[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6518583,"mediaKeyId","5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b","parentId",5387752,"title","Cheatham County budget committee forwards multiple amendments and capital items to full commission 5‑0","audioSeconds",225,"startMs",10108000,"endMs",10333000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b&start=10108&end=10333","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b/thumbnail_10108000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6518583/Cheatham-County/Tennessee/Cheatham-County-budget-committee-forwards-multiple-amendments-and-capital-items-to-full-commission-50","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6518583-4f3e17ba3d97b350ef7cf7a93abf37a7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770654433&Signature=f6GrXrafp9afJellA8dhU3EyxqNVYieFfEBh66mr4q-y34Mjgblj8tutorgP0OleDpo6G4~vbUaO3fZ1frp2fNePGL6T9J9Ryv2JfvbxMbLcOBitZPJUEsIADz7nYsLDVn-DB00yi3nj48izYSg54cSQrCFmkMvB7JQFk5NgP1SUiMVcNLk1yX-aWAnCz4GCbzBS3UJ-S2g-5dL-TeV7VX6Ab1uo7UNfSNP9hV~5WQLBAp19BjVA3UZk-Q4XOSGt9DujxvFXZFhmcZhe0QXmqQtsn89OiYNGimMt4tqd1kThLjxN-L2Y~EfS1JKJZ5XFRa8cklFWCxa3dZgqjsEE8A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Cheatham County","date","2025-07-15T02:18:51Z","article","At the July 14 workshop the Cheatham County budget committee reported that it reviewed and approved several budget amendments and transfers and forwarded them to the full commission with a committee vote (reported as 5‑0 at the meeting).

Key items the committee reviewed and forwarded include: a county general bookkeeping reissuance for open purchase orders totaling $640,051.54 (standard fiscal‑year closeout practice); a $45,000 transfer from an animal control donation reserve to fund rabies and animal control public‑health items; $21,213.42 in highway and public‑works PO roll‑forwards; and a $63,000 roll‑forward in drug control funds tied to street‑camera work that remained uncompleted in the prior fiscal year. The committee also forwarded $781,005 related to a previously approved maintenance building capital project, noting that the PO is being closed and reissued in the new fiscal year.

School and education items sent to the commission included requests tied to education debt service and school safety: the committee forwarded a not‑to‑exceed $160,700 request for a project at Cheatham County Central High School and a not‑to‑exceed $224,000 request for middle/high school safety equipment (front‑entry scanners and similar devices) to be funded via education debt service and interfund capital as described in the packet.

Other items mentioned: the committee noted transfers to cover data‑processing fee increases for several offices and a transfer of $3,500 related to county building expenses from a development tax reserve to cover memorial park mowing, electricity and water. Committee members discussed timing on certain capital reimbursements expected from state agencies and that some reimbursements will occur after project completion.

Outcome: the budget committee approved the listed amendments and forwarded them to the full commission for formal action at the next meeting. No single motion or full‑commission vote on the forwarded items is recorded in the workshop transcript; the committee packet will appear on the commission meeting agenda for final approval.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Cheatham County, Tennessee Workshop 14JUNE25","oneSentenceSummary","The budget committee reviewed and forwarded several budget amendments and capital items — including year‑end PO reissuances, maintenance building funding and school safety equipment requests — to the full commission with committee approval.","taxTitle","Cheatham County, Tennessee","taxId",71299,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6518586,"Developers present 560‑acre Kingston Springs resort concept at Cheatham County workshop; commissioners ask for community outreach",2464,7521000,9985000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b&start=7521&end=9985","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b/thumbnail_7521000.jpg","/articles/6518586/Cheatham-County/Tennessee/Developers-present-560acre-Kingston-Springs-resort-concept-at-Cheatham-County-workshop-commissioners-ask-for-community-outreach","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6518586-f3abd1ec684ef666839f32256cf69291/orig.mp4?Expires=1770654433&Signature=LqG3gwE7mQXKrgnbAAQX8hsLC0V6YBl4WyblLN5oXVXrMsdxr49fkKj95QelsO~t7LyZAiDh2hvaOvawR5WJq8W2KYjnluLQjUvC9l3None2NYMAh7mI3Qt5lTJgScPuv2weKGnoHqBm1aKDJkdjBriJ56NRZ-z2ZfNqtS-QNlpSJ2MgOEJ2vZL~Y3C5Kk6~c~L3fgLSWrFPdPGiNa3BD2881-r30FPEDgePDWjly6X6VeCkkr5PnjVVTdmMNNlbV20Ud-VwCHVjVwD1lixfdkmYbI8thh~BJsnRjyT2CQpdjdfh3csOsV~H-2nlfaUXAVt6DaEXT6kG5I5oZ5Nxyw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Developers seeking to build a resort at a site near Kingston Springs described the project to the Cheatham County Commission on July 14, presenting a master plan for a 560‑acre agritourism property currently operating in part as Bells Reserve.

