Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves wastewater‑billing settlement with Radisson owner after extended work‑session debate
Summary
After extended questioning about missing documentation and prior meter‑reading practices, the Clarksville council approved a settlement with JK Clarksville LLC (Radisson Hotel) to apply credits based on recent calibrated meter averages, reducing the historic charge to a nominal balance, though at least one council member opposed the agreement.
The Clarksville Town Council approved a wastewater billing settlement with JK Clarksville LLC, the owner of the Radisson Hotel at 505 Marriott Drive, after an extended discussion in the council's work session about prior meter‑reading practices and whether the town had been adequately notified of missing calibrations.
Attorney John Craft, representing the hotel, described the method staff and the hotel used to compute credits for water used by the hotel's air‑conditioning and refrigeration systems that did not enter the sewer system. "Using the recent 9 month average to compute the credit for the 2021 to June 2025 period, the result would be a credit of just under $192,000," Craft said. He told the council the parties agreed in principle that applying that averaged approach, subtracting the then‑current account balance and the most recent bill, would leave the account approximately current.
Several council members pressed staff and the hotel's representatives about why the settlement surfaced now and why a written agreement had not been on file prior to July 2025. One council member said they had not been notified and expressed concern about approving a large credit without prior review. Hotel staff and counsel said no written agreement existed earlier but that volumetric meters had been installed and recently calibrated; they described a July 2025 written agreement after which credits were applied to subsequent bills.
Council members also discussed procedural options before action. A motion to suspend the rules in the work session was made and seconded, and the council then voted on the settlement terms. The motion passed despite at least one member voting no. The attorney said the recommended approach would reduce previously assessed charges substantially and leave a small net balance owed to the town.
The council directed staff to document the mechanics that produced the credit and to provide the relevant ordinance citation and the written agreement language used to justify the adjustment. The settlement will be implemented per the terms presented at the work session; where the record cited totals (for example, the transcript states a credit figure and the method used), the council asked staff to supply the ordinance number (recorded in the discussion as 51‑091) and the final written settlement for the official file.
