The Fred D. Thompson U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building at 719 Church St. in Nashville, Tenn.
Photograph by John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout
A federal judge has temporarily blocked enforcement of Tennessee’s so-called “abortion trafficking law,” which subjects adults who aid minors in getting an abortion without parental permission to criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits.
In a lengthy opinion, U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger concluded the law is likely to be found to be an unconstitutional ban on protected speech about a procedure that, while largely banned in Tennessee, is legally available in other states.
The law outlaws the “recruitment” of a minor to obtain an abortion, a term the judge concluded was so ill-defined it could encompass a wide range of conversations about abortion, including simply telling a pregnant teen about all of her options.
“Tennessee, in other words, has chosen to outlaw certain communications in furtherance of abortions that are, in fact, entirely legal,” the decision, released Friday, said. “It is, therefore, a basic constitutional fact — which Tennessee has no choice but to accept — that as long as there are states in which abortion is permissible, then abortion will be potentially available to Tennesseans.”
From Judge Trauger’s decision:
“A teenager might be convinced to pursue an abortion by being told that she has great educational potential and should focus on her schooling, or she might be convinced by receiving information regarding childcare costs.
She could be convinced by being told, accurately, that there are many religious congregations that would not condemn her decision to terminate a pregnancy, or she might be convinced by having her exaggerated medical fears about complications assuaged. She might even be convinced simply by being told that, whatever she does, she is entitled to love and support.
Every such statement, if made to an unemancipated minor considering abortion with the intention of helping the minor choose the correct course for her—including, potentially, by obtaining a legal abortion—could lead to criminal prosecution under the recruitment provision.”
The lawsuit was brought by state Rep. Aftyn Behn, a Nashville Democrat and social worker, who has publicly advocated for abortion rights, and Rachel Welty, a Nashville attorney who describes herself as an “advocate for safe and healthy access to abortion care.” They are represented in the case by Nashville attorneys Daniel Horwitz and Sarah Martin.
Both women said they did not know if the information and advocacy they provided would be interpreted as “recruiting” a minor for abortion and subjecting them to felony arrest and prosecution.
Before filing suit, Welty sent a letter to district attorneys in Middle Tennessee seeking “assurances and/or clarification of their intentions regarding the enforcement of the law.” None of the district attorneys responded.
Behn, in an emailed statement Monday, criticized the bill as being “pushed by special interests and their bought-and-paid-for legislators to test how far they can go in undermining our constitutional rights.”
Friday’s preliminary injunction prevents the law from being enforced pending a trial in the case, which has not yet been scheduled. In issuing the order, Trauger rejected an effort by state lawyers to dismiss the case entirely or to confine her injunction against enforcing the law to only the two women filing suit.
“Welty and Behn do not just have a right to speak their message,” Trauger wrote. “They have a right to live in a state where that message can be repeated by all who find it valuable to all who wish to hear it. Otherwise, there would be no actual freedom of speech — just freedom of a few speakers to address a silenced populace.”
Trauger also shot down an argument by lawyers defending the law that it was rooted in the state’s “compelling interest in safeguarding the wellbeing of children and protecting the relationship between children and their parents.”
The law, Trauger wrote, “completely fails to explain how the recruitment provision is tailored to address … the wellbeing of Tennessee children. If anything, it is particularly striking for its lack of any provision focusing on the best interests of the minor at issue.”
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and X.
Amid a surge in HIV and syphilis cases in Shelby County, a group of Democratic lawmakers is pressing state health officials for answers.
Cases of HIV and syphilis in the Memphis region increased by 100 percent over the past five years, according to the Shelby County Department of Health, which has, thus far, not released total case numbers. Among young people aged 15 to 19, diagnosed cases increased 150 percent.
“This disturbing trend underscores the urgent need for effective public health strategies and resources to combat the spread of these infections,” read the letter, sent late last week.
The lawmakers are demanding an explanation from Tennessee Department of Health Commissioner Dr. Ralph Alvarado about a series of state policy changes that they believe are exacerbating the crisis, rather than addressing it.
Among the changes: a new parental rights law requiring parental consent for teens seeking healthcare services.
The Lookout reported last month that the Tennessee Department of Health quietly instructed public health clinics to turn away teens seeking access to routine healthcare without a parent, citing new legislation known as the Family Rights and Responsibilities Act.
It’s a significant shift in policy for teens accustomed to seeking out birth control, sexually transmitted disease testing, pregnancy tests, and routine healthcare in public health clinics — which serve as the only accessible source of healthcare for teens living in some rural Tennessee communities.
Advocates have warned that the way the Department of Health is interpreting the new law — by concluding it supersedes prior laws that allow teens to access birth control and sexually transmitted disease testing — will deter young people from visiting clinics entirely, exacerbating outbreaks of sexually transmitted disease.
The Department of Health has not yet publicly acknowledged the shift in policy for teens and did not respond to a renewed request for information from the Lookout on Tuesday.
“There hasn’t been anything concrete in writing,” said Rep. Aftyn Behn, a Nashville Democrat. “There hasn’t been any communication from the commissioner.”
Behn said she is concerned that the growing influence of a parental rights movement in Tennessee, which has ushered in a series of laws in recent years giving parents more legal control over teens, shares blame for the surge in HIV and syphilis cases among young people.
“The actual, tangible consequence of the movement is this public health crisis,” she said.