Presenters Bill McKnight and Michael Hayes, representing CB Ragland Company (project partner SV Capital was also named), said the plan centers on clustering development in a large field to preserve tree canopy and to keep new structures set back from the Harpeth River. McKnight said the team pulled buildings back from the water to preserve privacy and stated they intend to “follow a dark skies protocol,” placing buildings and lighting so river users and neighbors would not see them. He said the project would not create a traditional hotel tower; instead the concept calls for roughly 80 small cottages averaging about 845 square feet, and 40 branded residences, plus two small restaurants (roughly 55 and 65 seats) and a farmstead component for on‑site produce and farm‑to‑table dining.

Why it matters: developers estimated the project could represent about $250 million in capital investment and generate roughly $6 million per year in direct tax revenue (a combination of property tax, sales tax and hotel‑motel tax) if built as proposed. The team also emphasized economic development and local hiring, saying on‑site operations could provide career pathways for residents and that the resort would aim to source food and services from Cheatham County producers.

Project design and constraints: the team described a site plan that preserves more than a mile of river frontage and clusters lodging away from the river, with buildings set back roughly 300 feet from riverbanks. The master plan includes hiking and mountain‑biking trails, river access points, a farmstead area for produce and hen houses, and activity areas that would be intentionally limited on the river‑adjacent portions of the site because of river flooding variability. McKnight noted they had performed title research, aerial mapping, soils/geotechnical studies and initial site surveys to inform siting decisions.

Community engagement and approvals: developers said they are not asking the commission for approvals at the workshop and that their immediate plan is door‑to‑door outreach to neighbors and property owners along the relevant roads; McKnight said the team would meet with every household between Highway 70 and the county line on Cedar Hill Road as part of summer outreach. Commissioners and attendees raised questions about roads, water, sewer and utilities; the presenters said power upgrades would require new line stringing along existing poles and that those engineering tasks are in progress.

Public response and next steps: some attendees said they support economic development while others raised concerns about scale, river impacts and traffic. The developers invited the commission and neighbors to visit the existing Bells Reserve property and said they will return with more detailed engineering, utility and traffic information as they complete studies and community outreach. No action or vote was taken by the commission during the workshop.","CB Ragland Company and a development partner presented a concept for a 560‑acre agritourism resort near Kingston Springs that would add cottages, branded residences and on‑site restaurants. Developers described conservation measures, potential economic impact and a plan to conduct door‑to‑door outreach to neighbors.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6518591,"Commission discusses constable role, training and liability; decides not to pursue dissolving offices now",2842,757000,3599000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b&start=757&end=3599","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b/thumbnail_757000.jpg","/articles/6518591/Cheatham-County/Tennessee/Commission-discusses-constable-role-training-and-liability-decides-not-to-pursue-dissolving-offices-now","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6518591-bd51b746759d7cd9244812ab35010a44/orig.mp4?Expires=1770654433&Signature=eFchRNKt8eq8s7cxMNaJ3jjvZw-C9J7mMk3lHHAlfCXVOac6ZSqKpe6neTH0JmtftDsjQ3BniLsOJCGUuB3lD1BtLn~N99XCyj1KNldw1X2nJtNv3T3qsL~lZvfDTfQn88f8OJ~6Pzh0U~6ANSNQL7gZaT59AMX5x~sDkTNeGQ3a-Us9lNLkGXWtqVJFW~qp7pBlMriyOkCd7XgCEcff3KztRpYxhP9kd72zH1rkhhlxwGJ6rhKm9RyHwX0zg~~FXBjfdr8hAXiS8ouCKrVhJ2ig-eJLDq-10pnrbQfN7tiDl8teBQiBPzrrEb2bmJTa9JDmZftFTIvxgyJniARggg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Cheatham County commissioners spent a substantial portion of their July 14 workshop discussing the role of constables in the county, whether constable duties overlap with sheriff’s deputies, and what liability the county could face from constable actions.

