Resident Challenges City Center Spending, Warns of Debt and Future Tax Burden

DICKSON, Tenn. — As the City of Dickson moves forward with financing for its planned $38.7 million City Center, one resident is questioning whether the project is the best use of the city's financial resources.

Trace Edmonson addressed the Dickson City Council during public comment at its Aug. 3 meeting, raising concerns about the amount of debt associated with the project, the possibility of future tax increases and whether the money could be better directed toward improvements that residents use throughout the community.

Edmonson's comments came during the same meeting in which the council unanimously approved key financing measures for the City Center.

The council approved Resolution 2026-51, an initial resolution authorizing up to $80 million in general obligation bonds. City officials stressed during the meeting that the entire $80 million would not be borrowed for the City Center.

Instead, officials said the first bond issue would total $40 million and would be used entirely for the City Center. Additional bond series — potentially two more — could be brought before the council later to finance other projects if city leaders decide to move forward with them.

The council also approved a separate resolution authorizing the issuance, sale and repayment of the bonds needed for the first $40 million.

But Edmonson told council members he believes the City Center represents too large of a financial commitment.

“I don't think it'd be a good fit in our city because of how much debt we'd be taking on to build this,” Edmonson said.

He also questioned the direct economic return the city would receive from constructing the facility.

Edmonson argued that unlike some public investments that can directly encourage economic activity, the City Center itself would not generate significant new revenue for the city.

He also expressed concern about what taking on additional debt could mean for taxpayers in future years.

Edmonson said residents and future businesses could face greater financial pressure if taxes eventually have to be increased.

“No one wants tax raises,” he told the council.

No tax increase specifically tied to the City Center was proposed or approved during the Aug. 3 meeting.

Resident Points to Parks, Sidewalks and Neighborhood Improvements

Edmonson also questioned whether the city's financial resources could produce a greater benefit if directed toward projects throughout the community.

He specifically mentioned sidewalks, parks and neighborhood improvements as examples of investments that could have a more immediate impact on residents.

Edmonson connected that argument to Dickson's ability to retain younger residents.

He said he worries that increasing costs and government spending decisions could make it more difficult for younger people to remain in the community as they establish careers and families.

“This is a big reason why we don't have much youth retention here,” Edmonson said, arguing that the city should spend more on amenities that younger residents and families can use.

He also suggested that city leaders could have explored adapting an existing building rather than constructing a new City Center.

Among the alternatives he mentioned was the former YMCA property.

Edmonson argued that renovating an existing facility for city operations could potentially have provided an alternative to constructing the new building.

Council Approves $38.7 Million Maximum Price

Later in the meeting, the council continued moving the City Center project forward.

Council members approved a guaranteed maximum construction price of $38,723,075.

The council also approved an additional $46,450 for Southern Architecture Workshop for structural design and engineering work related to the project.

City officials said part of that additional work involves moving the project's steel package forward because steel mills are experiencing long delays. The firm's existing contract was identified during the meeting as approximately $1.44 million.

The City Center financing resolutions and guaranteed maximum price were approved without opposition from the council.

Public Has Opportunity to Seek Referendum

The city's bond process also provides an avenue for residents who oppose the borrowing to attempt to force the question to a public vote.

City officials said Resolution 2026-51 would be published in the newspaper, beginning a 20-day period in which residents could petition for a referendum.

Officials said a petition would require signatures from at least 10% of the city's registered voters, based on the number of registered voters on the date the notice was published.

The city expected the notice to be published shortly after the meeting, with officials identifying Aug. 25 as the anticipated deadline for filing a qualifying petition.

If no successful petition forces a referendum, city officials indicated they expected to move toward selling the first bonds for the project in September.

For Edmonson, however, the larger question is not simply whether Dickson can finance the City Center, but whether taking on the debt is the best long-term choice for the community.

He warned that decisions made today will continue affecting residents years into the future.

“This building is just going to be a big debt for people in the future,” Edmonson said.