Unemployment reaches lowest level in 18 years, however work force participation is dismally low.

Jobs Report Shows 3.8 Percent Unemployment, Lowest Since 2000 

Rod's Comment: This is great news. Also, wages are increasing and take-home pay. Trump's regulatory relief and the tax cuts and good governance at the level of the states can assumed to be contributing factors.  I don't want to throw a damper on good news; however, I think to a certain degree the party in power gets more blame for bad news than they deserve and more credit for good news than they deserve.  Economic statistics are impacted by many factors and there is a time lag between a policy change and economic impact so it is difficult to say with any certainty when policy changes effect out comes. Nevertheless, I am going to give Trump's policy and the tax cut some of the credit.

All economic news is not good however. The work force participation rate is only 62.7 percent.  One way to decrease the unemployment rate is to have more people just drop out of the labor market. The work force participation rate was lower in October 2015 when it stood at 62.5 and it had not been that low since October 1977. A factor prior to the late seventies was that women participated in the workforce to a lesser extend, many choosing to be full-time homemakers. While we should celebrate the lower unemployment rate, that should be tempered by the disappointing  low work force participation rate.  Why are so many people simply choosing not to work?  
 

Top Stories

Meet & Greet - Bill Lee - GOP Candidate for Governor

Tuesday, June 19 at 4:30 PM - 6 PM pin 930 E Main St, Murfreesboro, TN 37130-3947

See Facebook link for more information.

Top Stories

Nashville councilman proposes scrapping 10-acre private development from MLS stadium plan

Top Stories

Nashville, I call on you to Save The Fairgrounds Again !!!!

Tony Tenpenny

by Tony Tenpenny, from a Facebook post dated 5-30-2018 - This is my public response to last night’s meeting : As Chairman of the Board of Save Our Fairgrounds I must respond to this continuing give away of public land to a billionaire to build a soccer stadium and an additional 10 Acres of PUBLIC LAND to the same billionaire and his development partners to build commercial, retail, and residential buildings and then pocket the profits. 

This is a disgrace to the citizens of Nashville and flies in the face of what the citizens voted to do in 2011 by a 72% margin. That vote changed the charter of Metropolitan Nashville Government and forces Metro to get 27 votes to change the 3 major uses on this property. Please note on this new plan there is NO PLACE FOR A STATE FAIR. The City of Nashville and all of the citizens here should be embarrassed that we are not honoring the original reason Nashville owns this property now. Over 100 years ago a then wealthy family of Nashville donated the 117 Acres of current Fairgrounds Property to the State of Tennessee and Davidson County Government to insure ONE THING: that Nashville, Tennessee would ALWAYS host the Tennessee State Fair. PERIOD. Just one simple request for ALL of this land. 

Nashville’s leaders again are pushing ahead with their plans and not honoring a request from this family. Look at these plans, No where on this map is there a place designated for a Tennessee State Fair!!!!!! I call on the press to ask John Ingram if he had a choice on where the stadium would be built in Nashville ?? He has told more than one person that I personally know he was told by Rich Rebling and Megan Barry that the soccer stadium had to go on the Fairgrounds property. This is the same kind of plan Rich Rebling has had for the property since he convinced Mayor Karl Dean to announce the closing of the Fairgrounds in 2010. We know how that turned out. The citizens rose up and passed the Amendment to the Charter by 72% of the voters in 2011 choosing to prevent this very kind of thing from happening. So Nashville, I call on you to Save The Fairgrounds Again !!!! Go to Save Our Fairgrounds Facebook page for updates. 

#

Background on the Fairgrounds

by Rod Williams - The fairgrounds originally opened in 1891 as a horse racing track named Cumberland Park. The park became the home of the Tennessee State Fair in 1906 and was purchased by the Davidson County government in 1910. That the fairgrounds was "purchased" by Davidson County is what Wikipedia reports but I have had an understanding that some wealthy Nashvillians gave the property to Davidson County with the understanding that it always be used as a fairgrounds or revert to the families that gave it to the County in the first place. I don't know the facts. If anyone can explain this discrepancy, please do so.

