Bracewell: Conflicts, Taxes, and Accountability
OPINION • 10:40 a.m. June 23, 2025
Editor's Note: The Moore County Observer welcomes all opinions. If you have an opinion to share, email editor@mcobserver.news. We reserve the right to edit for space in the newspaper, but we publish the full opinion piece on this website.
ROBERT BRACEWELL
Metro Council member, District 2
Where to even start with this last meeting has been a difficult process. I am sickened by what occurred last Monday, June 16, but that was just the same result I have witnessed since I really began paying attention to our local politics in 2020. Some items that came up – and are in this county’s future – are jail renovations and roof repairs ranging from $600K–$850K, and a pension plan that will start out with a $4.8 million buy-in to build the initial pension fund.
As stated in my previous article, I have visited the jail. The kitchen and areas affected by the roof leak and burst piping are in very poor condition and are in need of repair. I am waiting for information from the sheriff’s department to determine whether or not, given the number of criminals roaming the mean streets of MC, housing inmates in neighboring counties would be financially beneficial.
Regarding the pension plan: it will take five consecutive years of employment by the county to become vested in this plan. The minimum retirement age is 60, and after 30 consecutive years of employment with a participating TN government employer, employees receive a 45% salary supplement for life. The teachers and elected officials are already enrolled in this pension plan, so this discussion revolves around only adding current full-time employees to this program.
The county currently pays a 3% salary match to a 401(k) or 457. This program would entail the county paying a fluctuating interest rate, with the current rate being over 5.7% of employee salaries. If approved, any employees over 60 with more than five years of service could retire Jan 1 of the year following adoption, and they would receive their pension as well as their 401(k) or 457 benefits – with the 401(k) being accessible at 59 1/2 and the 457 after separation from service at any age, without penalty.
They would also be able to retire as if they had been enrolled in this program for the duration of their employment. We tabled this discussion, but there appeared to be a large contingent seeking to find a means of funding it this year, even with the budget already passed.
It was stated that there are several county employees who have no 401(k) and no retirement savings, and that this would help. Below is the amount that an employee would receive monthly – just a few data points – for someone with an ending salary of $50,000. After five years of employment, the data points I selected arbitrarily show the number going up by 1.5% (or 1.575%; that part is still unclear) of their salary each year.
• 5 years: $312.50 — Accrual Factor 1.5% (or 1.575%)
• 10 years: $625.00 — Average (5 highest consecutive years) compensation x $50,000
• 15 years: $937.50 — Years of service x 20
• 20 years: $1,250.00 — Accrual benefit = $15,000 ÷ 12 months
• 30 years: $1,875.00 — Regular monthly benefit = $1,250.00
It has been claimed that retention is an issue with our county employees. I have not had an opportunity to ascertain the true retention rates across our departments over a given five- or ten-year period, but that is something I intend to follow up on. According to department heads in several of our departments, we range from 10–40% of employees who reside in another county and commute to work in Moore County. We have been told each year, as wages are discussed during budget season, that there is a retention problem here. My suspicion is that the workload or work environment in other counties is such that the few extra dollars aren’t worth working there.
As most of you have heard, the property tax increase of 11.5% passed 10–5. Four of the members read conflict-of-interest statements before voting, and two other members – who made no such statement – also had a conflict of interest in that their pay was increasing as well, although to a lesser degree. Six of the 10 “yes” votes on this budget had a conflict of interest. Four of their household incomes increased by substantially more than their property taxes.
This occurred after a budget committee meeting (that was not posted), which took place six days before the full council met to pass this second reading of the budget. The pension plan study with total costs to the county came back on June 3. After some deliberation, the budget committee opted to present it to the full council, acknowledging that they could not approve a proposal with so little information.
The question, however, was asked if we could amend the budget after the first reading to add the additional tax increase. There was a consensus that it was very likely not permitted, but they would recess pending legal advice and maybe meet again if we were allowed to add the additional tax increase to the first reading and then just pass it with the second reading – effectively passing a tax increase in one reading. That this was even a consideration is reprehensible. Some ask me what I’m trying to obtain with these statements. The same thing I’ve strived to provide from my council seat from day one: transparency for my constituents.
Harkening back to my March article when I stated, “We may not always get the representation we want, but I do believe we get the representation we deserve,”
I would like to hang out on this word deserve, because it has been tossed around ad nauseam for the last month and a half. What we all deserve from God is spelled out pretty plainly in the first half of Romans 6:23. What we deserve from one another is an acknowledgment of the value and worth of one another as fellow human beings endowed with inalienable rights – excepting forfeiture – and when an agreement is made, both parties deserve what was promised as part of the terms of that agreement.
I can already hear the push to point out an apparent contradiction between that last statement and a desire on my part to find a way to abolish property taxes. Short version: there is no short version. I am happy to discuss why this isn’t a contradiction but, unfortunately, can’t spend 8,000 words doing it here.