The Democrats are also seeking information on how Gov. Bill Lee’s decision to reject federal HIV funding is impacting the current Shelby County outbreaks.
The reality is this is 2024. Teens are having sex. What they don’t have is the information they need.
Sen. London Lamar, D-Memphis
Last year Lee announced he would reject millions in funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for HIV prevention and treatment that previously went to Planned Parenthood clinics in Tennessee.
GOP lawmakers have, for years, fought to remove public funding from the clinics, which also provided abortion services until the state’s strict ban took effect in 2022.
Sen. London Lamar, a Memphis Democrat who signed onto the letter, cited another GOP backed measure as contributing to the current outbreak in Shelby County.
A so-called “Gateway Law” enacted by GOP lawmakers in 2012 requires abstinence-only sexual education in public schools.
“The reality is this is 2024. Teens are having sex. What they don’t have is the information they need,” she said.
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and X.
Nearly half of all Tennessee working families cannot afford the basic cost of living in their counties, according to new analyses of Census and federal economic data by the United Way of Tennessee.
The report examined the challenges facing households that earned more than the federal poverty level but, nevertheless, struggle to make ends meet.
While the number of households living in poverty decreased by nearly 5,000 across the state between 2021 and 2022, more than 34,214 households were added to the category of Tennesseans unable to pay for basic needs despite earnings that put them above the poverty level. In total, the report found that 1.2 million Tennessee households fall into this category.
The report concluded that the “survival budget” necessary for a family of four increased to $75,600 between 2021 and 2022. The budget includes the cost of housing, food, childcare, transportation and healthcare — all of which grew more expensive. In 33 Tennessee counties, more than half of all households failed to earn enough to meet their survival budgets.
While wages have increased in that time period, the 20 most common occupations in Tennessee still pay less than $20 per hour, the report found. These include jobs like sales, truck driving, administrative assistants and elementary school teachers.
Although poverty levels for Tennessee kids have shrunk, the report found that 38 percent of working Tennessee families with children at home did not earn enough to keep up with basic expenses.
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
A challenge of Tennessee’s law dealing with the use of public school restrooms and locker rooms by transgender students remains alive after a federal judge declined to dismiss all claims against the state education department and Williamson County Schools.
U.S. District Court Judge William Campbell denied the state’s request in to dismiss the child’s claim of a violation of rights under the Equal Protection Clause.
The judge, however, granted a request to dismiss the child’s claim that her Title IX rights were violated. The ruling notes that because the federal law allows schools to maintain separate restrooms for “the different sexes,” requiring the child to use the restroom based on her biological sex doesn’t violate Title IX.
The judge also dismissed the child’s request to correct all records to reflect her female gender.
Tennessee lawmakers have taken steps in recent years to prevent transgender athletes from playing sports based on their sexual identity. The Legislature enacted restrictions in 2023 on transgender medical treatment and this year adopted a bill preventing adults other than parents and guardians from taking children outside the state for transgender care.
The case against the Tennessee Department of Education and Williamson County Schools involves a 9-year-old transgender child who was male at birth but identifies as female, according to court filings. The child uses “she/her” pronouns and lives socially as a girl by wearing her hair long and dressing in a manner usually associated with girls.
The complaint was brought by a friend and the child’s parents when the child was 8, claiming the Williamson County elementary school she attends requires her to use a single-occupancy restroom, not the multi-use girls’ restroom.
The child claims the school’s “insistence” that she use a separate restroom “isolates her and distinguishes her from her classmates and exacerbates the stress and anxiety she experiences while trying to fit in and avoid being stigmatized on the basis of her sex and gender identity.” The child also claims the restroom designated for her has problems with distance from her class, safety and cleanliness.
The Tennessee Legislature passed the Tennessee Accommodations for All Children Act in May 2021, requiring public schools to provide a “reasonable accommodation” to students, teachers and employees who want “greater privacy when using a multi-occupancy restroom or changing facility designated for [their] sex and located within a public school building.”
“Reasonable accommodations” include single-occupancy restrooms or changing facilities or use of an employee restroom or changing facility.
The “reasonable accommodations” don’t include restrooms or changing areas designated for use by members of the opposite sex while the opposite sex is present or could be present. They also don’t require remodeling or structurally changing a school facility, or limiting access to a restroom or changing room designated for use by members of the opposite sex if that creates a violation or state or local building codes.
The new state law defines sex as “a person’s immutable biological sex as determined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of birth.” It also provides students, parents, guardians, teachers and employees the right to sue public school systems for “psychological, emotional, and physical harm,” including monetary damages, legal fees and costs if they “encounter a member of the opposite sex in a multi-occupancy restroom or changing facility located in a public school building … [and] the public school intentionally allowed a member of the opposite sex [defined as sex at birth] to enter the multi-occupancy restroom or changing facility while other persons were present.”
Campbell denied the child’s request for an injunction against the school district to stop it from enforcing the state law.
Yet the judge opted not to dismiss the child’s claims under the Equal Protection Clause, which prohibits a state from “denying to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” and prevents government discrimination that “either burdens a fundamental right, targets a suspect class or intentionally treats one differently than others similarly situated without any rational basis for the difference.”
The judge’s ruling points out that classifications by the government based on sex are recognized as “a quasi-suspect classification subject to intermediate scrutiny.”