Since 1906 the fairgrounds has been the home of the Tennessee State Fair. As state fairs go, it is not

an impressive one. The Tennessee Valley  A & I fair in Knoxville is bigger and the Wilson County fair is bigger. Since 1969 the fairgrounds has been home to the monthly Nashville Flea Market, one of the largest such events in the southeast.  It features 1,500 booths of antiques, collectibles, furniture, glass, jewelry, and fine art with dealers from 30 states. As flea markets go, it is impressive.

The fairgrounds is also home to the Fairgrounds Speedway which is the oldest continually operating track in the United States. The track held NASCAR Grand National/Winston Cup  races from 1958 to 1984. Many greats of stock car racing got their start at the Nashville Speedway such as Darrel Waltrip and a bunch of others. In addition to famous stock car racers calling the Nashville Speedway home, famous country musc star Marty Robbins raced there.

In 2009, Mayor Karl Dean announced the Metro government's intention to redevelop the fairgrounds into a mixed-use neighborhood, displacing the state fair. Opposition to the closure prompted a countywide referendum in August 2011 that amended the Metro charter to require the continued existing activities at the fairgrounds site. The amendment was passed by over 70 percent of voters.

In 2016, mayor Megan Barry proposed demolishing several buildings on the fairgrounds to make way for community parks and soccer fields. The plan, which also includes a new soccer stadium for the new Nashville MLS team, would displace the fair by 2019.  This is the briefest of summaries. There has also been issues of the conflicts and relationship between the state fair commission which is charged with putting on a state fair and the Metro Nashville fair board which administers the fairgrounds.  There has also been issues of funding subsidies for the fairgrounds, the banning of a popular gun and knife show which was a major tenant of the fairgrounds, the future of the racetrack,  a consultants study which advised the city on the future of the fairgrounds, and spending of money on the development of the soccer stadium when that funding had not yet been appropriated by the Council. The status and future of the fairgrounds has been a long complicated contentious issue ever since Mayor Dean proposed doing away with it.

Where we are now is that the in November 2017, the Metro Council approved $225 million in revenue bonds to develop a Major League Soccer stadium to be developed on the fairground site. In December Nashville was awarded a MLS franchise. As part of a deal with the developers of he soccer stadium, the city gave ten acres of prime fairgrounds property to the private developer of the soccer stadium. Despite approval of the bonds the soccer deal is not a done deal yet.  The council must still actually approve the issuance of the bonds. Also, the ten acres of mixed use development will require council action to rezone the property.  Also, demolition of current buildings at the fairgrounds will require council action.The developers of the soccer stadium say that without that ten acres the soccer deal will not work.

Recently there was an attempt to approve the issuance of the bonds without those bonds tying the stadium to the fairgrounds location.  That effort appears to have failed. There has been a move to have the soccer stadium be located in Metro Center rather than the fairgrounds.  Developers say the soccer deal is dead if the soccer stadium is located anywhere other than the fairgrounds.

What has developed most recently is that the Fair Board presented a new master plan for the fairgrounds. This plan moves the ten acres that is to be given to the developers of the soccer stadium from one location to another location. Critics of this plan say the new master plan leaves no place for there to actually be a fair at the fairgrounds.

There has been a long hard fight to save the fairgrounds. Leaders of the effort have included council members Tony Tenpenny, Duane Dominy, and Robert Duvall and citizen leaders like Rick Williams and Milissa Simpson and others whose names I do not immediately recall and hundreds of citizens who worked to get the charter amendment passed which we thought would save the fairgrounds. While the leaders of the effort to save the fairgrounds are mostly Republicans, I do not see this as a Republican-Democrat issue but more of a conflict between the elite and the common man.

My perception is that there is an element of insiders, upper crust elites, and new comers to Nashville who are embarrassed by Nashville's southern, country, and rural identity.  In their vision of the "it" city, there is no room for gun and knife shows, stock car racing, flea markets or fairs.  In the last twenty years or so, city elites have embraced Nashville's identity as "Music City" since that now includes more than just county music and since country music is now cool and since that put Nashville on the map, but twenty years ago they did not want Nashville to be know for that old hillbilly music; they wanted Nashville to be "the Athens of the South." That elitist mentality is still prominent in our city.  In there view, there is not much room for original Nashvillians in the new Nashville. In there heart I think they want Nashville to be "the San Francisco of the South."

