Rutherford County committee forwards plan for county forensic center after multi‑agency presentations

MURFREESBORO, Tenn. — On Feb. 25, 2025, the Rutherford County Health and Education Committee voted to forward a proposal to build a county forensic center to the full County Commission with a positive recommendation, after hearing detailed presentations on need, design, costs and expected operational savings.

The committee heard from Eric Hennessy, Rutherford County chief of staff, who introduced the proposal and asked the panel to hear from the county’s medical‑legal death investigator, EMS leadership, architects and the sheriff’s office before asking the commission to act.

The proposal responds to a Tennessee Department of Health feasibility study and local officials’ complaints about capacity and timeliness at the Middle Tennessee Regional Forensic Center in Nashville. "All authority rests at the county level for medical legal death investigations in the state of Tennessee," Denise Martin, Rutherford County supervisor of death investigations, told the committee, citing the study and national guidance. She said the Nashville center’s current facility size and staffing fall short of recommendations and that the region is "urgently" in need of another center.

Martin described operational and public‑health consequences cited in the feasibility study, saying the regional center’s "insufficient staffing," limited storage and high caseload "pose a critical vulnerability in the provision" of forensic services for the region. She also noted written support for a Rutherford County facility from several counties, hospital systems and legal offices.

Brian Gaither, director of Rutherford County EMS, told commissioners that EMS supervisors currently spend hours conducting death investigations because there is not 24‑hour medical examiner coverage. He said this work "adds unnecessary stress and contributes to burnout and potential PTSD" among EMS staff and argued that specialized investigators would produce more thorough investigations while allowing EMS to focus on emergency medical care.

Captain Todd Sparks, commander of investigations for the Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office, described investigative delays caused by outsourcing autopsies to Nashville. "We have to wait to see what's coming back. We have to wait to see what the findings are," Sparks said, and gave examples of cases in which delays hindered homicide investigations and communication with families and funeral homes.

Tyrone Bunyan and Ron Cosentino of architectural firm KSA presented a schematic for a first phase roughly 15,000 square feet in size, with about 7,700 square feet devoted to autopsy/examination space and roughly 4,400 square feet for offices and administration. Key design features include a secured family meeting area, a separate staff entry, a sally port and cooler for decedent intake, space for two refrigerated tractor‑trailers for mass‑fatality response and expansion zones to permit future growth without interrupting operations.

KSA gave a top‑end construction cost estimate of $15 million and noted an owner‑controlled contingency of $783,000; presenters said the construction manager at risk was identifying savings expected to bring the final cost below the current maximum. County staff estimated an existing annual vendor autopsy expense of nearly $1,000,000 and cited recent, mid‑year fee increases from the Nashville provider (approximately $2,500 per autopsy in Nashville compared with about $1,900 in Knox County). County staff estimated the cost of a fully staffed county medical examiner office at about $500,000 and said a local center could recoup some operating costs through state autopsy reimbursements and fees for out‑of‑county services.

Mayor Carr told the committee the administration proposes to use one‑time increases to the county fund balance to pay for the initial construction without raising taxes or issuing long‑term debt. "We can accomplish everything you have seen here tonight without raising taxes or borrowing money," the mayor said, adding that the project would still go before property management and budget committees before the full commission vote.

Discussion among commissioners covered service area, future staffing and long‑term planning. Commissioners asked whether other counties would use Rutherford’s center; county staff said several counties had expressed interest but that no interlocal service agreements were committed. Advocates emphasized that Rutherford County is among the state’s most populous counties and remains the largest in its region without a local forensic center.

The committee motioned to send the project to the full commission with a positive recommendation. Commissioner Gooch moved to forward the plan; Commissioner Davidson seconded. A roll call recorded affirmative votes from Commissioner Gage, Commissioner Davidson, Commissioner Wilson, Commissioner Boyd, Commissioner McMurray and Chairman Dodd; the motion passed.

Votes at a glance

- Motion: Approve minutes from Jan. meeting — Moved by Vice Chair Wilson; outcome: approved by voice vote ("aye"). - Motion: Approve monthly Health Department report (John Blair) — outcome: approved by voice vote ("aye"). - Motion: Accept state contract amendment reflecting county salary raises (budget year 07/01/2024–06/30/2025) — Motion text: "accept the state grant as revised and presented." Second: Commissioner Davidson. Roll call: Commissioner Gooch (yes), Commissioner Davidson (yes), Commissioner Wilson (yes), Commissioner Boyd (yes), Commissioner McMurray (yes), Chairman Dodd (yes). Outcome: approved. - Motion: Approve Rutherford County school update (Dr. K. Martin) — outcome: approved by voice vote ("aye"). - Motion: Forward forensic center proposal and schematic to full County Commission with a positive recommendation — Mover: Commissioner Gooch; Second: Commissioner Davidson. Roll call: Commissioner Gage (yes), Commissioner Davidson (yes), Commissioner Wilson (yes), Commissioner Boyd (yes), Commissioner McMurray (yes), Chairman Dodd (yes). Outcome: approved (positive recommendation to commission).

What the committee did and next steps

The committee took no final procurement or construction action; it forwarded the schematic, cost estimate and supporting materials to the full County Commission with a positive recommendation. County staff said the proposal will next be reviewed by the Property Management Committee and by Budget before the full commission takes a final vote. County officials said final cost estimates, a construction manager’s guaranteed maximum price and any planned staffing plan will be provided to those bodies in advance of a full commission decision.

Why this matters

County and municipal public‑safety agencies described operational delays, increased overtime and communication gaps tied to sending autopsies and death investigations to an out‑of‑county provider. Advocates told commissioners a local center would prioritise Rutherford County cases, reduce travel and turnaround time, provide training space for education partnerships and could supply forensic services to neighboring counties subject to later agreements.

No formal interlocal service agreements or commitments from other counties were made during the meeting. Cost, staffing and service‑area details will be refined in upcoming committee reviews and the full commission process.

Ending note

Committee members praised the technical presentations and the credentials of county staff who briefed the panel. The committee’s positive recommendation does not itself authorize construction or staffing; the proposal must still clear property and budget committees and receive final approval from the full County Commission.