
And --
At no time was a Class 5 mentioned.
But you're now aware that you came awful
24 I close to being a Class 5?
25 A We knew it when we got this document. We
73
1 I knew what the score was. We knew that we were -- you know,
2 I and, again, I don't know where the
3 I Q You're referring to this document as the
4 I August 15 letter?
5 A Whenever we got all of the attachments,
6 I whatever date that would have come with the letter, that's
7 I when we would have known that we were at whatever that number
8 I was and that we were only within a certain percentage of
9 I being a Class 5.
Less than one percent, as I understood theQ10
11 I report.
12 I A You know, I don't have that in front of me.
13 I It was real close. But we knew we could pick up a percentage
14 I by getting our name, which we had already done before this,
15 I getting our fire department's actual name in the white pages.
16 I That was one thing we lost point something points on, which
17 I makes it a stronger number.
18 Q Well, on August the 15th of 2005, when you
19 I got that letter addressed to the Mayor, at that time you knew
20 I if you did nothing it was going to be a retrogression to
21 I Class 4?
22
23
A
Q
Yes, sir.
And as I understood, you were asking for
24 I additional time in your September 9 letter so that you could
25 I discuss this at the annual planning session in January?
1
2
A
Q
74
Correct, and gather additional information.
And so that's when you requested till
3 I February the 1st?
4
5
6 I you --
7
8
A
Q
A
Q
(Witness nods head.)
It's hard for her to pick up an answer when
Yes.
All right. And, in fact, Ms. Martin, is
9 I that her name who works for I.S.O.?
10
11
A
Q
Yes.
She extended it to March the 1st. When you
12 I asked till February 1st, she on her own just said 11m going
13 I to give you till March the 1st?
14
15
A
Q
Yes.
And then I think the letter was written
16 I March 30th when she wrote the Mayor, as Mr. Newman has
17 I pointed out, saying we never heard anything?
18 A She says, "I have not received any
19 I information subsequent to the meeting between the City
20 I Manager, the Fire Chief, and our field representative on
21 I December the 14th."
22 Q Let me ask you this: Between August the
23 I 15th, when you got the August 15th letter is what I'm
24 I referring to, and the March 1st deadline that she requested
25 I you respond by, what priority did this fire rating receive in
75
1 I your office?
2 I mean, I know you have a lot of things on your
3 I table, but I'm trying to understand why more attention wasn't
4 I given to this.
5 A We were gathering information and gathering
6 I information for the planning meeting that took place in
7 I January as to what costs would be to add a ladder company,
8 I house a new piece of equipment, so that we could discuss that
9 I with Council.
all understand that it was Item Number 20 on the agenda and
you didn't get to that item?A
(Witness nods head.)
Q
Now,at that meeting on December the 14th,
was
the Mayor at that meeting?
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Q
A
And that would have been in January and we
From the way this reads, no. But I
17 I honestly can't tell you when the Mayor -- you know, what the
18 I date was that the Mayor was at a meeting.
19 I The way this reads, subsequent to the meeting
20 I between the City Manager, Fire Chief, and our field
21 I representative on December 14th, I cannot say that the Mayor
22 I was at the meeting.
23
24
25 I Stross.
Q
A
Is that steve
The Mayor was at a meeting. That was Steve
1
2
3
4
Q
A
Q
A
This meeting was in your office?
In this room.
In this room here?
Uh-huh. Because he had all of the
76
5 I information and he spread everything out on these tables.
6
7 I Stross?
8
Q
A
Well, how often did you meet with Steve
I met with Steve either two or three times
9 I during this process.
10
11
12
13
Q
A
Q
A
He is employed by I.S.O.?
Yes.
Do you know where he lives?
Somewhere in Ohio. My understanding of why
14 I he was even here was because they were shorthanded at I.S.O.
15 I and he typically wouldn't have corne to this part of
16 Tennessee. And also I believe that he was -- he was the
17 inspector, I'm pretty sure, at Niota. 11m not sure about
18 I Englewood.
19 Q Just out of curiosity, did he do other
20 I cities in McMinn County during this May time that he was
21 I here?
22 A 11m pretty sure he did Niota. I canlt
23 I speak to anything else, but 11m pretty sure he did Niota.
24 I Q It seems to me that it's very important to
25 I know these dates. You had between the time that you were
77
1 I notified in the first letter, August 15, 2005 and your
2 I January planning, at least five City Council meetings and I
3 assume that would be five work sessions.
4 Is there any reason why during that time frame you
5 I didn't either put it on the agenda of a work session or
6 I that --
7 A Again, during that time period I thought
8 I the copy of the letter had been placed in all of the
9 I Council's box.
10
11
12
13
MR. TREW: A copy of which letter?
MR. MOORE: The August 15th and maybe even
one other. But for sure the August 15th I thought
had been put in there. Since no Council Member
14 I recalls it, then undoubtedly I was mistaken and it
15 I was not put in there.
16 I But as far as why it wasn't discussed at a
17 I work session, that was the reason because we were
18 I going to discuss it at the planning session with as
19 I good of numbers that we could get and an estimate
20 of what it would cost.