There were a number of teachers, citizens, and administrators talking about what people deserve. First, pay is a value judgment between employer and employee. If an employee feels that they are worth more money, they are free to ask for more money, providing justification for this claim, or to seek employment elsewhere. This idea of deserving more money comes from a lack of gratitude. You deserve the amount for which you agreed to provide your services.
I would encourage anyone to go to their employer and ask for a raise and then tell them about all of the non-work-related charities in which you participate – and on these grounds, you believe you deserve a raise. Not just a raise, but that you deserve, in large part, to be paid more than your employer. I seem to recall a story by someone about some people agreeing to work at the start of the day being upset that they got the same amount as people who didn’t start working until the end of the day (Matt. 20:1-16). Different context, same principle. A little gratitude for what you have, and less envy of what others have, might be in order.
Secondly, the raises in the central office and principal’s offices came to over $70K. It was never a consideration for them to forgo raises in order to obtain these much-needed new science books for the children about whom they care so much. I am a proponent of compensating people for their work, and I have no doubt that there are many within our school system who are giving it their all – or close to it – every day. I would also posit that the broken education system is hardest on these teachers who care the most. However, not being allowed to critique an institution at all without severe backlash is what was historically known as blasphemy.
I have had private conversations, and it has been stated a few times that people – or myself – seem to want to make this tax increase or the politics surrounding it personal. What I am trying to convey is that when you take from or tax people for a cause beyond what they want to give, to many of them you have stolen. Therefore, you are the aggressor and the one who has made it personal. Perhaps in government, rather than asking what can we do, there should be a reclamation of what ought we do.
Regardless of the motivation of the conflicted council members, there was not enough integrity to move them to recuse themselves. Not a lapse in their integrity, but a complete disregard for the concept of integrity, in that the thought of credible people having a valid reason to question their integrity is of no concern. We will not know their true motivations until the Last Day, and I hope that they only had the best of intentions. We have, however, seen a decline in this county of decorum, and I don’t think it’s the guy pointing it out who is the cause.
If you know these people personally and are certain of their altruistic motives, that’s great! I have a different view of mankind, especially those in the political sphere. The entire subtext of the U.S. Constitution and follow-on state constitutions is that you should never trust an American – especially one who seeks to wield political power. You, the people, have to pay attention to what your government is doing at every level. Pay attention to who the candidates are and examine their stated motives – and then monitor their actions. Then, if their actions time after time do not line up with their words, you must assume their actions are their true intent (see Proverbs 20:5).
It was pointed out to me recently by a department head in our county that there is a pressure they feel to expand services – and then the public gets angry when their taxes go up to pay for it. I had never considered or been confronted with this perspective. I spoke with other department heads – not all of them, but enough to validate this claim. Not all department heads share this sentiment. If you, the public, are relying on our local government to go beyond their assigned roles and then complaining about compensating them for their work, I would ask you as politely as possible to stop.
I contend that some of these departments are overfunded because I – and all of the people that I know personally – intentionally refrain from contacting them for things other than those expressly in their scope of work or that cannot be handled personally. I know that there is a large contingent of the county who still maintains this sentiment. If a tree falls across your road, I know we have a lot of people who help the highway department and clear them. If there is a cow or a dog loose, we have a lot of people who spend their time to get it returned. I have also been in a hurry such that stopping to get a cow returned would not only have made me late but would have resulted in a cascade of scheduling conflicts, and I called and reported this to the Sheriff’s Dept.
At the same time, with an influx of people who are not from here, we have a growing portion of people who correctly assess their inability to safely or effectively complete a task like this – or they have taken the stance that since they pay taxes, they have therefore been absolved of their duty to their neighbors. I understand, and I frequently have to put down this sentiment in myself, which is why I’m opposed to the government giving to charities. If people are forced to pay others to provide service X, why would they continue to perform X as the need arises?
I am not a councilman encouraging anyone not to use government services when necessary or to report legitimate issues. I am not advocating for you to put yourself in any situation with which you are uncomfortable. I am encouraging you – and myself – to seek out ways to be a good neighbor and reduce the burden, real or perceived, on our local government services where you reasonably have the capacity to do so.
Corruption – the tendency to a worse state. This is a concept with which we are all familiar. Things in a closed system decay without further input. What I would not advocate for is a Christless conservatism so that we can live in a better society. That too will rapidly fall prey to corruption. If this is to get better with lasting results, then it must be done out of an abundance of gratitude for the love that God has shown for you. His love and mercy are renewed each day, adding to the system to preclude decay.
Robert Bracewell is a District 2 Council member. Email him at moorecotnd2@gmail.com or call 931-434-0384.
• The views and opinions expressed in opinion pieces published by the Moore County Observer are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Observer, its staff, or its advertisers. We encourage a diversity of perspectives and aim to provide a platform for thoughtful community dialogue. Submissions may be edited for clarity and grammar, but the opinions remain those of the contributors.
