Comment
Email
PrintThe following lawsuit was filed on Friday, Dec. 14. The Town of Woodbury is suing Cannon County Executive Brent Bush and Cannon County over issues involving garbage collection, solid waste disposal and the payment of landfill costs. A hearing date has not been set.
IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF CANNON COUNTY, TENNESSEE AT WOODBURY
TOWN OF WOODBURY,
Plaintiff
v.
CANNON COUNTY, TENNESSEE and BRENT BUSH, CANNON
COUNTY MAYOR,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT
Comes now the Town of Woodbury, a Tennessee municipal corporation (hereinafter, "Town"), and for cause of action against Cannon County and Cannon County Mayor Brent Bush (hereinafter also referred to collectively as "County") would state and show unto the Court as follows:
1. The Plaintiff, the Town of Woodbury, is a Tennessee municipal corporation, and is the county seat of Cannon County.
2. The Defendant, Cannon County, is a political subdivision of the State of Tennessee.
3. The Defendant, Brent Bush, is the county mayor of Defendant Cannon County.
4. This Court has jurisdiction and venue pursuant to TCA §16-11-101, et seq., and TCA §16-11-113.
5. TCA §68-211-813 requires that: "After consideration of the needs assessment is completed, municipal solid waste regions shall be established by resolutions of the respective county legislative bodies by December 12, 1992. A municipal solid waste region shall consist of one (1) county or two (2) or more contiguous counties. If the region consists of more than one (1) county, an agreement establishing the region shall be approved by the legislative body of each county that is a party to the agreement."
6. TCA §68-211-813 requires that: "Any county that has a solid waste authority, not organized pursuant to part 9 of this chapter and in existence on July 1, 1991, may designate such authority as the board to administer the activities of the region, if such county chooses to be a region unto itself. The legislative body of the county and of each municipality that provides solid waste collection services or solid waste disposal services in the region shall approve such designation by the passage of an appropriate resolution."
7. TCA §68-211-851 requires that: "Each county shall assure that one (1) or more municipal solid waste collection and disposal systems are available to meet the needs of the residents of the county. Such systems shall complement and supplement those provided by any municipality. The minimum level of service that the county shall assure is a system consisting of a network of convenience centers throughout the county." Upon information and belief, the County operates one convenience center devoted to solid waste.
8. TCA §68-211-851 requires that the county provide solid waste collection and disposal systems "that shall complement and supplement those provided by any municipality." This same statute requires that "the minimum level of service that the county shall assure is a system consisting of a network of convenience centers throughout the county."
9. Under the law, Cannon County has two options for operating solid waste service. It may create a solid waste authority pursuant to TCA§ 68-211-903, or it may operate its own solid waste services pursuant to TCA §5-19-101, et seq.
10. Upon information and belief, the County has not created an authority pursuant to TCA §68-211-903. Therefore, the County exercises direct control of its solid waste operation, which in turn requires that the County comply with TCA § 5-19-101, et seq. (1)
11. TCA § 5-19-101, et seq., requires that the County either provide county-wide solid waste services or special district solid waste services. TCA § 5-19-108 provides that, "Such garbage and rubbish collection and disposal services may be financed in whole or in part by a levy of a tax on all property in the county only if all persons in the county are to be equally served, but such a county-wide levy shall be unlawful if any city, town or special district in any city or town, that, through its own forces or by contract, provides such services within its boundaries, or if any other part of the county is to be excluded from the service area." Upon information and belief, the County funds its solid waste operation, in whole or in part, by the levy of a tax on all property in the county.
12. If less than all persons in the county are to receive the same solid waste services, TCA §5-19-109 requires that the County must "establish a district or districts within which the service is to be provided", and that the County "must pay the full costs of the services to be provided either: (1) From the proceeds of a tax levied only on property within the district or districts; (2) From the proceeds of a schedule of service charges levied upon the recipients of the services in the district or districts; or (3) From a combination of both such a tax levy and service charge levy."
13. Upon information and belief, the County's current method of providing solid waste service does not comply with the law.
14. The County is comprised of five civil districts. The Town comprises the Fifth Civil District. The County has one convenience center dedicated to solid waste management. The Town provides curbside garbage collection. Until September 2018, the County accepted solid waste delivered to its convenience center by the Town. However, in September 2018, the County Mayor contacted the Town Mayor and, in violation of the law given the method by which the County funds its solid waste operation, advised that the County would no longer accept the Town's solid waste.
15. Because the citizens and residents of the Town, who are also citizens and residents of the County, deliver their garbage to the County's convenience center collectively via garbage truck, by declining to accept the Town's garbage, the County caused the citizens and residents of the Fifth Civil District to be unequally served.
16. There is no statute which permits the County to refuse the solid waste of the citizens and residents of the Town simply because it is delivered to the County collectively in a garbage truck.
