Sheltons want $11 million for Bible Park denial on The Murfreesboro Post

By: thinkingman on 4/6/09
These people won't be able to live here and look their neighbors in the eyes after this travesty. They put on this fancy show that was all about love of Blackman and love of the Bible until they lost. Now we can see it was obviously all about the love of money.

By: mdmcknight41 on 4/6/09
This law suit does not speak well of the Sheldon family. I also think County Mayor Ernest Burgess is correct defending the County’s right to approve or disapprove a zoning request. I hope the courts will do the right thing and toss the law suit as frivolous as it is a huge waste of time.

By: jbashley on 4/6/09
According to the Sheltons this was not about the money. I guess they decided it was all about the money. We all knew when the courts became involved this was going to be the result. I cannot believe they actually believed that BPU would have followed thru with the deal. It would have ended here as it did in Lebanon when BPU refused to release the TIF details or any of the business plan details. Either way, there would have been 'no deal'.

By: lupusman on 4/6/09
I guess if the land is worth $ 11 M - the assessed value needs to be updated in the county assessors office the Shelton's start paying the appropriate county tax! Interesting the Sheltons went to Nashville to find an attorney that would take the case. They must have known none of the local people would have touched it!

By: Trvlace on 4/6/09
I agree if they insist their property is worth the allotted $11M then that be the amount they pay taxes on from here on out!

Who do they think they are anyways? LOL What a joke! No jury of peers is going to see this on their side. How could they? Oh brudda...

By: Boo on 4/6/09
This has been about money all along. There was no great love for Blackman or the Bible. It was all about getting rich no matter who it hurt. They lost the chance with the Bible Park, now they are going to try to drain RC. I hope it gets thrown out of court. You can bet that if they win they won't hang around here. They will go elsewhere to live high on the hog.

By: thoughtful on 4/6/09
I guess I am in shock that a principal of a middle school in the county would be involved in this lawsuit that affects the students and the families that live here, those which he is supposed to "serve". It just seems so unethical and an extreme conflict of interest. Honestly he should resign if this lawsuit continues. That puts everyone at that school--teachers, parents and students--in an awkward position. How awful.

By: enoughisenough on 4/6/09
I have to agree with thoughtful. If Will Shelton wants to ever have any credibility in this county with his peers or parents of his students, he should step down. I can not imagine his father allowing this travesty to have continued to this point.
Do the right thing and STEP DOWN Mr. Shelton!

By: RafeHyatt on 4/6/09
thinkingman ---

Have to disagree with you there. The Sheltons are clearly not fazed in the least by the notion of looking their neighbors on the eye. They've never cared, they don't care now, and they never will.

By: thinkingman on 4/6/09
LOL - Rafe, you're absolutely right! The family went through the motions and did the requisite dog and pony show, but nobody believed them for a minute.

I have to agree with those who feel Mr. Shelton's job at the Middle School is an issue. I think his credibility as a community leader is already shot as of this latest filing (timed near the end of school.Further, I think the County should seek all legal fees for this frivolous litigation and ask for a jury trial.

By: enoughisenough on 4/6/09
I'm with the others on this. When this is found to be a frivilous case, the Sheltons should owe the County.

By: devolver on 4/7/09
What a bunch of jerks. They'd have us all pay higher taxes (that 11mil has to come from somewhere!) because they lost their precious bible park. jbashley is right, they're fools if they believe for even a moment that the bible park thing would have actually panned out.

By: hat4rack on 4/7/09
Can the county counter-sue for court costs and attorney's fees? With $11M worth of assets, the Sheltons should repay my tax dollars that are being used to defend the county instead of paying for schools and roads.

By: easygoing on 4/7/09
I take it most of you were against the Bible Park. The thing is, if any of you were going to make $11 million off of the sale of your property and then county officials acted in an illegal way, allegedly and those actions kept you from getting that sale, you wouldn't be upset? I would, especially if all of the allegations are true. There are a lot of things my tax dollars are used for that I don't agree with, but they happen anyway.

By: easygoing on 4/7/09
Do you have proof RafeHyatt? As I recall it wasn't a 2/3 vote. And was Mr. Cope using his office to campaign against the park?

By: enoughisenough on 4/7/09
The attorney of record for the County is obligated to inform the commission of any pertinent laws concerning an upcoming vote. Imagine if Mr. Cope had not let the commission know that the provision for a 2/3 vote was required and the issue had passed. Then the County would be tied up in a court case involving that matter.

The bottom line is the Shelton's are upset that the scam proposed by the BP con artists didn't line their pockets, so now someone has to pay. I repeat that I feel Dr. Shelton is not resting easy in light of the shameful way his sons are behaving, and the cost they are forcing the County to endure.