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
Jace Wilder, education manager of the Tennessee Equality Project, says the new law “puts kids at risk of being abused, neglected and harmed again.” (Photo: John Partipilo)
With Gov. Bill Lee’s signature, Tennessee last week became the first state in the nation to establish the right of adults who claim moral or religious objections to LGBTQ identity to foster and adopt LGBTQ kids.
In the days since the law became effective, the Department of Children’s Services (DCS) has shelved a 10-year-old policy that said children in state custody must receive care that “promotes dignity and respect for all children/youth and families inclusive of their gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation.”
That policy is now “under review and will be updated on the website once the review is complete,” DCS spokesperson Ashley Zarach said. New guidelines for how the state will navigate foster kids’ sexual orientation and gender identity in deciding where to place them are expected to be hashed out in the coming months.
The law’s passage has raised alarms among advocates for LGBTQ youth in Tennessee and elsewhere, who say it upends a central principle of child welfare systems: prioritizing the best interest of a child.
Instead, they say, the law gives greater weight to a prospective parent’s religious and moral beliefs over the need of a child for a loving, safe, and supportive home.
“What’s really sad about this is there’s a really high volume of LGBTQ+ kids in the foster system whose needs aren’t being met now,” said Molly Quinn, executive director of OUTMemphis. Among the LGBTQ nonprofit’s programs is one that aids 18- to 24-year-old LGBTQ youth facing homelessness, many of whom are former foster kids who faced a tough time in the child welfare system.
“The fact that the state would accept a family that is willing to discriminate into this broken system with such vulnerable kids is difficult to understand,” she said.
Best interests of the child?
The law, formally called the Tennessee Foster and Adoptive Parent Protection Act, was backed overwhelmingly by Tennessee Republican lawmakers, who two years ago also approved a first-of-its-kind law allowing private adoption and foster care agencies that accept tax dollars to reject prospective parents for a variety of religious or moral reasons, including their faith or whether they are LGBTQ.
In advocating for this year’s bill, Dickson Republican Rep. Mary Littleton characterized it as a necessary safeguard for families who want to offer loving homes to foster and adoptive kids but worry that they would have to compromise their faith or moral beliefs. Littleton also cited an urgent need for more willing families to step forward. Tennessee currently has 4,948 fully approved foster homes, but needs 400 more.
At the end of the day the state should be acting in the best interest of the kids and this doesn’t do this. This puts emphasis on beliefs of foster and adoptive parents.
– Laura Brennan, Family Equity
Littleton stressed that the new law says DCS is not precluded from taking a child’s preferences into account before placing them in a home.
“This bill does not disregard the values and beliefs of the child,” Littleton said, noting state child welfare officials can still take into account “a comprehensive list of factors” before placing any child in any home.
Advocates have pushed back to say that plain language of the law does not require the state to take into account the child’s own wishes.
They also criticized what they call a mischaracterization by the law’s supporters that prospective foster and adoptive parents in Tennessee have been rejected for holding anti-LGBTQ beliefs.
Parents in Tennessee have not been required to be gender- or sexual-orientation-affirming as a condition of becoming approved as a foster or adoptive parent. They have, however, been required to promote dignity and respect of a child’s identity if they take an LGBTQ kid in their home — until now.
DCS: parents preferences already taken into account
According to the Department of Children’s Services, prospective parents’ “preferences” have routinely been taken into account before a child is placed in a home, a spokesperson for the Department of Children’s Services said in a statement.
“Prior to this legislation, the DCS home study process included asking prospective foster and adoptive parents a series of questions to identify their placement preferences,” a statement from DCS said.
“Among those are questions regarding willingness to parent a child who identifies as LGBTQ+. Our goal always is to find the most appropriate placement to meet the unique needs of each child in our care,” the statement said.
Tennessee currently has 8,854 kids in state custody — 6,686 of them residing in foster homes. Up to a third of all foster youth nationwide identify as LBGTQ — often kicked out of home or winding up in state custody as result of mistreatment or rejection based on their gender identity, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Jace Wilder, education manager Tennessee Equality Project, an LGBTQ advocacy organization that has vocally opposed the law, pointed to his own tough childhood as an example of the importance of supportive adults in a child’s life.
Wilder, who is transgender, was raised, in part, by a friend’s parents after suffering abuse at the hands of his father, he said. His mother was disabled and frequently hospitalized.
Wilder said the abuse wasn’t solely because of his gender identity, but “it kind of gave him more ammo to use against me, so that did not help.” He was also able to connect with LGBTQ people for support in his teens and college years, he said.
“Without finding people that accepted me and really helped me grow, I think I would have been stuck in the position of being too afraid to transition, too afraid of being out,” he said. “I think this puts kids at risk of being abused, neglected, and harmed again.”
The nature of discourse over LGBTQ youth in Tennessee already exemplifies the need for safe and affirming homes, said Eli Givens, a college freshman from Tennessee who also serves as an advocate for the Tennessee Equality Project.
“It’s been just really unbelievable watching this session,” Givens said. “I’ve had adults telling me I need to go gas myself, that I was clearly molested when I was younger, just a wide array of threats.
“It’s bewildering that the same adults who told me to gas myself can adopt an LGBTQ child. That’s an extremely scary reality.”
Tennessee AG pushes back on proposed federal LGBTQ foster protections
The law was enacted on the heels of proposed new rules currently being considered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services related to the placement of LGBTQI+ youth in foster care. Among the proposed rules for all foster homes is they “establish an environment free of hostility, mistreatment, or abuse based on the child’s LGBTQI+ status.”
