Les Coffey
Meanwhile, the city of Rossville is claiming it has rights to the lines. The city arrested Coffey last month after he threatened to shut down the lines.
He has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on the matter, the future of which will be decided at a hearing in federal court in Atlanta on March 14.
Coffey was arrested Wednesday, Feb. 16, for making “terroristic threats” against the city and local businesses, claiming the city owes him $985,000 in sewer usage fees, and that if the bill was not paid, he would be forced to cut off the sewer lines.
On Friday Coffey held a news conference to show copies of blueprints of the city of Rossville’s original 1958 plans for building new sewer lines. In the plans, many smaller side sewers were listed as “private,” including one which services Peerless Mills, and which was labeled “private sewer by Peerless.”
According to Coffey, in the late 1950s the city of Rossville found itself in a sewer line entanglement with the city of Chattanooga for inappropriate use of Tennessee lines. The 1958 blueprints which Coffey presented represent, he said, the two cities’ attempt to build new lines for Rossville in order to avoid further conflict. As Rossville was not financially able to build the entire structure itself, alleged Coffey, many local private businesses, including Peerless Mills, fronted the cost for the sewerage lines on their own property, therefore retaining the rights to those particular lines.
Coffey maintains that although the city of Rossville has since that time bought out other properties involved in the sewer line building project and their privately-funded sewers with them, Peerless Mills does not fall under that category.
According to Coffey, the sewer line marked on the 1958 blueprint still belongs to the Peerless Mills property, not to the city, therefore exempting any prescriptive easement the city of Rossville may claim.
Coffey further alleges that the city of Rossville has hooked up its other sewer lines to the one that runs under Peerless Mills, effectively using the private sewer without consent, and without making payment.
He estimates that after his four years of ownership of the Peerless Mills property, the city has racked up $985,000 in sewer usage fees, for which he is demanding payment.
In the 1940s the federal government sued the city of Rossville over what was called the dye branch. It was where the Standard Coosa plant drained their dye to as well as the city dumped sewer into. Peerless had a waste treatment plant and dumped their sewer after whatever treatment the did to it into McFarland Creek. The dye branch and McFarland Creek ran into Chattanooga creeek. As part of the settlement the government gave Rossville 13,000 dollars to cover 1/2 of engineering studies to build a new interceptor sewer. The city had an emergency meeting of the council and approved the design of the sewer and the obtaining of the grant. After that the city did nothing as they did not have the money to build the sewer. In the mid 1950s the state filed suit to sell bonds on behalf of the city and pay to build the sewer. The city faught the suit but ultimately lost. At the time the city paid to build the sewer to Chattanooga and entered into a contract with Chattanooga to treat the sewer. Peerless and Standard Coosa paid to build the sewers from their buildings to the property line and or the main trunk line that runs to Chattanooga.
The city hooked into the Peerless site sewers at some point after the 1958 construction. I am sure there may have been some kind of hand shake agreement. The thing is we were not made aware of that agreement when we purchased the site. We were not aware the city had in fact tied into our lines. In one instance the city was not aware they had tied into our lines as the original letter their lawyer sent us in 2009 stated they were not using the Peerless sewer to drain anything along McFarland. That statement has now been proven to be inaccurate.
The issue is simple. If the old owners allowed the city to use the sewer that agreement was not passed on to us. The old owners did not tell us about that agreement if in fact there was one. In real estate all agreements must be in writting otherwise they are non-binding. You cannot have a binding oral agreement on a real estate deal or piece of property.
With that said, the city needs to find a firm that can put a real value on the sewer and pay us that sum and put the issue to rest once and for all. It must be noted that Chattanooga found themselves in the same situation on a property not to long ago. They spent 1.5 million to move a sewer they in fact did not have an easement for. This has happened many times in Atlanta. This problem is by far not a new issue for cities. The problem is Rossville has mis-managed their finances for so long they do not have the ability to pay the employee pensions much less pay to relocate a sewer or buy one from a property owner.
Another food for thought - The family owners of Peerless in its hayday were, lets say they were influential, at what was done in Rossville. Could it be they made a verbal agreement with Rossville as to connecting sewer lines? Back in the 1950's and 1960's allot of deals and agreements were done with a handshake. Giving how building codes, zoning laws, and lack of a master plan in Rossville - it could have happened.....
Facts? I thought owning the poo was your entire platform. So now your own argument isn't even a fact...what a shocker. I guess the slinging part would be an opinion, but I still stick by it.
You have brought up valid points.
(1) There is no contract as the 1958 drawing clearly shows the private part of the Peerless sewer dumping into the main trunk line at Williams street. It also shows the private part of the Standard Coosa plants sewer entering the city line at Williams Street. In fact Peerless gave Standard Coosa an easement for a small part of their land the Standard Coosa's sewer was running across. They also gave the city an easement for a small area that the city sewer was running on.