21 BY MR. AYRES:
22 Q When did you -- or take me through, because
23 I it's hard to develop a time line here. But is there some way
24 I you can get to us the date that actions were taken by the
25 I Planning Commission to recommend an annexation? And how does
78
1 I that come to Council, at that time was Mr. Price still alive?
2 I Was he the chairman of the Planning Commission?
3
4
5 I just --
6
A
Q
A
I believe that would be correct.
Does he come before the Councilor does he
No. The minutes are sent forward on their
7 I recommendation for whatever it might be. That typically goes
8 I to a work session and then to a Council meeting.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. NEWMAN: Can I interject?
MR. AYRES: Sure.
MR. NEWMAN: Because I think this is very
pertinent to that issue. These documents that
you've provided a report on, the possible
annexation, behind the study, the '87 study that
Mr. Crouch did, there's an insurance study on fire
rating versus home value and it specifically talks
about Mt. Verd and if that comes in to play how
this is from Chief Miller -- no, it's to Robert
Miller, Fire Chief, from Charles Dennis. And you
had a copy of this. Do you know when you got a
copy of this? It was written on August 7th of --
MR. MOORE: It would have been around that
time period.
MR. NEWMAN: So in August of 2004 you were
being fed information that with the Mt. Verd annex
12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
79
that I do not perceive the City of Athens to drop
their I.S.O. fire rating lower than a Class 5.
That with that information, without doing
improvements, there was a possibility, according to
Chief Miller's study, that we could drop as low as
a Class 5?
MR. MOORE: No, sir. What I asked Chief
Miller was, I said, "What would happen if we went
from there a three to a five?"
MR. NEWMAN: Okay. But
MR. MOORE: So that
MR. NEWMAN: But you had this statement in
August of 2004 from Chief Miller or at least to
Chief Miller. You had this document that states,
"I do not foresee the city of Athens to drop their
1.S.0. fire rating lower than a Class 5."
And that's as a result of Chief Miller
requesting his lieutenant and someone else to get
quotes, to look at the fire hydrants, to look at
the water supply. And that report back to Chief
Miller in August of 2004 said, "I don't foresee it
going below a five." Is that accurate? Is that
what this --
MR. MOORE: Can I
MR. NEWMAN: This is what I'm talking
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
80
about, insurance study, the last statement there.
MR. MOORE: No, that statement is there.
MR. NEWMAN: And my question is
MR. MOORE: But I donlt know in what
context that statement is there.
MR. NEWMAN: Okay. Well, following that
memorandum is the information dealing with going to
five different insurance companies showing that
and I just happen to know this because Rick Lay
told me recently, that it has different values of
homes, eighty, a hundred, a hundred and fifty, two
thousand. The average value of a home in Athens,
Tennessee is ninety thousand dollars.
So you take the eighty thousand dollar and
you go to five different insurance companies and
the average increase, if you went from a three to a
five, would be three point seven percent. Do you
recall these documents? Do you recall reviewing
those documents?
MR. MOORE: Yes, sir. And I know in what
context they were prepared.
MR. NEWMAN: Okay.
MR. MOORE: And that was, I asked Chief
Miller, I said, "What if we went from a three to a
five, what would it mean?"
1
2
81
MR. NEWMAN: Okay.
MR. MOORE: Not if we do the annexation and
3 I that is going to cause us to go to a five.
4 I BY MR. AYRES:
5 Q Let me go back to what we were talking
6 I about with Chief Miller. I have been to very, very few City
7 I Council meetings, but as I recall they ask for reports. Do
8 I they not -- monthly from the department heads?
9 I A The finance, police, and fire departments
10 I give a monthly report.
11
12
13
Q
A
Q
That would be Chief Miller?
Yes.
Did you ever have any discussions with
14 I Chief Miller about him making a report as part of his monthly
15 I report to the Council of him reporting anything about the
16 I I.S.O. ratings?
A
A
Q
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I did not instruct him to do that, no.
Well, did you tell him not to?
No, I did not tell him not to.
MR. NEWMAN: Why did you request in August
of 2004 for Chief Miller to determine the I.S.O.
ratings?
MR. MOORE: Let's don't get confused. I
did not ask him to look at I.S.O. ratings. I asked
him to look at if we annexed and the I.S.O. rating
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
82
went from a three to a five what would it mean.
Now, he would not have the formulas and
everything that's involved to do an I.S.O.
evaluation, so he could not have done an I.S.O.
type study.
MR. NEWMAN: Why were you concerned -- why
didn't you ask him if we -- why were you asking
that question? Did you suspect that that might
happen?
MR. MOORE: No. I asked that question in
case it did happen. I wanted an answer. I wanted
12 I to know if we annexed and that by that annexation
13 our I.S.O. rating went to a five, what would that
14 mean.