By: Alma228 on 4/7/09
The council remember, represents the people, the people didn't want the theme park. Nor does Lebanon. Good common sense worked here.
For once it worked here.

By: RafeHyatt on 4/7/09
easygoing,

I don't comprehend your comment "as you recall it wasn't a 2/3 vote". What do you mean?

Was Cope using his office to campaign against the park?

Well, let's see. What happened was, a Commissioner sought the advice of the County Attorney on how his constituents could legally petition against the park and have that petition conform to the letter of the law so that it merited consideration by the commission. Cope advised this commissioner of what the laws and rules were, and that commissioner then proceeded to advise his constituents. If that's not the job of the County Attorney, I defy anyone to tell me what is.

Furthermore, Cope organized no rallies, attended no opposition meetings, signed no petitions himself and even refused to comment in news interviews as to whether he was for or against the Bible Park. So, I'm going to let you decide whether he used his office to campaign against it. The smart money, and the smart people, say no.

By: Farmall on 4/7/09
Sounds to me like Mr. Cope was representing the values of his constituents.

By: easygoing on 4/7/09
I don't believe the rezoning was decided by a 2/3 vote as required. The question is not did Mr. Cope represent the values of his constituents, the question is did he represent them within the legal boundaries set forth. What it really comes down to is if a U.S. District Court believes that the county followed fully all procedures and laws regarding the matter and if Mr. Cope abused is office or not. I'm not deciding, I'm simply trying to bring to light how the court will look at it.

By: RafeHyatt on 4/7/09
easygoing,

Forgive me, I'm still out to lunch on what you mean. "I don't believe the rezoning was decided by a 2/3 vote as required."

It was decided (denied) by the failure to get a 2/3 majority vote.

The County Attorney, I believe, is appointed, not elected, so in the true sense of the word Cope does not have what you would call "constituents" to represent. He is essentially an employee of the County Commission. He doesn't represent Rutherford citizens as a vote-holding and vote-casting county official. He provides legal advice and services to the people that do cast the votes. That's what he did regarding the Bible Park.

By: easygoing on 4/7/09
Regardless of the details, it's up to the court now. All of us are free to bring legal action against anyone we want, for any reason. I will not judge anyone's motives. That's not my place.

By: thoughtful on 4/7/09
easygoing...let's hope the court sees it for what it is: shameful, greedy, unethical, distasteful, and disgusting.

By: perseveretolive on 4/7/09
Shame, what shame

By: thinkingman on 4/7/09
easygoing obviously had a vested interest in seeing this deal go through. That's okay and anyone has that right. What I don't understand is why he/she feels the need to contend that anything done was illegal (it wasn't) and that there was some kind of problem with the 2/3 majority requirement. Jim Cope is a resource for all of the Commissioners and he did his job. Nothing illegal, nothing out of line. For the Sheltons to display such sour grapes and seek "punitive damages" is disgraceful behavior. That's where easygoing's attention should be focused.

By: thinkingman on 4/7/09
One item that I believe will doom any attempt by the Sheltons to get their pound of flesh from our wallets: The zoning variance was what got denied. The County Commissioners denied Armon Bar Tur and his posse permission to alter the land in the manner presented in numerous coloring books and blueprints. The Sheltons had a contingency to sell the land to Bar Tur if the project was approved. I fail to see how they could sue over a proceding that did not officially involve them yet. If anyone were to sue it should be Bar Tur. The Shelton's "dog in the hunt" was not off the truck yet.

By: enoughisenough on 4/7/09
Thanks Shelton family...
Your lawsuit just sealed the negative vote for new Middle Schools. $11 million is 2/3 of the costs for a new school.
Will,
I am very disappointed that you, as an administrator in this school system, would bring a lawsuit that is detrimental to not only your own students, but the rest of the children of this county.
Resign and bring your lawsuit. Good luck in the courts.

By: debtn on 4/8/09
ALL-

If Mr Shelton spent half the amount of time taking care of issues at our school as he does on this lawsuit then maybe kids would not be getting jumped in the bathrooms and him not doing anything about it. Especially when one kid had already been kicked out of Central for hitting a teacher then he is allowed to come to Blackman and jump a student and Shelton turns his head to it. He is a very poor example of a Principal and the school has not been the same since Mr. Vaughn left. Shelton allows his ASST Principal to walk around school looking like she belongs on Dickerson Rd but then tells the kids to tuck in their shirts while hers is unbuttoned enough to show all or her skirts are so short that we know they do not come to her fingertips. The kids talk about it ALL the time. Or when you need the SRO officer, he has disapproved with the approve mentioned Asst. Princpal and you can't even get him on the Radio. Some example they are really sitting for the kids. It's time that Blackman Schools be returned to Leaders that want to be there and want a great school. Going down hill really really fast.