In November, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti led a 17-state coalition opposing the rules, saying in a letter to the federal government that they would shrink the pool of available foster families and “further divert resources away from protecting foster children from physical abuse and toward enforcing compliance with controversial gender ideology.”
Laura Brennan, associate director for child welfare policy for Family Equality, which advocates for LGBTQ families, said national advocates are keeping a close eye on what’s happening in Tennessee. The state’s 2022 law allowing publicly-funded private adoption and foster care agencies to exclude LGBTQ parents has seen been adopted by 13 other states, she said.
“At the end of the day the state should be acting in the best interest of the kids and this doesn’t do this,” she said. “This puts emphasis on beliefs of foster and adoptive parents.”
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
A sign outside the Velsicol chemical plant. (Photo: Ashli Blow)
When 40 people gathered to hear about the future of a defunct chemical plant in North Memphis, many were surprised to learn the company has still been storing and shipping toxic materials for years.
Environmental advocates and residents met Velsicol Vice President George Harvell earlier this month at the Hollywood Community Center. Harvell organized this pre-application meeting as part of a mandatory step for his company to renew a state-sanctioned permit with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC.)
For generations of Black families in the communities of Hollywood and Douglass Park, Velsicol’s toxic legacy is a familiar burden. Harvell recounted the company’s history during his presentation, citing familiar information about how Velsicol manufactured several pesticides that were later found to have harmful effects on both human health and the environment.
However, his presentation took an unexpected turn when he began discussing the storage of existing Velsicol products. People interjected with questions about how that was possible when the company stopped its chemical production in 2012. Warnings are posted at the Wolf River about the potential toxicity of fish caught there, a legacy of Velsicol.
Through Velsicol’s hazardous waste management permit, however, it is authorized to store and distribute chemicals including Hexachlorocyclopentadiene, also commonly referred to as hex. Used in flame retardants and pesticides, hex is a manufactured chemical that does not occur naturally.
Warnings are posted at the Wolf River about the potential toxicity of fish caught there, a legacy of Velsicol. (Photo: Ashli Blow
Harvell gave conflicting remarks on the current source and acquisition of hex prior to storage at the Memphis facility. At the start of his presentation, Harvell said, “Velsicol is not manufacturing any products anywhere in the world, and we just broker chemicals.”
Moments later, he detailed “the four main products that Velsicol manufactures.” These four chemical products, including hex, are prominently advertised on Velsicol’s website.
As people asked for clarification about the product development in the meeting, Harvell backtracked, explaining, “I misspoke, but we’re not manufacturing. We’re storing them in the warehouses.”
Harvell initially denied that the company is extracting chemicals from contaminated water and soil on its site and reselling them as these products. However, his responses became inconsistent when a resident directly asked, “Where are you getting them from?”
Storing and distributing legacy pollutants
Hex is a crucial component in now-banned pesticides such as chlordane, aldrin, dieldrin, and endrin – all of which are legacy chemicals that still contaminate soil and water on and around Velsicol’s Memphis facility to this day, although Velsicol does not manufacture it now.
Laboratory testing has identified chemical residue since the 1970s, when industrial hygienists reported excessive levels of hex to the EPA based on air sampling. Im 1982, a memo from the City of Memphis documented that soil samples taken from around the site exhibited the chemical’s oily-greasy nature and indicated the potential for hex preservation in the soil.
In the 1990s, Velsicol was the sole producer of chlordane in the United States, despite its banned status for use in the county. The Memphis plant continued to manufacture chlordane for international export. When it stopped production later that decade, the company then reported a subterranean plume of chemicals roughly the size of the Liberty Bowl stadium.
It contained 80,000 pounds of carbon tetrachloride.
According to the National Library of Medicine, hex can be produced as a byproduct of creating carbon tetrachloride. Recent reports filed with TDEC showed low levels of the hex compound remain on-site, while around 7,000 pounds of carbon tetrachloride persisted, as noted in the latest publicly available Corrective Action Effectiveness Report (CAER). These reports are required annually by TDEC, and David Winchell, a consultant for Velsicol and senior engineer with the firm WSP, signed the 2022 report.
During Thursday’s meeting, Winchell and Harvell took questions about if these legacy chemicals tie into their modern products, but they did not give straightforward answers.
When a woman in the meeting asked, “are those chemicals coming from out of the ground, because you’re cleaning up?” Winchell replied, “No, those are products. I’ll let George speak to that …”
Harvell continued, “Those four products, with the exception of hex, I don’t think we’re finding them on the plant side.”
The woman posed her question again, “Are they coming out of the ground?” Harvell empathically responded with “no.” She asked a third time about their origin, and in response, he said, “The carbon tetrachloride is coming out of the groundwater.”
Despite repeated inquiries from The Lookout to both TDEC and Velsicol regarding the specifics of extraction activities over the last decade and the remaining clean-up tasks, simple answers have not been provided.
The cost of clean up
Velsicol’s defunct 62-acre site in Memphis has led many residents to believe it’s a federal Superfund site, because of perceived inactivity and deteriorating infrastructure, though the EPA hasn’t listed it as such.
The facility is operating under a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit, which allows Velsicol to legally store, treat and dispose of hazardous waste. Winchell and Harvell told people on Thursday they want to continue remediation of legacy pollutants, though it is unclear what is left to clean up.