15 I BY MR. AYRES:
16 Q All right. Now, when you passed your
17 I annexation ordinance, you already knew that it had gone to a
18 I four?
19
20
A
Q
Yes, sir.
In the discussions about the -- and I
21 I assume this was at the second reading of the ordinance. You
22 I help me if I'm right or wrong. I think you said this was -
23 I was this in the Summer of '06?
24
25
A
Q
Yes.
Did you give any information to the Council
83
1 I that the rating had been changed from three to four?
2
3
A
Q
No.
Would that not have been relevant in the
4 I discussion about annexation?
5 A It would have nothing to do with the
6 I discussion of annexation. The I.S.O. rating was based on the
7 I inspection that was conducted when Mr. Stross was here.
8 I The only time that an annexation would come into
9 I play is when they come back the next time to do an I.S.O.
10 I rating.
11 Q You say it has nothing to do with
12 I annexation, but aren't there two sides to the annexation;
13 those who want the annexation to occur and those who
14 supposedly live in the area to be annexed who do not want to
15 I be annexed?
16
17
18
19
A
Q
A
Q
That's a fair statement.
And that's generally the
That's a fair statement.
-- sides that are involved in an annexation
20 I dispute. Well, isn't it relevant to those who are opposing
21 annexation to know that the insurance rates for all of the
22 City of Athens are going to go up? Isn't that a relevant
23 I factor for the people who are going to be annexed to know?
24 A For those who are annexed, if they were
25 I receiving not the rates attributed to the City of Athens, if
84
1 I they were receiving an I.S.O. rating from where they're
2 I located, then they would have had a reduction in their
3 I premium regardless, because if they're in a county area
4 I they're probably a Class 9.
5 I If they carne into the City of Athens, even with the
6 I increase they would have been a Class 4. So they would have
7 I received a reduction in their premium unless they were
8 I already enjoying the classification for the City of Athens
9 I simply because they were located adjacent to our city limits,
10 I and some insurance companies rate by zip code.
11 Q Well, they were adjacent to, but did not
12 I receive and are not receiving and will not receive, the
13 I benefits of fire protection, to wit, fire hydrants and things
14 like that. Is that a fair statement?
15 A No.
16 Q When are they projected to have those
17 I benefits?
18 A If the annexation takes effect, according
19 I to the plan of services, they will have all required fire
20 I hydrants within five years.
21 Q I think my question was a valid question
22 I then. So for five years they will be sort of second class
23 I citizens without the fire hydrant protection?
24 I A They would not enjoy the immediate fire
25 I hydrant protection. They would enjoy our fire department and
85
1 lour equipment.
2 I Q I understand.
3 I A And our mutual aid with the county fire
4 I department. And because their address would be in the City
5 I of Athens, if it were to take effect, if they were a Class 9,
6 they would then if they notified their insurance company,
7 I they would then go to whatever class the City was.
8 Q The meeting at which someone stood up, as
9 I Mr. Trew characterized it, and said there's been a change in
10 I the fire rating or something, I assume that was after the
11 I annexation second reading?
12 I A I honestly donlt know if it was after the
13 second reading. I think it probably was, but I donlt know.
14 EXAMINATION
15 BY MR. NEWMAN:
16 Q Now, there are two documents here, one
17 I dated March 2nd of 2002, it's a memorandum from Mitch Moore
18 I to Bob Miller, the Fire Chief, and itls in regard to, I
19 I guess, something that he had given to you and you submitted a
20 I report, basically saying, as I read this, and I'll give it to
21 I you, but basically reading as I say, "That by annexing
22 I Mt. Verd, the area when annexed will pull the I.S.O. mileage
23 I response for the fire department well over the one point five
24 I miles from engine company. It would be two point five miles
25 I the way I.S.O. calculates on the map. It would also extend
86
1 lour two point five miles for our truck company. This would
2 I help justify a third fire station in that area. This is when
3 I a combination pump or ladder truck would help."
4 80 I assume, correct me if I'm wrong, that he's
5 I saying if we annex this, to maintain our Class 3 rating,
6 I we're going to have to put a new engine company out there as
7 I well as some kind of truck pump or ladder situation that can
8 I respond because they're going beyond the limits of our
9 I community; is that correct?
10 A Reading from the paragraph that you read,
11 I "This area when annexed will pull the 1.8.0. mileage response
12 I for the fire department well over one point five miles from
13 I an engine company. II And that is a measurement that is
14 I conducted by 1.8.0. when they come in and evaluate your
15 I community.
16 I The goal for any community is to have seventy
17 I percent of their community within the two and a half mile
18 I area. This would be -- what he's saying -- and I don't want
19 I to put words in his mouth, but to me what he's saying is if
20 I we do this we need to think about another station or moving a
21 I station so that we have better coverage for the entire city.
22 Q Right. And an obvious assumption from that
23 I is, if you don't build a station out there your I.S.O. rating
24 I is going to be affected?
25 A Not unless there is an I.S.O. inspection
87
1 I again.
2 Q I understand that. But if there was an
3 I inspection, then logically if you didn't put an engine
4 I company and hook and ladder truck or whatever they're saying,
5 I that your own fire chief is saying, that your I.S.O. rating
6 I could be affected negatively?
7
8
A
Q
Could be, but it could be anywhere.
