Some People

Just last week, I mentioned in a story that the county commission and the county school board have a few people that don't just object to almost everything we do, but they constantly accuse us of doing all kinds of illegal things, and violating the law and things like that. Problem is, they never provide any proof of their accusations in any way.

Two of those people are a couple who moved to Tellico Village about a year and a half ago, Jim and Debra Stephenson. For over a year now, they have attended many meetings to voice their complaints on just about everything we do. They don't seem to like much of anything about Loudon County.

Last week, we learned they had gone so far as to file a complaint with the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation about the process of developing the county school building program. Apparently, that complaint was forwarded to 9th Judicial District Attorney, Russ Johnson. Below you can read the response from DA Johnson.

Bless their hearts, the Stephenson's, in just the short time they've lived in Loudon County, feel they're now experts on everything Loudon County. Recently, they even attended a meeting of the Loudon County Election Commission to tell that board that they needed to remove the chairman of the Loudon County School Board, Bobby Johnson Jr., because he lives in Lenoir City. Obviously they have no concept of how local government and districts work. Their position is that the county school board has to kick all the Lenoir City kids out of the county schools. According to them, that way there would be no need for the county school building program. I guess they don't realize city property owners also pay county property taxes to the county schools system.

Below is DA Johnson's response and included is the school board attorney's response to Johnson's request for information. Maybe what stands out to me the most is that the school board staff has provided "4,804 pages of documents to citizens". That doesn't include hundreds if not thousands of documents that have been provided to them from the county government side. But according to the Stephenson's and others, the county is not transparent or providing requested documents.

Welcome to local government.   

From 9th Judicial District Attorney, Russell Johnson:

A couple from Tellico Village that evidently shows up at the Loudon County School Board meetings complaining about the move to build a new 7-12 school in the north end of the county filed a ‘complaint’ requesting a TBI investigation into the school board and their process for arriving at this decision.  Ostensibly, the complainants do not want the tax increase that would go along with the building project to provide the new school which is being planned to meet anticipated school enrollment.  As District Attorney, I am the only one that can predicate a TBI investigation on this issue.  However, since the complaint does not allege a violation of ‘criminal’ law, there will be no TBI investigation.  

I did, however, take this a step further.  After reviewing the complaint, I contacted attorney for the Loudon County School Board and asked him to review the complaint, address and opine on the complaint and provide supporting documentation.  The attorney, Chris McCarty has done this.  His response with hyperlinks is attached. 

This is truly a political issue.  It will have to be resolved by the Loudon County School Board and the Loudon County Commission.

While it is not for me to determine, or probably even suggest, I have always been of the opinion that both Loudon County School Board and the Lenoir City School Board should at least entertain discussions and perform a study to see if the consolidation of both systems into one might provide Loudon County a more efficient model for educating the students of Loudon County.  This is not to say such a move would remove the need for a new school, but it deserves consideration. All politics are local, so this obviously would be a hot button issue for the school boards and county commission to determine.

END OF STATEMENT  

Russell Johnson
9th District Attorney General

RE: Response to TBI Tip Created by Debra Stephenson

Dear Mr. Johnson:

Please allow this letter to serve as an initial response to Debra Stephenson's ("Complainant") "tip" to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation created on February 5, 2025. To be sure, the Complaint, even if it were true or to even be taken as true, does not state a single alleged violation of criminal law by Loudon County Schools ("LCS") or by its board members, officers, and employees. However, due quite frankly to a faction of individuals spreading misinformation regarding LCS's plan to build a new Grade 7-12 school in north Loudon County, LCS seeks to address the Complainant's allegations herein.

1. Loudon County Schools operates transparently in accordance with Tennessee law.

LCS first addresses any suggestion by the Complainant that LCS has not properly responded to public records requests. LCS has responded to numerous public records requests under the Tennessee Public Records Act. The documents LCS has produced pursuant to the TPRA in relation to the school project between May 13, 2023 and February 18, 2025 can be accessed at this link [LCS Open Record Requests] and span from LCS 000001 to LCS 004804. That means in total LCS has produced 4,804 pages of documents to citizens like the Complainant in relation to the school project. Clearly, LCS operates transparently and responds to public records requests in accordance with the TPRA.