The fight is not over. Those who want to wipe the fairgrounds off the map have not won yet. Please stay informed and involved. 

#

For the Tennessean's coverage of the latest fairground's controversy, follow this link.

Top Stories

Ikea will not be coming to Nashville after all

Ikea's planned store opening in Nashville dead

Top Stories

Full Speech: President Donald Trump Holds MAGA Rally in Nashville, TN 5/29/18

Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the Trump rally in Nashville yesterday due to my obligations at home. The rally was to support the candidacy of Marsha Blackburn for U.S. Senate. While I was originally not a supporter of Donald Trump and while his style and tone still make me cringe from time to time, his accomplishments have caused me to be more supportive. I have warmed to Trump. I think he is putting our country on the right track. Dare I say, he is making America great again?  I remain skeptical of the wisdom of building the wall and remain fearful that he may start a trade war, but the tax cuts, improved economy, appointment of conservative judges, confronting North Korea, moving the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and various other accomplishments are impressive. I would have liked to have been able to attend this rally.

For those who missed the rally and would like to view the rally in full, below is a YouTube video.

If you want more, a group called Right Side Broadcasting Network provided seven hours of coverage with commentary and interviews of people on the street. You can catch that video at this link. To read the Tennessean's coverage of the rally, follow this link.

Top Stories

Who is running for the office of Vice Mayor?

Soon, probably August the second, we will be headed back to the polls to elect a vice mayor for the city of Nashville. The August second date is also the date of the state primary when Democrats and Republicans will be voting for their candidates for governor and senator. 

The vice mayor presides over the Council  and is next in line to serve as mayor should a vacancy occur in the office of mayor. The vice mayor only votes in the case of a tie in the council, but has enormous influence by virtue of being the person handing out committee assignments.  When Mayor Barry resigned due to being caught abusing her position, related to an extramarital affair with her bodyguard, David Briley was elevated to the office of mayor.  Sheri Weiner who was serving as speaker pro temp was elevated to roll of acting speaker but is only serving in that roll until there is an election to fill the position.

Several candidates have announced an interest in the position. In an article in today's Tennessean, Joey Garrison list these council members as eyeing the position: Sheri Weiner, Jeremy Elrod, Bob Mendes, Burkley Allen, Erica Gilmore, Sharon Hunt, Jim Shulman and Antony Davis.  He provides a short profile of each.  Other candidates could emerge. If the election were today, I would vote for Sheri Weiner.

Top Stories

Bellevue Breakfast Club June speaker is Councilman Robert Swope

Who: Councilman Robert Swope, Guest speaker
What: Bellevue Breakfast Club, coffee and pastries available
When: June 2, 8AM
Where: Chili's on Hwy 70

Top Stories

Why is no one proposing doing something to protect students from a school shooter?

by Rod Williams - As Metro government takes up consideration of the budget, I have heard no one propose that Metro should budget money to make our schools safer.  Protecting school students from a school shooting has not even been mentioned. Not  Mayor Briley, none of the candidates recently running for mayor,  not the Director of Schools, no school Board members, nor Council members, nor student activist, nor engaged parents, nor The Tennessean - not anyone has called for improved school safety.  No one has even called for studying the issue.

It is not rocket science to know what would make safer schools.  Adopting the same policies as airports and the court house and many office building and concert venues and sporting events would be what was required.  Schools would have to have bags checked, single points of entry, and metal detectors.  The cost very well not be worth it, but I find it curious that no one wants to even find out what it would cost.

