Two Gallatin councilmen who purchased property that the city needs for a street-widening project denied any wrongdoing in acquiring the property and even suggested that they may donate to the city the land necessary for the right of way.

The property in question is located on East Smith Street, on the back side of Sumner County’s $100 million justice center, approved by the county commission in 2019 and currently under construction.

In coordination with the courthouse expansion, Gallatin targeted a portion of East Smith Street for widening from two lanes to three between South Water and South Boyers avenues, in the area where a new parking garage is to be located.

Gallatin City Councilman at Large Steve Fann and Shawn Fennell finalized the purchase of three parcels of identified as 117 East Smith Street in May.

The following month, at the June 28 work session of the council, City Engineer Nick Tuttle gave an update on the East Smith Street widening project, advising that they are moving into the right-of-way phase. It is a project Tuttle said had been funded for a little while.

Tuttle elaborated that there are 11 properties that are involved in the right of way, but only four property owners.

In the right-of-way process, it was discovered that a couple of council members own one of the properties, and Tuttle was giving the “heads-up” that the city won’t be able to go through a regular negotiation under those circumstances.

“We have to move straight ahead to a condemnation process, according to the legal advice,” Tuttle advised the council members. Though Fann and Fennell were in attendance, Tuttle didn’t name them, and neither Fann nor Fennell acknowledged that they were the property owners Tuttle was referring to.

Tuttle gave his update later in the same meeting, at which Fennell defended the proposal he made at the meeting prior to de-annex individual property owners Pascal and Michelle Jouvence, who regularly attend city government meetings and frequently speak during public comments on the management of the city. With the distraction of the de-annexation, citizens did not become aware of the purchase of the property by council members Fann and Fennell until months later.

Following the regularly scheduled council meeting of October 25, The Tennessee Star asked council members Fann and Fennell about the purchase of the property, specifically as it relates to City of Gallatin Code of Ordinances under Chapter 2, Division 1 where the Code of Ethics is defined.

The code’s first section details that the code of ethics applies to all full-time and part-time, paid or unpaid, elected or appointed officials and employees.

Sec. 2-1. Applicability. This chapter is the code of ethics for personnel of the city. It applies to all full-time and part-time elected or appointed officials and employees, whether compensated or not, including those of any separate board, commission, committee, authority, corporation, or other instrumentality appointed or created by the municipality. The words “municipal” and “municipality” include these separate entities.

A later section addresses benefiting from would commonly be referred to as insider information.

Sec. 2-6. – Use of information. (b) An official or employee may not use or disclose information obtained in his official capacity or position of employment with the intent to result in financial gain for himself or any other person or entity.

When Fann was asked about the city being forced into condemnation and the inability for council members and employees to use information gained in their position, Fann denied any knowledge of the project, telling The Star, “I didn’t have that information at the time to start with. I didn’t know what the city was doing.”

When asked about approving the money related to the project, Fann responded, “I haven’t approved any,” as Fennell walked up to where Fann was sitting.

Fann continued, “You call the people I bought the property from. Seven, eight years ago, he came by to see me because he worked for me 40 years ago to see if I was wanted on the corner [sic], and I asked him then, I said if you ever get ready to sell your property, please contact me. He contacted me and asked if we were willing to give [sic]. In the beginning it was just me, and it was more than I wanted to take on, so I asked Shawn to come in. But you call Mr. Foster and ask him, and it will clear these lies up.”

The Star responded that the source of the purchase were not lies, but the public record that their two names are on, and information from the city engineer stating that the city now has to condemn the property in order to obtain the right of way, which raised the question why they would get involved when they knew the city was negotiating the right of way.

“I didn’t know,” responded Fann before being cut off by Fennell.

“Ma’am, I was on the JPA committee in 2016,” Fennell said in reference to the third-party judicial planning consultant retained by Sumner County to oversee the project and the ad hoc committee established by the Sumner County Commission’s General Operations Committee Fennell served on to oversee JPA and the project.

“If I was going to do insider stuff, I could have bought stuff back in 2016, 2017. I didn’t. That building’s already up. I mean who’s to say we’re not going to turn around and donate it to the city?” responded Fennell.

The Star asked the two council members why they hadn’t done that already, when the issue was raised at the June council meeting.

“We don’t even know how much footage yet that the city is going to require for that. Who’s to say that we’re not going to put a building up and donate it as a 501 (c) nonprofit? There’s a lot of stuff that you don’t know that you’re speculating on,” Fennell said.

Fann added that he just told the history of the property and suggested that a call be made to the man in Florida who lived in the house.

The council members were asked again about the city’s inability to negotiate with them on the right of way and will have to condemn the property, because they can’t negotiate with a public official or an employee. Fennell interrupted with his response.

“No matter who owned it, they was [sic] going to have to condemn it anyway, because that man was not about to take … ” Fennell said when Fann went on to finish the sentence.

“What they offered,” and then Fennell repeated the same, “what they offered” to complete his sentence.

Fennell confirmed, upon questioning, that the two own no other properties together besides the East Smith Street property.

“So, the only one that you own is the one that the city needs in order to get the right of way? How does that look to citizens?” The Star asked.

“Well, you don’t know the full picture,” Fennell replied. “I mean, people put stuff on the internet that they don’t know.”

After The Star repeated that the source is not the internet, but what it says in the ethics [code], the deed and the tax records, Fennell responded again regarding a donation to the city.

“Are we the bad people if we was [sic] to donate a strip of it to the city?”

When The Star asked again about the timing of the funding for the project in relation to the purchase of the property, Fann said he didn’t even know if he was on the council then. Fennell then changed the subject with Fann, asking Fann about getting something to eat the following night.

City Engineer Nick Tuttle was contacted by The Star via telephone two days later to gain confirmation and clarification regarding the East Smith Street widening project right-of-way process.

Tuttle confirmed that an RFQ issued on January 4, 2021, was the result of funding through a general obligations bond approved by the council for 2021.

Ordinance No. 02101-2, Appropriating Funds from 2021 Generation Obligations Bond Issue in the amount of $11,112,853.25 and $700,000 from General Fund from Capital Projects was on the agenda for the January 26, 2021, meeting and the details attached to the agenda listed as one of the included projects the Smith Street widening in the amount of $1,000,000.

While Fann told The Star he had no knowledge of the project, minutes from the January 26, 2021, meeting recorded that both Fann and Fennell were present at the meeting and voted “yes” to the roll call vote approving the bond, after Fennell seconded the motion.

Though Fennell claimed that they did not know the needed footage for the right of way, Tuttle told The Star that the right-of-way plans were finalized sometime over the summer, although he could not provide an exact date.

Tuttle confirmed that the footage requirement of 14 feet was also included in the right-of-way plans completed over the summer.

With regard to the right-of-way process, generally speaking, Tuttle said, an appraiser is hired and a separate company is hired to handle the negotiations for the acquisition of the property.

The city will not be able to follow its standard process when it comes to the property owned by Fann and Fennell.

“Specifically, for the property owned by the council members,” Tuttle explained, “we are not requiring our negotiator to contact the council members. Once we’ve got the appraisal complete, I’m going to turn that over to the attorney’s office to begin condemnation proceedings.”

With regard to the property owned by the Fann and Fennell being donated to the city for the right of way, Tuttle said he has had no conversations about a donation of the property.

– – –

Laura Baigert is a senior reporter at The Star News Network, where she covers stories for The Tennessee Star.
Photo “Steve Fann” by Gallatin Tennessee. Photo “Shawn Fennell” by Gallatin Tennessee. Background Photo “Gallatin Tennessee Town Square” by Ichabod. CC BY-SA 3.0.