Okay. Again, this is attached to the 2004
9 I study. And, again, I'm just -- you can look at the
10 I highlights. This says, "To achieve a Class 3 rating the City
11 I received seventy-two point seven seven points. This is two
12 I point seven seven points over the minimum for Class 3."
13 I Then it says, "To receive full credit for the
14 I engine company, ninety percent of all structures must be
15 I located within the coverage area." You're saying that's not
16 I going to happen with Mt. Verd.
17 I "Ninety-five percent of the area that we will have
18 I will be outside the one point five mile range for our ladder
19 I company. When 1.S.O. does a study" -- and I realize they
20 I would have to do a study -- "the City would lose more points
21 I for the Highland Community because the subdivision is located
22 I on Lee Highway which was built after the '86 rating."
23 I So, again, looking at that, both in 2002 and 2004,
24 I before I.S.O. even came down here, is it not fair that you
25 I were really concerned with the Mt. Verd annex that our I.S.O.
88
1 I rating was going to be affected if we didn't do something to
2 I build up our fire department?
3 A And we have been looking at building up the
4 I fire department and looking at different locations for that.
5
6
Q
A
Exactly. But it hasn't happened?
But that does not necessarily mean that the
7 I new station would be built toward 305.
8 Q Okay. But, again, my question to you is,
9 I is in 2002 and 2004, you and at least Chief Miller were well
10 aware that if you or were concerned enough that you had
11 I studies made that with the Mt. Verd annex the 1.8.0. rating
12 I was going to be affected if you didn't present --
13
14
15
A
Q
A
Could be.
If there was an inspection?
It could be affected, and we didn't know
16 I that. That's the only reason I'm saying "could be".
17 Q I know it could be, but your Fire Chief was
18 I saying it would be with his knowledge of 1.8.0. ratings,
19 I correct?
20
21
A That's what he put in writing.
MR. NEWMAN: Okay.
22 EXAMINATION
23 BY MR. AYRES:
24 Q Let me ask you, when you say that this note
25 I here on Exhibit 2, "We do not need a third station," you say
89
1 I that is Steve
2
3
4
A
Q
A
Stross.
-- Stross's statement?
That's what he said to me when we were
5 I having one of the exit interviews or interview.
6 Q And that was after that letter there dated
7 I August the 15th?
8
9
A
Q
Yes.
Did you ask him why the very first reason
10 I given for the retrogression by Ms. Martin in her letter of
11 I August 15 is that you need to go from two stations to three?
12
13
A
Q
That's not what that says.
Two engine companies in service when three
14 I are needed?
15 A That doesn't mean stations. That's actual
16 I equipment. That's a truck, if you will.
17 I Q So you're anticipating then that they
18 I could--
19 A What we were looking at, after having the
20 I discussion with Mr. Stross, could we add a truck without
21 I adding a station and still get the coverage that would give
22 I us a three. If we add the truck, we've got to add the
23 I people.
24 I But I asked do we need to have an additional
25 I station. His response was no. But we probably would have to
90
1 I have a station because I don't have the room to house this
2 I extra piece of equipment. But what he was saying -- and
3 I that's the reason I made the note.
4 What he was saying, that's not necessary. You need
5 I the engine. You know, he wasn I t saying buy an engine and
6 I build a building. You get the engine, it's up to you to
7 I figure out where you're going to put it.
8 Q You were trying to see if you could
9 I increase mobility without increasing your physical plant, so
10 I to speak?
11 A That's what this is about. I mean, the
12 I first thing, that two engine companies in service, where
13 I three are needed. That's what that is about, is another
14 I piece of equipment that's manned.
15 Q What do these additional fire engines, what
16 I do they cost?
17 I A It depends on what kind of engine you're
18 I talking about. Anywhere from three hundred plus thousand
19 dollars to a million one or two.
20 Quints that we're looking at right now are anywhere
21 I from four hundred and fifty thousand to six hundred thousand
22 I to maybe seven hundred thousand on a quint. And what a quint
23 I is -- I'm throwing out things.
24 What a quint is is what we have now, with the
25 I exception of one piece of equipment, are pumpers. And on the
91
1 I pumper you've got all the equipment and everything that you
2 I can actually pump seven hundred and fifty gallons of water or
3 I twelve hundred gallons of water or whatever off of your truck
4 I before you ever hook up to a hydrant.
5 I With a quint it is a combination truck that carries
6 ladders and pumps sufficient to make it look at it as moose
7 now.
8
9
Q
A
As what?
