"I consider this matter closed," Greeneville Mayor Laraine King wrote Friday afternoon in an e-mail to Alderman Sarah Webster regarding the transfer of maintenance employees from the Parks and Recreation Department to the Public Works Department.

Alderman Webster asked earlier this week for the controversial issue to be placed on the agenda for a vote at the Nov. 17 meeting of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen.

That meeting has been canceled "due to a lack of business items needing immediate board action," according to a Friday afternoon announcement from the mayor's office.

Mayor King's e-mail, sent to Alderman Webster and The Greeneville Sun at about 3 p.m. Friday, states, "I received your e-mail. The format set out in my memo was clear. There has been no response containing written facts challenging my decision to efficiently utilize staff.

"I consider this matter closed. We need to move on and move forward."

Webster's previous e-mail, sent to King and The Greeneville Sun on Tuesday evening, stated: "Mayor King, I disagree with the 'facts' you present in your memo 'Building, Grounds & Maintenance Crew -- Do the facts justify a change of supervision?'

"I request that this item and a vote be placed on the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen."

The mayor's memo was given to the four aldermen at the conclusion of their Nov. 3 meeting in an effort to provide data in support of her decision some 15 months ago to transfer the maintenance employees.

Mayor has emphasized that the workers' transfer has saved a significant amount of money for the town and resulted in more efficient operations.

The full text of the mayor's memo can be viewed under Public Records at http://GreenevilleSun.com .

In the memo, Mayor King wrote, "If you have any disagreement with the facts as I have presented them, please put them in writing to me within one week, and I will then schedule a workshop to address them."

Webster later explained that she was facing a one-week deadline when she sent the brief e-mail message on Tuesday evening.

Webster said she had delayed reading the memo while she was busy helping organize the Nov. 7 GFWC Greeneville Woman's Club annual Holiday Bazaar.

On Thursday, Webster elaborated that she thinks the issue should be open for public discussion in a city board meeting.

The "very divisive situation for our community" will not be resolved until members of the public are allowed to give their input, Webster said.

"We can't do it if we keep sending memos," she said.

She added that Mayor King needs to clarify a lot of the numbers presented in the memo.

Attempts by The Greeneville Sun to reach Webster on Friday were unsuccessful.

In the meantime, Alderman Keith Paxton brought a letter to The Greeneville Sun at 3 p.m. Friday in which he declared support for Mayor's King's position.

Please see accompanying article for the full text of Paxton's letter.

Paxton's three-page letter said, "The Street [Public Works] Department cannot be expected to build and maintain the properties if they don't have the manpower behind them to get the job done. Moving eight men back to the Recreation Department, especially at this time of year when there is no outside mowing and weeding, would not be good use of time.

"With the combined effort, they mowed more locations more frequently this year and last year with fewer men and less gas than had been used in the past. They maintained more facilities better than ever."

Paxton's letter also says, "Based on the budget numbers from the past few years and the 15-month savings plan by combining the Recreation workers with the Street Department, it has been proven to be in the best interest of the City of Greeneville to keep these city departments combined through this year's budget plan."

The letter also said, "I still agree with Alderman Sarah Webster who was quoted as saying she 'didn't think it could be solved until we look at it in black and white from both sides.'

"With so much money in question, I couldn't agree more. Yes, we need a joint workshop with the Recreation Department board and director.

"Mayor King presented some of the savings in writing, some I had noticed during the budget workshops and other savings could be brought up during the planned workshop.

"It is not fair to Greeneville to hear only from Mayor King in writing and not have facts from Butch Patterson and also the Recreation Board in writing, showing how moving the workers has affected the Recreation Department's program."

In response, Patterson, Parks and Recreation director, said in an interview Friday he has not provided such information because he does not want to speak negatively about the employees because of work not being done in his department.

This work includes maintenance of ball fields and other tasks that he did not list.

"There's been enough negativity toward the Rec. Department, and I refuse to do that to the employees over there in the Public Works Department," he said.

"They're working hard," he said, adding that he admires them for doing what they were asked to do.

To properly operate his events and programs, Patterson said he must be able to work with his own maintenance employees.

Instead of providing details about the transfer's effect on his department, Patterson said he has been compiling budgetary information for Town Hall.

Part of this information is the utilities expenses for the former Andrew Johnson School building, which Paxton mentions in his letter.

Paxton refers to a packet of information from Patterson and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board that suggests that if the Parks and Recreation Department did not pay the light bills for the Andrew Johnson building, the department would be $15,000 under budget.

Paxton wrote that this is not true because the funds to pay the light bills are allocated by the town into the Parks and Recreation Budget.

Patterson said his budget receives a total of $68,000 a year for utilities and he spends $78,000.

He said the total annual light bill for the Andrew Johnson building is approximately $24,000.

The Parks and Recreation Department occupies 40 percent of the building space, he said.

If the Parks and Recreation Department pays 40 percent of the bill, it would owe $10,000.

Subtracting the remaining estimated $14,000 of the bill from the total expense of $78,000, leaves a total expense of $64,000, or $4,000 under budget, Patterson said.

In addition to Webster and Paxton, Greeneville's other two aldermen, W.T. Daniels and Buddy Hawk, have expressed opposition to the maintenance employee transfer, they questioning the mayor's authority to make such a decision.

Mayor King has maintained that transferring employees between town departments was within her authority and responsibility as the senior official of the town government.