(1) Peerless owns all of the lines on the property. The 1958 drawing clearly reflects such. The problem has come in over the years since 1958. The city took it upon themselves to tie and add additional lines into the Peerless site. They never obtained any permision to do this, or at least no one can find where they obtained permision. They sure have not prodcued any proof they obtained permision. In fact they are claiming that they took the land over 20 years ago and therefore own it and should not have to pay. The city has conceded that they never paid for an easement but rather started using the lines and no one stopped them so they now own them.
(3)You are correct in saying we are responsible for the line. In fact contrary to what the city would like for you to think in October 2009 they sent us a letter listing improvements and repairs we needed to make to the line to bring it up to federal standards. This letter is what later brought on the litigation. As we inspected and began to make repairs and discovered the city was in fact using our sewer. They seem to forget about the letter that was sent and would like for the public to forget. Also when we first confronted the city their lawyer wrote us a letter clearly stating the city was not dumping any sewer or storm sewer into the Peerless sewer system and if the city sewer was enetering our lines we had done something to cause that. We sent the city a letter advising them that we were going to disconnect these unauthorized lines at which time they sued and obtained an injunction. The injunction expired and we are now in court. Instead of asking for another injunction they tried to make the issue criminal when in fact it is the city now back pedaling and trying to cover their butts.
With all of this said the city is caught taking two contradicting positions on the matter. First it was this is your sewer now spend the money to get us out of hot water with the federal government and Chattanooga. Then after we asked to be paid for the use of the sewer it is we own the thing because we said we do, not because we can show we paid anyone for it. The bottom line is Peerless owns the lines running through the property. There is no way of getting around that. It is like the contractors that never was paid for the work on city hall. The city simply thinks they can cheat anyone and everyone since they are The big bad city of Rossville.
If they wanted ot put a stop to the issue and settle the dispute they would show up for the court ordered mediation. As they are now refusing to come. I am sure the court will find them in contempt soon. Kind of funny how they are fast to run to the local courts for arrest warrants but want show up for court in Atlanta where the federal judges do not play fovorites.
Also if peerless wishes to collect money from the city for using sewer lines then doesn't there have to be a valid contract - signed by both parties - that spells out what peerless will provide the city and what the city will pay?
I would think if he is going back to plans from 1958 that there should be a contract on file from 1958 also. Obviously there has been no contract or "meeting of the minds" in this matter. I would agree that the city owes the money if peerless can produce a valid current contract stating what both parties have agreed to concerning peerless sewers - if peerless can't than I think he is out of luck. Please produce a valid contract between Peerless and the city concerning the sewers and I am sure all your detractors will conceed.
So I am Craaaaaaazzzzzzzyyyyyyy.
Brought to you by the good people at Rossville Metals. The largest scrap yard in Walker County. We are directly across from the Rossville city hall.
It is scary when we look at some of the people that we have installed in office. They control our money and how it is spent.
Even more scary will be if Coffey owns the sewer. He will control the poo and where it flows.
Has anyone tried being nice to him as opposed to pushing his buttons?
I am crazzzzzzzzzzyyyyyyyyyy
Brought to you by Rossville Metals. Across from Rossville city hall.
Yeah, seriously. This guy just isn't my "Businessman Of The Year"
1) He doesn't pay his taxes. You and I have to haul the freight for deadbeats like him.
2) He only obeys laws that he agrees with and give him advantage ( ie: illegal asbestos removal).The rest of us schlubs have to obey the rules, but when he gets caught doing something illegal (which is alarmingly often) ,then he starts hiding behind his lawyer and claiming that everybody is out to get poor 'ol Les.
3) He's a bully. After being bullied in my school days , I would say that I know the type. Whenever anyone stands up to this guy, he starts making threats. He better hope that I am not on his jury for threatening city officials that were just doing their jobs.
4) He doesn't give a fig about the city of Rossville. He can just pack up and get back on his Beverly Hillbilles truck and go back to Arkansas and stick us with his mess. Some of us call this home and want to defend it against people like him that turn it into a pay toilet.
If I were in his shoes ? Wow, tough question. Um, lets see, Um, Maybe I would stop acting like a jackass 24/7 and actually stop attacking my city government for enforcing the laws that are on the books. Maybe I would pay my taxes. Maybe I would act like a citizen and not commit felonies. Thats an idea so crazy that it might just work !
Tick, tock.Tick,tock.
Again, Coffey has presented no context or background for his latest assertions. He has some 50 year old drawings that show what he wants to show,leaving out every development since...1958. (Boy,do I feel old). But remember,this is the same nutmuffin that has claimed :
1) He would some day be the mayor of Rossville.
2) Every police officer and city administrator in his would-be kingdom is conspring day and night against him.
3)That the real owner of his little junkpile (RDS) is conspiring against him,in collusion with the city,the Freemasons and the Rossville Elks Lodge.
4)That a full 80% of Rossville is behind him in his courageous fight to make the town an eyesore.
5)Tried to get the police chief arrested for doing his job.
So. Even though this guy should be under psychiatric care, we're supposed to believe that because he waves a sheaf of 50 year old drawings under the nose of a reporter that he's suddenly rational ? That's a bit of a stretch. This guy spins lots of tall tales during the brief periods that he is not incarcerated for one indiscretion or another. Lets see how this one plays out before we declare him sane.