Following the Parkland, Fla. tragic shooting there were national school walkouts, demonstrations in state capitols and major cities and a march on Washington and high school student activist were on TV for days.  Here in Nashville, we had school walk-outs and students at Hume-Fogg marched to the capital plaza for a demonstration.  Much of the protest seemed unfocused and the message was unclear. The NRA was criticized and attacked and activist called for a boycott of companies who gave discounts to NRA members and boycotts of firms that were friendly to the NRA. A call went out to vote against any politician who accepting NRA funding or endorsements. Other than an anti-NRA focus about the only other consistent message was a desire to ban the AR-15. There was a lot of noise but to what purpose was unclear. After a while the intensity of the protest died down.  Following the Santa Fe shooting the anti-gun activism again geared up but it seems some of the passion had died down and the demands to "do something," seemed more muted.

I guess it is cathartic to demonstrate and march and make rousing speeches following a tragedy such as that at Parkland, Florida and Santa Fe, Texas.  I guess it is convenient to have the NRA upon which to vent your anger. It is exhilaration to let off steam amidst people who share your passion. Unfortunately, it appeared to me that all of the thundering was more like shaking their fist at the sky rather than a concrete call to action.  It seems more like "letting off steam," than advocacy of policy.  The protestors did not seem to have a coherent message.  Some called for "gun control" and for adults to "do something," but were not very specific.  About as specific as the protestors got was a call to ban bump stocks and "assault weapons," or "weapons of war."  The most  often sighted "assault weapon" protestors wanted banned was the AR-15.

Banning bump stocks and banning the AR-15 and maybe some other "assault weapons"  really seems like modest goals and would probably not prevent any deaths.  Those goals might even be achievable. A ban on bump stocks most likely will occur. It has been proposed and the proposal in the phase of receiving public comments. There was a ban on the sale of newly manufactured "assault weapons" from 1994 to 2004. It withstood constitutional challenges but it had no demonstrable effect on gun violence. It is possible that with a change in the makeup of Congress, the AR-15 could be banned again. Does anyone really think that would make a difference? 

If a ban on what is called "assault weapons" and a ban on bump stocks went into effect does anyone think schools would be one bit safer?  Would those protesting students feel they had really accomplished anything of much importance? To be effective a ban would not only have to apply to newly manufactured weapons but there would have to essentially be a confiscation of weapons already in the hands of Americans and ban on gun ownership.  The Second Amendment would have to be repealed for that to happen. That is just not going to happen.  It would be an uphill battle to win public support for that and even if a majority of Americans accepted that the Second Amendment should be repealed, the process of changing the constitution is long and slow. Since the first ten amendments were adopted, the constitution has only been amended 17 times and a couple of those were when the South did not have a vote.  We still do not have a balanced budget amendment, a right to life amendment or the equal rights amendment and those have been pushed for years and years. If one thinks they can repeal the Second Amendment, they have their work cut out for  them.

If one really wants to "do something" about school shootings, then marching and demonstrating without a specific goal seems like wasted energy and campaigning to repeal the Second Amendment seems like wasted effort and a commitment of many, many years. If one was really concerned with stopping school shootings it would seem that improving school security is something that is achievable but it may not offer the same emotional satisfaction as marching against the NRA and engaging in school walkouts.

I am not necessarily advocating turning all schools into fortresses but am surprised that school safety is not a concern beyond a desire for ineffective or unattainable gun control.  Contrary to public perception. gun violence is down considerable from  thirty of fourty years ago but has increased since 2014 from the years immediately prior.  Of the gun violence that does occur, mass shooting account for less than 1 percent of gun violence and school shooting are a fraction of that. In the wake of the two most recent school shootings, students have been quoted as saying they feel like a school shooting is going to happen; they say they live in fear of it.  They say they feel like they have a target on their back. School shootings do, no doubt, effect the psyche of students, but student grossly overestimate the risk of being the victim of a mass shooting.

One study found that time spend in an airline flight was 300 times more dangerous than time spend in a classroom. A study from 2013 found that your chances of dying in a car crash was approximately 1 in 7775, which is about the same as your chances of dying due to any type of gun violence in the next year. As a writer explained in a Washington Post story recently:

The chance of a child being shot and killed in a public school is extraordinarily low. Not zero — no risk is. But it’s far lower than many people assume, especially in the glare of heart-wrenching news coverage after an event like Parkland. And it’s far lower than almost any other mortality risk a kid faces, including traveling to and from school, catching a potentially deadly disease while in school or suffering a life-threatening injury playing interscholastic sports.