The discussion began when commissioners reintroduced the item at a workshop meeting. Commissioners and several speakers questioned how constables operate today, what training they must complete and whether their actions expose the county to legal risk. One participant summarized the concern: “My concern is the liability of the county has on their shoulders,” a speaker who identified himself as a former sheriff said during the discussion.

Commissioners and staff reviewed training and certification requirements discussed in the meeting: presenters said constables who are certified receive initial academy training and annual in‑service hours, that deputies typically receive a 12‑week field training program plus 12 weeks at the police academy and 40 hours of annual in‑service training, and that some constables do not attend every offered in‑service course. County staff and commissioners repeatedly asked whether constables are covered under the county’s liability insurance; county staff said they could not guarantee coverage and recommended checking with the insurance carrier.

Why it matters: constables are elected positions in Tennessee; they may serve civil process and assist law enforcement, but unless their duties and oversight are clarified the county could be exposed to litigation if a constable’s actions result in harm. Speakers noted that constables are not subordinate to the sheriff and are accountable to voters, which complicates supervisory remedies.

Outcome and next steps: after extended discussion commissioners agreed not to place a motion to dissolve constable offices on the next Monday agenda. Instead they asked staff to confirm whether all county constables have completed required certification and annual training, whether constables are bonded, and whether the county’s liability insurance covers constable actions. Commissioners asked the mayor’s office and the sheriff to be notified if training is missing so that the county can follow up. One commissioner said the county’s constable association “oversees if they've done their training,” and asked county staff to collect and report certification and insurance information to the commission before any formal action.

Ending: The meeting record shows no vote to eliminate or alter the office of constable; commissioners directed staff to verify training and insurance status and to report back before deciding whether to place a formal proposal on a future agenda.","Cheatham County commissioners debated whether to dissolve or redefine the office of constable, focusing on training, certification, and county liability. Commissioners did not place a dissolution motion on the next agenda and asked staff to verify constables’ certifications and insurance coverage.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6518596,"Cheatham County commissioners hear detailed briefing on local property tax‑freeze option; place issue on next meeting agenda",3445,3629000,7074000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b&start=3629&end=7074","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5387752-451739162abf78d873e95077168a9d2b/thumbnail_3629000.jpg","/articles/6518596/Cheatham-County/Tennessee/Cheatham-County-commissioners-hear-detailed-briefing-on-local-property-taxfreeze-option-place-issue-on-next-meeting-agenda","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6518596-f66471895cd2a9c78b367823b912c3b1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770654433&Signature=Ckm7XuInmQpPUgbf4oYb7Dm~-dLJAgqT6tridZtYmTzEZrbtIbjUCd-Jao9ZxSE-lsq9pyz5jmf8hY8frB2WjyEpeklvWri6yV26fylYWm30xLbvf0oyv~qSLs38nEO727SNTIm7UwNWSigw3Gnd1HOURCNk1nWdpP2JHoI9Wvj0dQRgKjFNFSsZZ0sl0GjAMNIFF9MuWx9KU4qrg710jcw6J-F9PQ0IAyylkWvQHy2O0TzfQJV2GuNvQYE5HsGYsV0-TcT1leIHhChIpZbpFxB9O2nUWLieZG57MpFx-ul92um0f0WekSam1sTsbsPlkfeKaeoQZI0mtT85TLvHQA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A representative of the Division of Property Assessments in the Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury’s office told the Cheatham County Commission on July 14 that a local property tax‑freeze would freeze tax amounts for eligible homeowners — not assessed values or tax rates — and that the program carries administrative costs the county must decide whether to accept.