17. As a further consequence of the County's unlawful action, the Town has incurred, and continues to incur, damages: it is forced to transport its solid waste to the landfill at its cost, including, but not limited to, the payment of landfill tipping fees that should be paid by the County. This additional cost continues to accrue.
Count I - Declaratory Judgment
18. The Town incorporates the allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs as if set forth herein verbatim.
19. Pursuant to TCA §29-14-101, et seq., the Town may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under statute and obtain a declaration of its rights, status or other legal relations thereunder.
20. Pursuant to TCA §29-14-101, et seq., the Town seeks declaratory judgment of its rights, status, and other legal relations affected by the statutes governing the County's obligation to provide solid waste services. Specifically, the Town seeks declaratory judgment that the County is obligated to accept the solid waste of the citizens and residents of the Town that it would otherwise have to accept by law, even if the citizens and residents of the Town have it delivered collectively to the County by garbage truck.
21. Pursuant to TCA §29-14-101, et seq., the Town seeks declaratory judgment of its rights, status, and other legal relations affected by the statutes governing the County's funding of its solid waste services. Specifically, the Town seeks declaratory judgment that the County's method of funding its solid waste operation is unlawful.
Count II - Damages
22. The Town incorporates the allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs as if set forth herein verbatim.
23. Pursuant to TCA §29-14-110, "further relief based on a declaratory judgment or decree may be granted whenever necessary or proper. The application therefor shall be by petition to a court having jurisdiction to grant the relief."
24. The Town has incurred, and continues to incur, thousands of dollars in damages for the cost of transporting and disposing of solid waste that should otherwise be accepted by the County at its convenience center. As such, the Town makes application by this petition for a judgment for damages against the County for the costs incurred by the Town as a result of the County's failure to accept the Town's solid waste.
Count III - Injunction
25. The Town incorporates the allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs as if set forth herein verbatim.
26. Pursuant to Rule 65 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, the Town seeks a permanent injunction against the County requiring it to comply with its obligations under the law and accept the Town's solid waste that it would otherwise have to accept by law, even if the citizens and residents of the Town have it delivered collectively to the County by garbage truck.
27. Likewise, until such time as the County complies with the law by accepting the Town's solid waste, the Town seeks a temporary injunction against the County enjoining the County from expending money it receives by the levy of a tax on all property in the county for solid waste operations and purposes.
Count IV -Violation of the Open Meetings Act
28. The Town incorporates the allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs as if set forth herein verbatim.
29. Upon information and belief, the County Mayor and certain county commissioners of Defendant County, in violation of the Tennessee Open Meetings Act, TCA §8-44-101, et seq., communicated with one another and deliberated toward the decision to refuse acceptance of the Town's solid waste.
30. Upon information and belief, the County Mayor and certain county commissioners of Defendant County, in violation of the Tennessee Open Meetings Act, TCA §8-44-101, et seq., have failed to promptly and fully record minutes of public meetings regarding the County's solid waste operation.
31. The action of denying the Town the ability to deliver its solid waste to the County's convenience center was made in violation of the Tennessee Open Meetings Act, TCA §8-44-101, et seq., and as such, the decision to prevent the Town from delivering its solid waste to the County's convenience center is void and of no effect.
Wherefore, premises considered, the Town prays:
1. That this Complaint be filed and that a summons be issued to all Defendants requiring them to answer in the time allowed by law.
2. For a declaratory judgment that the County is obligated to accept the solid waste of the citizens and residents of the Town that it would otherwise have to accept, even if the citizens and residents of the Town have it delivered collectively to the County by garbage truck.
3. For a declaratory judgment that the County's means of funding its solid waste operation is unlawful.
4. For a judgment against the County for money damages the Town has sustained as a result of the County's conduct described herein.
5.For a permanent injunction requiring the County to comply with its obligations under the law and accept the Town's solid waste that it would otherwise have to accept, even if the citizens and residents of the Town have it delivered collectively to the County by garbage truck.
6. For a temporary injunction against the County enjoining the County from expending money it receives by the levy of a tax on all property in the county for solid waste operations and purposes.
7. For judgment voiding the County's decision to refuse the Town's solid waste pursuant to TCA §8-44-101, et seq.
8. For a judgment against the County for all costs incurred in connection with this civil action including, but not limited to, reimbursement of its attorney's fees if allowed by law.
9. For such further and other relief to which the Town is entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
HUDSON, REED & McCREARY, PLLC
E. EVAN COPE, BPR #21436
16 Public Square North Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37130 Telephone: (615) 893-5522
Attorney for Plaintiff, Town of Woodbury
(1) In an email from the County attorney on October 17, 2018, he stated, "Solid waste is operated by the County. No Authority has been formed to perform this function."