Moose, our big aerial platform truck. So a
10 I quint is a two-in-one combination vehicle that gets you more
11 I points according to the formula that is outlaid by I.S.O.
12 I So if we were to buy -- where it says two engine
13 I companies, if we would buy a quint, we would get more credit
14 I than if we just bought another pumper. I probably confused
15 I you, but
16 I (A break was taken.)
17 I EXAMINATION
18 I BY MR. TREW:
19 Q Mr. Moore, I want to go over two exhibits
20 I and then I think I'm probably done. Attached to the back of
21 I Exhibit Number 1, which is the planning session meeting in
22 I January of 2006, there's some handwritten notes. Can you
23 tell us what that is?
24 A That's my scribbling to look at my
25 I estimated cost for a new station, what it would cost to man
92
1 I it, and then other incidental costs. And then down here is
2 I looking at a tax rate now for homes that would be located in
3 I Athens.
4
5
Q
A
Tax rate for what?
For a structure. If you have a hundred
6 I thousand dollar home and your assessed value is a hundred
7 I thousand, twenty-five percent of that divided by a hundred
8 I times your tax rate, and that's how much your property tax
9 I rate -- or your property tax is for that year on a hundred
10 I thousand dollar home.
11 Q Okay. Now, the first part of your notes,
12 I that seems to be related to the I.S.O. issue?
13 A It's related to what would happen if we had
14 I to build a new station.
15 Q Well, did you generate this information
16 I because of that I.S.O. report, thinking you were going to get
17 I that at this planning session?
18
19
20
A
Q
A
This is after the planning session.
Okay.
This is after the planning session. Again,
21 I if this got copied with this, it shouldn't have, because they
22 I do not relate to one another.
23 Q I'm going to take it apart. Exhibit Number
24 I 1 is just the Council session topics. So when did you
25 I generate what's now going to be marked as Exhibit Number 10?
1 A This was done sometime after all of the
93
2 I I.S.O. controversy got started. Again, you asked for any
3 I notes that I might have in my file, and that's one thing that
4 I I had in the file.
5 Q So you generated this after this I.S.O.
6 I issue became an issue?
7 I A What I was looking at is, this is our
8 I existing tax rate. That's what it would cost you, as a
9 I property owner, if you had that value home today. If we had
10 I to have a tax increase, that's what that would go to, from
11 I there to there.
12 Q A tax increase to fund the improvements to
13 I the fire department?
14
15
16 I document?
17
A
Q
A
Right.
What else is on here, this three-page
That's pretty much -- this part is pretty
18 I much the same thing as this. This section done here, that
19 I thirty-one thousand three hundred and ninety-five dollars is
20 I what a penny generates. Inside this past budget year, that's
21 I what a penny was worth on your tax rate. For every penny
22 I that's generated, thirty-one thousand three hundred and
23 I ninety-five dollars.
24 I So to meet these numbers -- if that's the number,
25 I it would be a tax increase to fund the initial outlay and
94
1 I then this is recurring costs. It would cost thirteen cents
2 I each year thereafter just for the recurring costs. And then
3 I I've got this number with three percent inflation factor.
4
5
Q
A
When did you generate that document?
Again, all of these were pretty much around
6 I the same time.
7
8
9
10
Q
A
Q
A
When?
A couple of months ago.
And then the back page, what is that?
The back page, property tax implications
11 I for a new fire station, associated costs would be the same.
12
13
14
Q
A
Q
Did you ever disseminate
This is all mine.
Let me ask the question. Did you ever
15 I disseminate this information to City Council?
16
17
18
A
Q
A
In that form, no.
In any form?
I told them at a work session that a new
19 I fire station would be about one point six million dollars.
20 I But, again, that was after I had done these.
21 MR. TREW: Okay. Mark this as Exhibit
22 Number 10.
23 (Exhibit No. 10 was filed.)
24 Q Let's go back to Exhibit Number 9. Exhibit
25 I number 9 has already been marked and it's got a cover page,
95
1 I "Report on Possible Annexation Property on Highway 305." I
2 I want you to look -- behind it there is a table of contents
3 I and there are Roman numeral one through Roman numeral
4 I thirteen.
5
6
A
Q
Uh-huh.
And I've done this and you can do it if you
7 I want to, but I'm going to represent to you that everyone of
8 I these Roman numeral bullets is in this packet.
9
10
A
Q
Okay.
And we've already pointed out through
11 I Mr. Newman and you were looking at it earlier, that this
12 I packet has documents that were generated at different times?
13
14
A
Q
Right.
Some of which I think were around August
15 I 31, 2004. And then we've got the fire protection study by
16 I Mr. Crouch that was in 1997. Here's a memorandum, March 20,
17 I 2002. Something from November 6, 2002.
18 I So it looks like all of these -- August 16, 2004.
19 I It looks like all of these materials were together and
20 I predate the date of August 31, 2004 to me.
21 I I'm not asking you to verify that at this time, but
22 I what I want to ask you is assuming all of those documents
23 I were together in that form, based on that table of contents,
24 I what did you do with this report?
25 A Well, did you not mention a date of --
96
1 I maybe you did and maybe I misunderstood what you said. This
2 I was a document, again, that was given to me by the Fire Chief
3 I as part of his evaluation.
exhibit?