In both federal programs, a distinction between RCRA and Superfund sites is that Superfund sites prioritize remediation and redevelopment, whereas RCRA is primarily focused on the management of hazardous waste. However, land reuse has successfully happened under RCRA permits.
The EPA typically designates a Superfund site when a company lacks the financial means to conduct clean-up or has abandoned its site.
The Memphis facility has faced several financial challenges over the decades. In 1986, people who lived near its rural dump site, then referred to by Velsicol as a farm, collectively filed a class-action lawsuit.
“Velsicol has taken the position that without the farm, the Memphis plant would close,” reads the court case. “Thus, the Court believes that it would be appropriate to deprive Velsicol of a reasonable part of the profit it made by improperly disposing of those chemical wastes to keep that plant open.”
The case raises questions about stockpiling chemicals and “unjust profits.” Attorneys argued that Velsicol may have pocketed between $23 and $63 million from not paying for proper chemical disposal, leading to significant settlements. The dump site later became a Superfund site, similar to the one in the Hollywood neighborhood, where Velsicol faced another class action lawsuit in 2008 for contamination, resulting in smaller settlements for affected residents.
During a months-long investigation into the Velsicol facility site in Memphis, The Lookout submitted a public records request to determine the company’s profits and clean-up expenditures over the past decade. The Tennessee Department of Revenue denied the request, citing sealed records.
Velsicol in Memphis is now navigating bankruptcy proceedings after filing for Chapter 11 in September. Discussions with the EPA and Department of Justice regarding future actions are underway, as confirmed by Harvell.
As part of the renewal process for Velsicol’s RCRA permit, the company must demonstrate to the state its financial ability to cover the costs of clean-up. In their previous permit renewal, Velsicol committed to providing $2.5 million for this purpose.
Velsicol is required to submit their current application to TDEC by April 3.
Following submission, TDEC will review and potentially revise the draft permit. This process can take over a year to complete, but in some cases, it can take as little as 60 days. If the review period is shorter, TDEC may hold public hearings on the draft permit as soon as this summer.
In the meantime, environmental justice movement organizers are trying to get a clearer picture of Velsicol’s present operations and upcoming plans.
The community wants more opportunities to engage with Velsicol over its redevelopment plans and federal funding opportunities, similar to those offered by the Superfund site process, particularly as the RCRA permit’s renewal occurs only once a decade — the only time public comment is required.
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
Legislation designed to stop the potential release of climate-controlling chemicals into the atmosphere is scheduled to be considered in the House this week, a bill the Senate’s sponsor also relates to “chemtrails,” a conspiracy theory related to the lines of vapor coming from jet planes.
One environmental lobbyist called the measure “nonsense,” even though it passed the Senate last week 25-6.
Rep. Monty Fritts (R-Kingston) is taking the matter seriously and is slated to put House Bill 2063 before the Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee Wednesday. He is not expected to try to amend the measure.
Fritts said Monday the bill deals only with “geoengineering” purportedly to be done by the federal government and noted he is not concerned about a connection with “chemtrail” conspiracy theories.
If you look at a thousand planes, you won’t see one (chemtrail). But then all of a sudden you see one. So we’re just asking the question: Are they putting anything in the air that could be toxic?
– Sen. Steve Southerland, R-Morristown
The bill points out that the federal government and other entities acting at the government’s request are preparing to conduct experiments by dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere. It further notes the impact on human health and the environment from this type of “broad scale geoengineering” isn’t fully understood.
“Chemtrail” conspiracy theories have surfaced for decades. But this bill could be a reaction to a measure signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022 instructing the Office of Science and Technology Policy to work with NASA on research of climate intervention.
An article in MIT Technology Review reports the crux of the federal plan is to release tiny particles into the atmosphere that, theoretically, could reflect enough sunlight to slow down the Earth’s warming. In other instances, groups could try to determine whether the release of particles might stop cirrus clouds from trapping heat against the Earth, according to a news report.
The bill, which would avert that in Tennessee, says “intentional injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of chemicals, chemical compounds, substances, or apparatus within the borders of this state into the atmosphere with the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight is prohibited.”
Sen. Steve Southerland (R-Morristown), who initiated the legislation, didn’t mention “chemtrails” when he passed the bill on the Senate floor last week.
But when he spoke to the Tennessee Lookout previously, he made that part of his argument, pointing out that a space shuttle doesn’t leave a “chemtrail.” Likewise, he said, emissions at Watts Bar nuclear and Kingston fossil plants appear to be “pure steam,” in contrast to the “chemtrails” from some jets.
“If you look at a thousand planes, you won’t see one (chemtrail). But then all of a sudden you see one,” Sutherland said. “So we’re just asking the question: Are they putting anything in the air that could be toxic?”
Scott Banbury, a lobbyist with the Sierra Club, described the bill as more of a “laughing” matter than anything and said efforts in the legislature to undo wetlands protections are more important.
“It’s not happening,” Banbury said, adding he was uncertain how the bill got so much traction in committees. “It’s not gonna happen anytime soon. It’s nonsense.”
Numerous websites debunk the theories surrounding “chemtrails.”
David Keith’s Research Group with Harvard University describes “chemtrails” as a conspiracy theory that governments and other groups are running a secret program to add “visible plumes” containing toxic chemicals to the atmosphere, similar to contrails or vapor trails released by aircraft engine exhaust that are made up mainly of water in the form of ice crystals.
The group notes, “We have not seen any credible evidence that chemtrails exist,” but if researchers did find proof the government is endangering people it would be “eager to expose and stop any such activities.”