The presentation, given by Ryan (Division of Property Assessments, Comptroller of the Treasury), explained eligibility and mechanics: the local tax freeze applies only to residential property up to five acres, requires the homeowner to be 65 by Dec. 31 of the tax year, mandates annual reapplication and income certification, and is administered locally by the county trustee or city collecting official with assistance from the assessor. Ryan said, “the fundamental concept is it's the tax amount that's frozen, not the value, not the assessment, not the rate.” The legal authority cited was state statute TCA 67‑5‑705 and administrative rules of the State Board of Equalization.

Why it matters: the program reduces property tax bills for qualifying elderly homeowners but creates foregone local revenue and extra work for county offices. Joe Griffin, a consultant with the County Technical Assistance Service (CTAS), told commissioners that some smaller counties that adopted the program earlier have hired additional staff in trustee and assessor offices to handle the workload. Griffin said many trustees “have to go to the counter and have people hand over all their income stuff” and that “they've hired a part‑time person extra in the assessor's office and a full‑time person in the trustee's office because of this program.”

Details and local figures discussed: income limits for the tax‑freeze program vary by county based on median income; Cheatham County’s median income used in the presentation was about $52,000 and the 2023 statutory local‑option cap cited was roughly $60,000 (adjusted annually by Social Security cost‑of‑living adjustments). The presenter noted line items that counties must consider in budget forecasts because frozen properties remain in assessments but will continue to pay the lower frozen tax amount. The presentation also contrasted the tax‑freeze program with the long‑standing state tax‑relief program: tax relief is state‑funded and reimburses local governments, while the tax freeze is a locally funded foregone revenue. The presenters cited statewide numbers: the General Assembly’s current appropriation for state tax relief was described as about $41.2 million annually; the presenters also noted that, in recent years, the state paid $246,781.50 to county recipients and Cheatham County’s local match totaled about $96,357 (figures cited by presenters during the briefing).

Commission reaction and next steps: commissioners asked about likely administrative burden, how applications would be handled and secured, and whether the county could instead increase its local match to the state tax‑relief program rather than adopt a tax freeze. The Comptroller’s office and CTAS staff cautioned that the county would not know the exact fiscal impact until applications were received and processed, because qualification depends on applicants’ incomes each year. After discussion, commissioners agreed to place the tax‑freeze item on the commission’s next meeting agenda for further consideration and to request additional information on projected administrative costs, estimated numbers of eligible households, and the fiscal effect of different match or supplemental options.

What comes next: staff from the trustee and assessor’s offices and the Comptroller/CTAS contacts said they would provide more detailed cost and staffing estimates and clarify local match options before the commission votes. The presenters noted statutory deadlines and application timing: applications may be filed beginning Jan. 1 of a tax year, and there is an application cutoff in April (the presenter cited April 5 as the county’s processing cutoff), which affects when benefits would take effect.

Ending: Commissioners did not vote on policy at the July 14 workshop; they directed staff to collect additional cost and eligibility estimates and placed the tax‑freeze proposal on the commission’s next meeting agenda for further consideration.","County staff from the Tennessee Comptroller’s office and a CTAS consultant outlined how a local property tax‑freeze would work, who would qualify, and the administrative and budget impacts. Commissioners agreed to put the proposal on the next meeting agenda for further study and potential action.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Cheatham County budget committee forwards multiple amendments and capital items to full commission 5‑0

Developers present 560‑acre Kingston Springs resort concept at Cheatham County workshop; commissioners ask for community outreach

Commission discusses constable role, training and liability; decides not to pursue dissolving offices now

Cheatham County commissioners hear detailed briefing on local property tax‑freeze option; place issue on next meeting agenda