4
5
6
7 Q
MR. AYRES: You're referring to the entire
MR. MOORE: I believe Chris is correct.
There's a table of contents that lists
8 I everyone of them.
9 A I believe Chris is correct. Because I
10 I thought there was a date after the 2004, but I don't see it.
11 Q There's a table of contents. So was
12 I this -- so this report was done related to the annexation?
13
14
A
Q
Yes.
You asked Chief Miller to do it and that's
15 I what he provided to you?
16
17
A
Q
Yes.
And it's got all kinds of representations
18 I in there or statements about the I.S.O. and so forth. Did
19 I you give that report to City Council?
20
21
22 I Council?
23
24
25
A
Q
A
Q
No.
That report was never given to City
No.
Well, that answers that.
EXAMINATION
97
1 I BY MR. AYRES:
2 Q Let me ask you a question. And 11m going
3 I from memory because I never dreamed that you and I would be
4 I sitting here having this discussion.
5 I As I recall there were reports in the newspaper or
6 I something about that there was one letter that came out of
7 I all these letters, I assume it's one of these letters here in
8 I front of us that's been marked an exhibit, and it was the
9 I first one that was produced.
10 Which letter was that? And then it came out that
11 I Ms. Alvey said, "There's a lot more correspondence." But
12 I what was the first letter that came to the attention of the
13 I Council?
14 A That would have been what Ms. Hutson
15 I requested. Yeah, this, Exhibit 4. And then subsequent to
16 I that is when Ms. Alvey said, "They mention attachments. I
17 I don't see any attachments. will you get me the attachments?1I
18 I Which I did and gave it to all of them. And then she came to
19 I the next Council meeting and says, III have found all of
20 I thesell --
21
22
Q
A
Ms. Alvey or Hutson?
Ms. Alvey. "I have contacted I.S.O. and I
23 found more of these documents. And we're missing twenty-one
24 or twenty-two pages. II
25 I Well, of that twenty-one or twenty-two pages that
98
1 I we're missing included the fifteen or so that she had
2 I requested of me at the work session. So it was not
3 I twenty-two that was not in there. It was some other letters
4 I that were not in there.
5 I I should have given her the full file, even though
6 I she asked for the attachments. I have gave her the
7 I attachments. At the same time she requested this from
8 I I.S.O., she could have come to see me, to my office and made
9 I the same request and got the same information because it was
10 I in the file. I mean, there was nothing that wasn't in the
11 file.
12 EXAMINATION
13 BY MR. TREW:
14 Q While Mr. Ayres is thinking, because I
15 I think this report is important. Why was this report not
16 I given to City Council?
17 A Because it was an evaluation that I asked
18 I for from the Fire Chief to me as one of his goals to make
19 I sure that we were looking at everything we needed to look at
20 I prior to any annexation taking place at Mt. Verd.
21 I And, you know, some will ask, "Well, how long have
22 I you all been looking at it?" Well, this tells us from at
23 I least 2004, but I really think it was prior to that.
24
25
MR. NEWMAN: 2002?
MR. MOORE: Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
99
I think it was even prior to that. But the reason
that this was given to me is because I said to
Chief Miller, "As one of your goals, I want you to
go out and assess 305 and look at it as to whether
or not we meet or can meet the requirements of
I.S.O. "
MR. AYRES: Why would you not want to share
that with the Council? Because, Mr. Moore, what
bothers me more than anything with what I'm hearing
today is there is something that says to me, we
don't have an open sharing policy with Council.
MR. MOORE: That is absolutely untrue.
MR. AYRES: Let me finish. I'm thinking if
I'm in your position, I would rather just give them
everything and then let them pick and choose what
they think is important so that they can't corne
back and ask the question that I'm asking, that
Mr. Trew is asking, why didn't you give this
document right here, Exhibit 9, to the Council.
11m thinking if I'm in your position -- and
I know this isn't a question and I don't mean to
lecture, but if I'm in your position, I'm thinking
five minds or six minds are better than one.
MR. MOORE: We had a study that was done by
the State Planning Office that looked at all of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
100
this, that had looked at fire protection, along
with police protection, along with recreation,
along with water supply, along with everything else
that's associated with Planning Services, and that
type of information was included in that study.
MR. TREW: Does that study contain the
I.S.O. references that are in this Exhibit Number
9?
MR. MOORE: Probably not. Probably not.
MR. TREW: Because, I mean, that's why
we're here as related I.S.O., not really
annexation. But this Exhibit Number 9, if this had
been given to Council, it clearly indicates that if
anybody ever does a study, our ratings will go from
a Class 3 potentially to a Class 5. That's why
we're asking why this was -- if this was given to
Council
MR. MOORE: And, again, I think you all are
taking it a little bit of context when you say that
it would go from a three to a five.
