Resident presents TVA documents, urges Monroe County to accept maintenance of Boring Springs Road; county official says commission already maintains portion

Gordon Bimbley, a Monroe County resident, used the meeting’s public‑comment period to press the Board of Commissioners to accept responsibility for maintenance of Boring Springs County Road and to ask for a follow‑up review.

Bimbley said he possesses records from the Tennessee Valley Authority and county files he says show TVA accepted the work for project TVA 7106 and that easements were deeded to Monroe County. He told commissioners a 1976 acceptance letter signed by then‑Road Superintendent Ernest West and deeds recorded in 1983 support his view that the county is responsible for maintenance.

"If you read it, each and every one of you should have it says, 'Do not sign this unless everything was completed to spec. Everything was completed to the satisfactory of Monroe County,'" Bimbley said, paraphrasing the language in the TVA acceptance letter he provided to the board. He said he preferred to work with the commission or the planning commission to resolve the matter without litigation but that he might pursue a lawsuit if no remedy is found.

The public comment prompted a response from an invited county official identified in the meeting as Mr. T. Mr. T said the commission voted in 2012 to add maintenance for 8/10 of a mile (described in the meeting as the portion beginning at the chip‑and‑seal) and that the county has maintained that section since the vote.

"We have maintained that 8/10 since 2012 when the commission voted to take it into the road system," Mr. T said, describing the county’s current maintenance stance. He also suggested the parties could schedule a meeting with the planning commission to discuss the discrepancies between the documents and the county’s records.

The exchange highlighted a factual dispute: Bimbley said TVA documents and a signature by Ernest West show county acceptance of responsibility for more of the road, while the county official said the board’s 2012 vote limited county maintenance to the 8/10‑mile portion. County Attorney Jay Reed Dixon is cited in the public comment as having written to Bimbley stating that TVA did not complete the project to county standards, a point Bimbley disputed in his remarks.

The board did not take formal action on the matter during the meeting; commissioners and staff said they could pursue follow‑up with the planning commission or other venues to review the historical documents and determine whether additional maintenance responsibility rests with the county.

What happens next: Commissioners offered to schedule further review (planning commission or separate venue) to examine the documents and seek a resolution, with the resident asking for an amicable solution before litigation.