2. Loudon County Schools operates in accordance with Tennessee law with respect to student enrollment, including transfers and the identification of open seats for open enrollment.

Complainant's assertions regarding LCS's plan to construct a new school in northern Loudon County are equally unfounded. At a fundamental level, the complaint is based on a misunderstanding of the law. Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-128 governs student transfers within an LEA. The statute does not provide any obligations on an LEA with regards to the opening of new schools or the construction of new school buildings.

LCS publishes its available open seats in accordance with Tennessee law, under Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-128. However, this process is not a statement on open seats based on physical space, as the Complainant suggests. Nor does LCS's calculation take into consideration the state of LCS's school buildings. Rather, LCS calculates open seats based on the number of teachers per grade level and state-mandated teacher-student ratios. Moreover, it is apparently lost on the Complainant that LCS is not permitted to deny a student enrollment who attended that school in the previous school year, regardless of whether a student is a non-transfer student, or an in-district or out-of-district transfer student. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-128(f)(1). Therefore, it is proper—and mandated—that LCS include in its student count under Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-128 those LCS students who are Lenoir City residents as well.

Likewise, Complainant misunderstands Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-128 in regard to transportation. The relevant part of the statute provides, "If an LEA grants a transfer to a student, then the parent or guardian of the student is responsible for transportation to the new school. The student must maintain satisfactory attendance, behavior, and effort to remain in the new school." Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-128(e). The Complainant alleges that LCS is violating the statute by transporting LCS students who are Lenoir City residents. However, subdivision (e), along with the statute as a whole, refers to transfers within an LEA. In accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-128(e), LCS Board Policy 6.206 provides that students within the school district who attend a school for which they are not zoned must provide their own transportation to and from school.

To address the Complainant's allegation that an LCS middle school "dis-enrolls then re-enrolls" to avoid truancy requirements, LCS points out that school systems do not enroll or disenroll students; that duty falls on parents or guardians. Therefore, if a parent withdraws their student and he/she is then no longer subject to Tennessee compulsory attendance rules, disenrollment has occurred. If a parent returns to LCS with their student and wishes to enroll, the student is reenrolled per state law. This is a mechanical process that is far from nefarious. In any event, LCS maintains an attendance and truancy policy in accordance with Tennessee law through Board Policy 6.200.

It is important to note, further, that the Complainant oversimplifies the relationship between LCS and the Lenoir City School District. The relationship between the school districts differs from the relationship between two separate county school districts. Tennessee counties are required to provide a free system of public schools. Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 49-1-102, 49-6-3001. Tennessee law further requires that "[w]here a student meets the requirements of the state board of education for transfer or admission purposes, the student may be admitted by a local board of education, notwithstanding any other provision or act to the contrary." Id. at § 49-6-3001(b)(3). Likewise, Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3102 requires local boards of education to "provide for the enrollment in a public school of each student who is eligible for enrollment within the schools of the local school system." The requirement that an LEA provide free education is inextricably linked with a county's ability to tax its residents. See id. at §§ 49-6-3003(b)(1), 49-6-3112, 49-6-3104.

Accordingly, my office previously advised LCS that, though the issue is not clearly decided under Tennessee law, LCS must admit Loudon County resident students into its schools, free of tuition, even where those students also reside within the Lenoir City municipal school district. That prior opinion letter to LCS can be found at this link [Letter re Enrollment to Garren 2024-03-18.pdf], and was made public some time ago as well.

As noted by the Complainant, it was the duly elected Loudon County Commission that ultimately voted to adopt a budget that included funds to construct a new school building. This occurred after LCS presented its related proposal, including the slideshow found at this link [LCBOE Presentation 2024 CC 6-17-24.pdf], and after the County Commission heard numerous public comments on the matter. If the Complainant is unhappy with that decision, the proper avenue of her disagreements is through political channels, rather than levying baseless accusations against elected public officials and school officials.

To be clear, LCS's decision to construct a new school is based solely on the need to address the continued population growth on the north side of Loudon County. As always, LCS is acting in accordance with its mission to provide high quality education to its students and to ultimately graduate college and career ready learners. Quite frankly, the citizens of Loudon County elected members of the Loudon County Board of Education to lead and manage the community's educational efforts, and those duly elected officials decided that a new school is needed for the community both now and certainly moving forward.

If you have questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Chris McCarty

BACK
3/3/25