Spending money to fortify our schools may not be money well spend. Dollars are limited. To take money away from classroom instruction or school counselors to pay for armed guards manning metal detectors may not be money well spent but don't you think that those Hume-Fogg students who walked out of their classroom to march to the Capitol building would be demanding it?

Top Stories

President Reagan's Speech For the Fallen

Top Stories

Why is Metro short of money?

by Rod Williams - If you have been following the news, you may think that Metro has less revenue to spend this year than they did last year. That is not correct. This year's proposed budget is $2.23 billion, which is $22 million more than last year.  $22 million is not chump change, but it does represent a growth in revenue of less than 1%.  Cost of providing government services has increased more than 1%,  given the services those in power want to provide. The proposed budget does not reduce any services, institute any cost savings, nor does it raise taxes.

Since Nashville is booming and the sky is filled with construction cranes and existing homes are being demolished everywhere and new much larger homes are being build in their place, how can it be that tax revenues are not greater? We know that we have been experiencing historically high appreciation of property.  A couple things or more are going on. 

We had a mass reappraisal this year.  The state mandates that every four years property be reappraised. The reason for this is that values change in relationship to each other. If you and a friend each bought a house four years ago and you bought a house in Antioch for $150,000 and he bought a house in The Nations for $150,000, then four years later the home in Antioch may be worth $200,000 but the home in The Nations may be worth $500,000. The person with the home in The Nations should be paying more property tax than the person with the home in Antioch. A reappraisal determines current value so each are being assessed a tax obligation based on the current value of their home.

Another reason for a periodic reappraisal is to keep local governments honest.  A lot of  State funding, especially education funding, is based on assuring that people from poor parts of the state have an equal opportunity to an education as are people from wealthy counties. So it is in a local governments interest to plead poverty so they can get greater state funding. A periodic state-supervised reappraisal every so often ensures that local governments are not purposely undervaluing their wealth in order to appear poor and get more state funding.

Since the purpose of reappraisal is not to bring in more revenue but to "equalize" evaluations, the state requires that following a mass reappraisal that the local government adopt a "certified" tax rate that  brings in no more revenue than before the reappraisal. Often what happens is that in a year of an appraisal, local government slips in a tax increase. The local governing body does as they are required to do, and adopts a revenue-neutral lower tax rate, but them immediately adopts a higher tax rate, usually at the same meeting. Since most people do not understand what is going on, they blame their increased property tax burden on the reappraisal. Mayor Barry did not do this. Last year would have been a golden opportunity to raise taxes but to her credit, Barry did not do it.

Following the adoption of the certified tax rate, there were a lot of people, especially large companies, who appealed their appraisal and some appraisals were rolled back resulting in the new certified tax rate not bringing in as much revenue as city officials thought it would.

Another factor is that much of Nashville's urban commercial growth has occurred in redevelopment districts and the growth was financed by Tax Increment Financing and the increase in tax revenue flows to MDHA to fund more development rather than flowing into city coffers. I do not know the extend of this but it is a factor. If we had an inquisitive local press, this would be something worth investigating.

So, the bottom line is that while Metro has had a lot of growth, it did not produce the revenue it was anticipated to produce. The budget is considered a "status quo" budget which means that with few exceptions it funds departments at current levels. The two areas most "underfunded" by the budget are a promised Cost of Living employee pay plan adjustment and funding for Metro Schools.

The Metro School funding problem is largely the result of declining enrollment. While Metro's population is soaring, many of those moving to Nashville are childless young millennial's. Our schools are so bad that those with school age children choose to locate to a surrounding county or they send their children to private schools. If we had an inquisitive local press we would know to what extend this is an issue. While the school system has fewer children to educate, the cost of providing that education should also drop but the school system cannot contract as rapidly as enrollment is dropping. In the short-term there are fixed overhead cost.

None of what I have written above is intended to justify a tax increase, which I oppose, but rather to provide context to the claim that Metro has a shortage of revenue.

Top Stories