MR. TREW: I agree with you. I'm sorry
about that. But it indicates at least in one of
the -- the 1997 report by Mr. Crouch, he says
you're not going to retain your Class 3 rating.
MR. MOORE: Correct.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
101
MR. TREW: It says that. So if this -
MR. MOORE: And Council had discussed not
being a Class 3 according to that study several
years ago.
MR. AYRES: Let me ask you this question.
Was there ever any discussion on the record, off
the record, with any member of Councilor with
anyone else or words to the effect, "Let's proceed
with the annexation and hopefully I.S.O. doesn't
come and raise us until it's all done"? Any sort
of discussion like that?
MR. MOORE: No, not to my knowledge.
MR. TREW: Are you telling us that this is
within the body of Exhibit Number 9? Because I
think that's what we were asked to do is what did
City Council know.
I mean, some members of City Council are
questioning what you did or did not do. I want to
know if City Council already knew it to start with.
This February 27, 1997 report, was that
disseminated to City Council?
MR. MOORE: Yes, it's my understanding. I
wasn1t here. It's my understanding it was.
MR. TREW: And we can look back at the
minutes to see if it was or not. Because this
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
102
document says you're not going to keep your Class 3
rating.
MR. MOORE: My understanding that
particular meeting was held at Springbrook where
the presentation was given by Mr. Crouch.
MR. NEWMAN: 1997?
MR. MOORE: I was not present.
MR. AYRES: Well, has there been
discussions during your tenure with the Councilor
members of the Council that back in 1997 the
Council was informed that we were not going to
keep --
MR. MOORE: That has been talked about.
That study has been talked about previously, yes.
I can't tell you which Council. I can't tell you
that Dick Pelley or Shannon Alvey was on the
Council. I can't tell you who was or who wasn't.
If it was Margaret Mahery that was the Mayor or
whatever, but that has been discussed. It has been
discussed in the sense that when it was brought up
that the City is a Class 3, it's even been said,
yes, but you know Ray Crouch said if we were to be
inspected we would not be a Class 3.
MR. NEWMAN: Has it been discussed since
you've been City Manager?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
103
MR. MOORE: Yes sir.
MR. AYRES: Let me ask you about Exhibit
10. And I was trying to listen and read it upside
down. Did you do or does this in any way purport
to figure what it's going to cost the taxpayers of
Athens by a lower classification going from three
to four and doing nothing versus doing what it
what we would have to do to retain a Class 3
classification, the cost of that?
MR. MOORE: That's what these numbers are
about, is trying to estimate a cost to meet the
requirements, and that would be to keep a Class 3.
That's what those numbers are.
MR. AYRES: Well, what did you come to the
conclusion in terms of what would be the cost to
the taxpayers by doing nothing versus complying
with the I.S.O. requirements?
MR. MOORE: Ask that again.
MR. AYRES: In other words, what would be
the cost -- did you do anything to estimate the
additional cost to a taxpayer with higher insurance
and doing nothing versus additional cost to the
taxpayer in the forms of taxes they would have to
pay by meeting the requirements?
MR. MOORE: That was the attempt at what
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
104
all of this is about, was that attempt.
MR. NEWMAN: But that was post I.S.O.
issue?
MR. MOORE: Yes, sir.
MR. AYRES: My question is, in other words,
that was not done, that study that you're looking
there at, Exhibit 10, at the time that you wrote
the letter saying -- April 17, 2006 letter saying
that the City could not meet their requirements?
In other words, this report right here was after
MR. MOORE: This is not a report.
MR. AYRES: Excuse me, this document.
MR. MOORE: This is my handwritten notes
that I was doing. And, yes, in fact, those kind of
things have been done. I don't have any notes on
it, but we've always known about what a fire
station is going to cost, and we've always known
what nine additional firemen would cost, and we've
pretty much always known how much a new fire engine
or engines would cost.
MR. AYRES: Well, my question is, Exhibit
10, was that prepared before or after your letter
of April 17, 2006 --
MR. MOORE: It was after.
MR. AYRES: -- to I.S.O.?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
105
MR. MOORE: It was after that letter, but
this has been done within the last couple of
months.
MR. AYRES: That was generated as a result
of the controversy?
MR. MOORE: It was generated when they
started asking about what would it cost, so I
wanted to have actual numbers on a piece of paper.
But we've been talking about the cost of a station
for four or five years.
MR. AYRES: Well, I guess my question is
this, why didn't you do something like this on
Exhibit 10, a cost analysis, so to speak, before
you wrote the letter of April 17?
MR. MOORE: I did a cost analysis. I do
not have anything in writing that says I did that,
but I knew what those numbers were. I did not go
into detail to say what would be the tax increase
on those kind of things.