Banbury pointed out fear of “chemtrails” has been discussed for years, but he was uncertain how the federal government could conspire with enough people to send out toxic chemicals from jets without someone “blowing the whistle.”
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
Entrance to a Memphis Velsicol plant. (Photo: Ashli Blow)
A chemical company in North Memphis that spent decades dumping toxic materials into waterways is looking to renew a state permit that would allow hazardous waste operations to continue at its defunct facility.
Unlike other Velsicol facilities across the United States that have become Superfund sites — a federal designation that allows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to fund cleanup of contaminated areas — the Memphis location, 119 Warford St., has worked under a state-sanctioned permit since 2014. Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in Tennessee, companies can store, treat, and dispose of hazardous waste. The primary difference between the two is that RCRA addresses the management of hazardous waste and Superfund is geared toward the remediation of abandoned sites with contamination.
Environmental advocates and residents question whether a hazardous waste permit is the appropriate avenue for Velsicol or whether the company is using it as a means to circumvent national Superfund site status.
People will have a rare opportunity to ask during a public meeting on March 21 at 6 p.m. at the Hollywood Community Center, when Velsicol representatives plan to discuss its plans to renew and update its corrective action permit.
The public meeting comes in the wake of the company’s recent bankruptcy filing and their obligation to submit a new work plan to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) to address contamination at a neighboring property, an affordable housing apartment complex.
“This [RCRA] permit is really supposed to be used for facilities that have hazardous materials on site … it’s not really supposed to be used for a long-term cleanup,” said Sarah Houston, executive director of watchdog group Protect Our Aquifer. “Really that should be something that has more federal oversight like the Superfund program, and we just see that this permitting structure has really made this a very slow cleanup process and isn’t doing the real due diligence of removing the toxins from the soil and the groundwater and really finishing the job.”
Velsicol created chemicals so dangerous that it changed environmental policy nationwide. Their pesticide production with chemicals like dieldrin and endrin became the center of Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring,” published in 1962 and credited with the start of the modern environmental movement. Carson described the chemicals as the “elixirs of death” and warned of its neurological effects on people and wildlife, as well as its nearly irreversible pollution in ecosystems.
As America responded with federal regulation, such as banning chemicals for domestic use, Velsicol continued to make chemicals like chlordane through the early 1990s in Memphis — more than 30 years after the national reckoning. Meanwhile, the Black community around it was left to live with an enduring toxicity.
The Memphis facility closed in 2012, but to this day, as people pass by Velsicol, the 62-acre site appears unchanged from behind the chain-link fence. Many think it is a Superfund site, because of its appearance resembling that of a desolate lot.
The secretive operations of today’s Velsicol
In Southwest Tennessee, Velsicol is known for disposing of their chemicals in two landfills that became Superfund sites: One in the Hollywood community in Memphis and the other in Toone, an hour east of Memphis. Their cleanup at these dumps, and subsequent lawsuits and settlements, were heavily followed by mainstream media and politicians, but little public understanding exists about the facility where the chemicals were originally produced.
In anticipation of its permit renewal, something that only happens once every 10 years, the Lookout conducted a months-long investigation into Velsicol in 2022. We reviewed 125 public records that documented 40 years of its cleanup efforts. Under RCRA, Velsicol is required to submit a yearly Corrective Action Effectiveness Reports (CAER). To accurately understand the technical data in these reports, the Lookout talked to lawyers, policy analysts, and chemists who work with site remediation.
According to those reports, since 1999, Velsicol has been trying to reduce a fluctuating plume of chemicals beneath the facility that’s mass measured around 126 acres, which is roughly the size of Liberty Bowl stadium. The company calls the plume “under control.” It monitors a network of wells to calculate the boundary and weight of the plume, made mostly of carbon tetrachloride – a chemical used as house cleaner that is now also banned for consumer use by the EPA.
Their plume has decreased from over 80,000 pounds to 7,000 pounds of chemicals over 20 years.
“The fact that they have removed 90 percent doesn’t mean that it’s 90 percent less toxic. There’s much more in terms of threat and potential injury than just the total,” Christopher Reddy, a marine chemist who analyzes drinking water for pollutants, including pesticides, told The Lookout in 2022.
Velsicol reported to TDEC that it extracted another 2,659 pounds as of 2023, and it is unclear how much of the plume remains.
Scientists such as Reddy and advocates like Houston express concern about lingering chemicals and the groundwater’s flow, as these concentrations of chemicals may move downward into the ground and potentially reach layers of the Memphis Sand Aquifer, the primary drinking water source for over one million residents in the region.
But there are even more concerns about what lies above the surface.
Bankruptcy, residential contamination
Guided by RCRA regulations, the remediation for topical contamination in soil has unfolded gradually, marked by a series of inspections, investigations, action plans, status reports, and investigations.
During their permit tenure, Velsicol incurred minor violations from TDEC for mislabeling materials. However, following The Lookout investigation, Velsicol faced a different array of violations and deficiency notices from TDEC.
Last August, when attempting to file its latest CAER, Velsicol submitted a document that did not include analytical laboratory reports. This January, TDEC gave Velsicol a violation for not having documentation of hazardous waste management training in recent years. According to monitoring reports filed over the last decade, Velsicol employs two people at its Memphis facility.
The fact that they have removed 90 percent doesn’t mean that it’s 90 percent less toxic. There’s much more in terms of threat and potential injury than just the total.
