The People News, a free newspaper serving Cleveland Tennessee (TN) and Bradley County Tennessee (Tn).





Of Bradley County Tn.


NOVEMBER  2007

                            The People News, a free newspaper serving Cleveland and Bradley County Tn.

HOME

BACK ISSUE ARCHIVE

EDITORIALS

LETTERS

CONTACT US

What Do You Think?
by pete edwards

Editorial for THE PEOPLE

Junkers

On the front page of this issue will be seen a report by Tonya Sprague on the Bradley County Sheriff's Department vehicle fleet which has become part of a budget showdown between Sheriff Tim Gobble and the County Commission including Mayor D. Gary Davis. Gobble contends that the safety of his men and his legal responsibility to the citizens are being compromised by his department's continued use of exhausted patrol vehicles, some of which have over 200,000 miles on them, and he needs more money to replace them.

There are 33 vehicles in use by the BCSO that have over 200,000 miles and to be fair to Sheriff Gobble, that is only part of the story. Most of the working cars in the fleet, which are patrol vehicles, traffic and corrections vehicles and CID vehicles, also double as mobile offices for the deputies that use them. Even though they may not be moving during these office duties, the cars are still running to provide heat and cooling. So, in actual fact, the vehicle mileage does not accurately reflect vehicle use which could reasonably be considered to be much higher than the odometer shows. When you think about it, it is a testament to the abilities of the BCSO maintenance garage staff that they manage to keep these high mileage vehicles roadworthy at all. And, add to that the unusually tough treatment a police cruiser must endure, it seems Gobble may be justified in being concerned for safety.  But, and there is a big 'but', there are still other aspects that must be considered before the reader can make an educated judgement as to the justification for the request for 33 new cars immediately and the planned replacement of the entire fleet of 133.

The BCSO policy at present allows for all deputies to take home the cars they drive on their shift, resulting in the need for many more cars than are actually required to patrol the streets. It would be like each firefighter being supplied his personal fire truck to take home in case he had an emergency call to a fire - which would be unreasonable, resulting in unjustifiable costs. In the case of police patrol vehicles, the practice has become almost universally accepted and possibly seen as an unofficial perk by law enforcement. There is some value to a deputy to take his cruiser home that must be considered, savings to him on gasoline and maintenance which the average man has to absorb while driving to and from work. He can probably eliminate having that second car most working families find essential. It may be savings and a perk to the deputy, but is it essential policy to meet a sheriff's duty to the citizen?

Pete Edwards
Editor - Publisher


A search conducted by The People News uncovered a tendency among law enforcement and police media to embrace the idea of take-home cars. No surprise there, but to justify their argument they use some dubious assumptions that I doubt would withstand serious scrutiny. And remember, it is not just patrol deputies that are using take home cars, all the higher ranks also have take-home cars even though the annual mileage they are recording doesn't seem to justify them being supplied with a vehicle at all.

It is my opinion after seeing the results of our investigation, the BCSO is indeed using vehicles that have long passed their best and may be a future liability to the county, but at the same time there seems to be an unjustifiable allocation of late model, low mileage cars to employees that could perform their duties just as efficiently if a more cost effective policy was adopted.

That's what I think. What do you think?


Hide and seek

This is a comment about the Bradley County Commission retreat and public meeting held in Gatlinburg at the end of September. Apart from the fact that the whole affair was organized in an underhanded and sneaky manner by County Mayor, D. Gary Davis, so as to eliminate public input, there was a number of occurrences that need to be mentioned to highlight just how devious a public official can be in order to appear the good guy. Both the Cleveland Daily Banner and the Bradley News Weekly ran stories on the retreat as if they were there to cover the event, they weren't. This is not to fault them for reporting on it, but where did they get their information? It had to have come from inside, as everyone at the meeting was associated with county government except for two reporters from this paper and the wife of a commissioner. My guess is that Mayor Davis had his assistant do the work for the other newspapers, which doesn't seem kosher. What's more, the effort seems to be an attempt to use the media for propaganda in an effort to make something appear something it is not - which is worrying.

When a public servant such as Davis goes to so much trouble to hide his actions, usually there is a reason. Could it be that the reason behind Davis' odd actions is an attempt to test the waters for future citizen exclusion in public business? Could it be that Davis has made closed door deals to change the healthy infighting of the commission by enlisting the help of a teambuilding seminar to indoctrinate commissioners and others into feeling guilty if they show any opposition to a Davis sanctioned action? Conspiracy theory you may be thinking? Absolutely! Davis told The People News that the cost of the retreat could not be calculated until the middle of the week, yet the Banner printed it on the Monday. And why try to scuttle away a teambuilding exercise in Gatlinburg?

Davis has often said that the reason for the teambuilding seminar was to use cooperation to make county government better. Better than what? If he means removing disagreement from commissioner's deliberations then why not just have himself make the decisions and square them with a team-ready nodding head commission. Better still, eliminate the commission entirely for a "better" and more efficient county government and have Davis call all the shots personally - behind closed doors, of course.

County commissioners are elected to represent the interest of their constituents. And, for that to happen the democratic process demands that all disagreements are placed before the public so that citizen pressure can dictate the outcome. Sometimes a messy process, but a politically healthy one. I believe Davis and his shadowy cohorts are trying to eliminate this necessary function of government under the guise of teambuilding and they are trying to do it in every aspect of government, city and county.

The teambuilding strategy taught by the Performance Excellence Program has been used successfully by industry for decades because it teaches employees of a company to work together as a team for the good of the Company with the CEO guiding that concerted effort to make a profit. For performance excellence to work in government, it would be necessary to organize government employees into team working units with the citizen's representative acting as the CEO to guide that concerted effort, not organize the commission into a team.  Disagreement among commissioners is healthy. It means that when a consensus is reached it is a good consensus, but to remove the independence of the citizen's representative would take away the citizen's voice.

Maybe that is the whole idea.

That's what I think. What do you think?

.

HOME

BACK ISSUE ARCHIVE

EDITORIALS

LETTERS

CONTACT US