MR. NEWMAN: But you did not do an analysis
that compared what was -- before you realized that
the rating had gone down, you didn't sit down a few
years ago and say, "Wow, you know, if we build a
new station, it's going to cost the taxpayers a
million and a half dollars. If we don't, it's
106
going to cost the taxpayer three million dollars
because of the rate"? You didn't do any analysis
like that?
MR. MOORE: If you will go back to this
document.
annexation of Mt. Verd Road is going to affect us
from the standpoint of our insurance requirements
and/or our requirement of getting new fire stations
and equipment.
It doesn't have anything to do with the
MR. NEWMAN: Right.
MR. MOORE: That's what that was all about.
MR. TREW: That's Exhibit Number 9.
MR. MOORE: Was seeing how much an
insurance rate would go up if you went from a three
to a five.
MR. NEWMAN: But that's really taking
scripture out of context for a biblical story.
Because if you read this, it says, "Mt. Verd
Interchange Report, Mt. Verd, 1.8.0., 1.8.0.,
insurance, insurance, understanding and improving
1.8.0., map structures of the annexation."
I'm sorry, you know, this was an 1.8.0.
study, it appears to me, and you're going to have
12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to convince me otherwise, as to what how the
annex.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
107
rest of the city. It has to do with the Mt. Verd
It's got maps on there. It doesn't --
MR. MOORE: Right. I wouldn't argue that.
MR. NEWMAN: I have a copy of the minutes
here from the October 17th meeting, and in that it
says, "Mayor Proffitt opened the meeting.
Ms. Sheree Hutson requested" -- it says,
"Acknowledged a recent newspaper article about
possible changes in the City of Athens I.S.O.
rating as it relates to the Athens Fire Department.
Question when and then Mayor asked Chief Miller to
explain that."
Was this the first time that there was a
request about information?
MR. MOORE: I believe that would be
correct.
MR. NEWMAN: Because I think we said August
a while ago. This would show that it was October
17th, unless you had done something before this.
MR. MOORE: If that's our official minutes,
I believe that would be correct, because I only
remember saying it one time.
MR. AYRES: So then what you're saying is
that when she came to the office the next day, that
would have been October the 18th?
12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
108
MR. MOORE: I don't know that. Because I
wasn't here, so I don't know when she came. I
don't know if it was the next day or --
MR. NEWMAN: But it was after October the
17th?
MR. MOORE: Going from that, it would have
been after that date.
MR. AYRES: And that October 17th that
Chris is looking at, that is the annexation second
reading?
MR. MOORE: No, I don't think so. I was a
little quick, but I don't believe that to be
correct.
MR. NEWMAN: I'm going to ask just a
professional opinion from your experience, do you
believe that had this information in the I.S.O.
surveys and inspections that were going on, do you
believe
MR. MOORE: No, they were not going on at
that time.
MR. NEWMAN: I understand that. This was
in existence at the time they were going on. We
have two documents. This that deals with I.S.O.
We actually have an inspection that's going on from
2005, May of 2005 through whenever.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
109
Had the information from this document and
that I.S.O. analysis been revealed to the City
Council, in your professional opinion would that
have been a significant issue for them to deal with
on the annexation of Mt. Verd Road?
MR. MOORE: Knowing that both had already
been done?
MR. NEWMAN: The existence of what the
information is in this.
MR. MOORE: Knowing that I.S.O. had already
been in and made their decision?
MR. NEWMAN: I'm just saying there's two
pieces of information that you had at your grasp as
of whatever date, December of 2005, when I.S.O.
made the determination
MR. MOORE: It was earlier.
MR. NEWMAN: Two volumes of information
that you had at your disposal. This report, which
goes up through about 2004 back to '97 dealing with
I.S.O. issues and Mt. Verd issues.
And then you had a new document of
information that dealt with I.S.O. information
excluding Mt. Verd Road, that obviously affected
the City negatively. And with more land -- I mean,
it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
110
it's going to affect it more in some way.
My question is, with both of those volumes
of documents, this document and all of this stuff
that we've got the letters and the studies and our
rating going down and whatever, and I had given
this to Council Member Perkinson, the Mayor, all
five of them, do you think that would have impacted
their decision on the Mt. Verd annex?
MR. MOORE: It would have generated a
discussion. I don't know that it would have had an
impact one way or another.
MR. NEWMAN: Thank you.
MR. TREW: Can we take a break?
MR. NEWMAN: A couple of these things. One
is putting the fire department in the White Pages
which would raise us three tenths of a point? Have
we done that?
MR. MOORE: Absolutely.
MR. NEWMAN: And how about a generator?
How much does a generator cost? That's like three
points, because we don't have a backup generator
for our system in communications as I recall.
MR. MOORE: We're in the process of bidding
out for a generator for this building. It's in
"excess of a hundred thousand dollars.
1
2
3
4
5
MR. NEWMAN: Okay. That answers that
question.
MR. MOORE: But I don't know that it's
going to satisfy I.S.O.
MR. NEWMAN: Okay.
111
6 I (Exhibit No. 11 was filed.)7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25