– Christopher Reddy, marine chemist
TDEC is also now requiring that Velsicol submit an interim measures work plan by the end of April to address contamination at the neighboring Cypress Gardens Apartments on 1215 Springdale Street. The property manager of the affordable housing apartment complex hired an independent environmental consulting agency, Tioga, to collect soil samples. The Lookout reached out to the property manager, but they did not respond to comment.
Tioga took the tests to a lab that found several pesticides including aldrin and endrin with dieldrin exceeding the EPA’s contamination limit for residential properties.
“The findings of this assessment indicate that soil contamination associated with the former Velsicol plant still remains on the property and could potentially post a continued risk,” said the report, signed by Tioga Geologist John Luke Hall.
The report specified that the western building alongside Cypress Creek, where Velsicol disposed of their hazardous waste for years, was most at risk. The environmental consultants recommended the removal of the soil between the apartment building and Cypress Creek.
It would be a part of existing work that Velsicol does to extract patches of contaminated soil on its property, where a baseball diamond-shaped consolidation pile at the northwest corner of its property Each time soil is added to the pile, a tarp-like impermeable liner is put over it and welded into place. Eventually, the pile will be capped and “monitored in perpetuity to ensure the cap is not compromised.
“[The permit] comes around every decade,” said Kathy Yancey-Temple. “So we’re here again, and we have to fight them off again.” (Photo: Ashli Blow)
The Lookout reached out to Velsicol’s Vice President George Harvell for comment, but he had not responded to our request by the publication of this article.
Velsicol Chemical LLC and its parent corporations filed for bankruptcy in September, and Harvell wrote in a letter to TDEC that the company plans to reorganize. It’s a similar step that the Velsicol plant in Michigan, which operated under a different corporate parent, took, also filing for bankruptcy and relying on the EPA and State of Michigan for funding to clean up its site. It’s now one of the country’s costliest Superfund sites.
“[The permit] comes around every decade,” said Kathy Yancey-Temple. “So we’re here again, and we have to fight them off again.” (Photo: Ashli Blow)
Kathy Yancey-Temple lives near the Velsicol facility in Douglass Park, a historic community established by a formerly enslaved individual to provide safe property ownership for Black families during the Reconstruction era. The neighborhood is now surrounded by industry.
Yancey-Temple believes that Velsicol’s toxic practices have been at the expense of her community’s health and livelihoods.
As an organizer for the Center for Transforming Communities, Yancey-Temple has had difficulties in getting clear answers about the company’s actions over the past decade, submitting her own public record requests to the state for information. Despite her efforts, neither she nor other community members have received outreach from the company about health implications of the contaminants that linger.
Years of committed environmental justice advocacy efforts played a crucial role in the company’s closure. Yancey-Temple is confident that continued community organizing can be instrumental in navigating this next phase and advocating for a thorough cleanup to conclude, allowing the property to be redeveloped.
“[The permit] comes around every decade,” she said. “So we’re here again, and we have to fight them off again.”
Tennessee Lookoutis part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
A lingering legal battle that was poised to be settled this summer, leading to a clearer pathway for tens of thousands of Tennesseans to restore their voting rights, has instead reignited into a contentious court fight with no certain outcome ahead of the next presidential election.
One in five Black voting-age Tennesseans lacks the right to vote due to a past criminal conviction — likely the highest rate of African-American disenfranchisement in the nation, according to the Sentencing Project. Overall, nearly 10 percent of the Tennessee electorate — 470,000 people — have lost their right to vote due to convictions.
In a lawsuit filed in December 2020, the Tennessee Conference of the NAACP and five residents denied the right to vote alleged Tennessee officials failed to follow state laws that allow individuals to legally restore their voting rights after serving their sentences and completing parole. Instead, the state implemented inaccessible and opaque processes that impede legal pathways for restoring rights, the lawsuit claimed.
Close to settling key claims in the case over the summer — potentially ahead of high profile local elections in Nashville, Memphis, and for state office — attorneys for the state abruptly broke off talks in late July, catching lawyers for the NAACP by surprise, legal filings show. Then, on August 2nd, lawyers for the Tennessee Attorney General filed motions asking a judge to reject the claims entirely.
“The Elections Division, TDOC, and Governor’s office had the opportunity this summer to create accessible, transparent, and uniform procedures to allow the over 470,000 disenfranchised Tennesseans a fair shot at getting their voting rights restored and rejoining their communities as full citizens,” Blair Bowie, an attorney representing the NAACP with the DC-based Campaign Legal Center, said Friday.
“Instead, they blew up the voting rights restoration system entirely and imposed effectively permanent disenfranchisement on July 21st,” she said.
A spokesperson for the Tennessee Attorney General did not respond to emailed questions on Friday.
The breakdown in the federal case came shortly after a June 29th ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court against Ernest Falls, who was denied the right to vote in Tennessee in 2020 after receiving clemency in Virginia for a decades-old crime.
The Supreme Court ruled that Falls, also represented by the Campaign Legal Center, was required to show he had paid all outstanding court costs, restitution and child support obligations in Virginia to establish his voting rights — in addition to proof of the Virginia clemency.
Secretary of State Mark Goins then issued a memo that incorporated expanded requirements for all state residents seeking to restore their voting rights — regardless of where their conviction took place. In addition to the process of demonstrating they, too, had paid court costs and other financial obligations related to their crime, in-state residents must now show they also “have been pardoned by a Governor, U.S. President, or other appropriate authority of a state or have had their full rights of citizenship restored as prescribed by law.”
The memo wasn’t shared with attorneys for the NAACP who had been involved with them in settlement negotiations for months, legal filings said.
“Plaintiffs learned from publicreporting that Defendant Goins had that day issued guidance to county election officials changing his interpretation of the State’s requirements for individuals with felony convictions to restore their voting rights,” court records said.
In seeking a ruling dismissing major elements of the case, state lawyers have argued in motions for summary judgment that the five individuals names in the suit lack standing in court.
Tennessee does have a process in place for restoration of rights, one that provides a pathway to restoring rights while preserving election integrity, they argued.
“Tennessee does not reject all voter registration forms on which the applicant affirmed that they have a felony conviction,” the state’s filings said. “Moreover, Tennessee’s practice is rationally related to its legitimate interest in combatting voter fraud, safeguarding voter confidence, and ensuring accurate record keeping.”
The Sentencing Project’s national voting rights study found that that 3,415 Tennessee voting-age citizens have been granted Certificates of Restoration since 2016 — fewer than 1 percent of those with prior felony convictions estimated to be eligible to vote under Tennessee law.
The NAACP lawsuit argues that the current administration of voting rights restoration certificates violate the U.S. Constitution’s due process and the equal protection rights.
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
Tennessee Comptroller Jason Mumpower is pushing a plan to increase the frequency of county property reappraisals to more closely match market values and stop local governments from losing tax revenue.
Mumpower, who floated the idea in May, told the Tennessee Lookout he plans to introduce a bill in 2024 to speed up the reappraisal schedule statewide.
“It’s just something everybody recognizes needs to happen in such a dynamic and growing state,” Mumpower says.
With 83,000 people moving into the state last year, seventh highest nationally, the state is suffering from a housing shortage, which is driving up real estate prices, according to Mumpower.
Yet real property is appraised by country property assessor offices only once every four, five or six years, depending mainly on the size of the county. Mumpower wants to move that up to every two, three or four years, and he’s considering requesting larger counties such as Shelby, Davidson, Hamilton, Knox, Rutherford, Williamson, and Wilson go to a yearly reappraisal.
Because of the lag time between appraisals, governments often have to discount property taxes by applying a sales ratio dealing with appraisals versus market values, which led 38 counties to experience “extraordinary revenue loss,” according to Mumpower.
Another 36 counties will suffer the same type of revenue loss next year, he says, thus the need to speed up reappraisal cycles.
“It is a modern practice. It is the global standard,” Mumpower says.
Local property assessor offices would be in a constant state of reappraisal, and equalization boards might have to go through more hearings for contested appraisals.
But Mumpower contends counties and the state have the technology for annual reappraisals.
Officials such as Davidson County Property Assessor Vivian Wilhoite and Rutherford County Property Assessor Rob Mitchell also support the proposal.
Mitchell says Rutherford lost $11 million over the last two appraisal cycles because market values outstripped property appraisals by such a wide margin.
An appraisal or sales ratio has to be applied in cases where a property is appraised at $300,000, for instance, but sells in a growing economy at $400,000 within two or three years before the property is appraised again.
Wilhoite, a Metro Nashville mayor candidate this year and a former appraiser for the Tennessee Regulatory Commission, points out the state already does annual reappraisals on personal property, and she believes frequent appraisals will help property owners.
“Taxpayers won’t get that sticker shock,” Wilhoite says.
The Comptroller has an Office of State Assessed Properties, which reappraises some commercial, utility, and transportation properties annually.
Mumpower presented the plan to the Tennessee County Services Association, the Tennessee County Mayors Association, the Tennessee Municipal League, and the Tennessee Assessors Association and the Government Finance Officers Association and says it is “heralded” as a good idea from a “fairness” standpoint for taxpayers and local governments.
“There are tax dollars generated off of growth,” Mitchell says, but he notes county commissions still wind up missing out on revenue increases because of the way sales ratios are applied.
If appraisals are done every two years, the law doesn’t require the use of an appraisal or sales ratio, according to Mitchell.
In addition, assessors say disabled, elderly, and veteran property owners who receive property appraisal reductions will benefit from the proposal.
The Beacon Center, a libertarian group, issued a statement Monday saying it agrees with Mumpower that property taxes and housing costs “are becoming a larger issue in Tennessee,” though it contends the state has bigger problems with taxation.
“The timing of reassessments doesn’t change the underlying issues with property taxes,” Ron Shultis of the Beacon Center says in a statement. “Policymakers should create property tax caps across the board to give property owners protection from large unexpected tax hikes, as we are one of only four states without one. More frequent reassessments without a cap would make it easier for local governments to collect a windfall due to the truth in taxation law, as evidenced by what occurred recently in Nashville.”
The Beacon Center points to the 34 percent property tax increase in Metro Nashville four years ago, followed by a reappraisal when property values increased across Davidson County.
In April 2021, now-former Mayor John Cooper claimed the tax increase would be “reversed” because property reappraisals would show values increased countywide. Several Metro Council members disagreed with the mayor, saying his comments were misleading.
Under state law, counties are prohibited from having a tax revenue windfall from increases in property reappraisals. A certified tax rate from the state that equalizes revenues must be sent to counties following reappraisals, then the county’s governing body sets a new rate.
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
