Editor's Note -- Following is the text of a statement issued Friday by Greeneville Alderman Keith Paxton on the dispute between Greeneville Mayor Laraine King and the other Greeneville aldermen:

Thank you, Greeneville citizens, for allowing me to represent and serve you as Alderman. I ask everyone to pray for Greeneville during this recession that continues to affect our community in so many ways.

I appreciate Mayor Laraine King in her decision to bring transparency to the Greeneville government, especially in the development of the budget.

The Aldermen, along with the Mayor, worked to prepare and set the budget for this year. We had frank, open discussions. We were unable to fund all that was requested.

We did not raise taxes because we did not want to place an extra burden on the people.

We asked departments to work together during these hard economic times.

Each department was asked to cut their requests and to reduce expense.

I found working on this budget so early in my new position helped me to know where the city was financially and it gave me a better sense of what to expect during this extraordinary year and what trends to watch for next year.

As we worked on the budget, we discovered that we were short more than $1.5 million.

To make things worse Gov. Phil Bredesen announced that the state was experiencing similar revenue shortfalls as well and there would have to be layoffs.

I want you to know that I believe the 2010/2011 budget will be even more challenging.

We don't have large employers like Magnavox, Kaydon, Weavex and Hurdlock that we relied on in the past years.

With the loss of those firms, jobs have been lost and not replaced. Homes are being foreclosed on and many people in this community need help.

For these reasons the Board, under Mayor King's leadership, looked at how services to the community could be improved. All departments were asked to cooperate and to tighten their belts.

Mayor King recently shared some of the facts relative to the saving of combining the Recreation Department workers with the Street Department workers.

Mayor King has asked Butch Paterson (Director of the Greeneville Parks and Recreation Department) to report to her in writing how moving the workers has affected his programs. The programs were set and improvements to our facilities were approved in the budget.

The Street 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.

The park revenues for the first nine months of last year were up $34,429.75 and expenditures were down $65,746.78.

Mayor King has even asked that a third independent party (MTAS) come in and review the facts.

I know advisory boards sometimes suggest actions that might not be the best financial decision.

For example, the Solid Waste Planning Board voted to advise not to bid out the solid waste disposal but to keep the BFI contract for another five years.

Mayor King and Mayor (Alan) Broyles sought to have bids placed and this resulted in over an $800,000 savings over the five years.

Based on this year's budget, Patterson and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board stated in a letter that the Parks Department budget was over $15,000.

Patterson and the Advisory Board sent an Aug. 11, 6-plus page breakdown of the Andrew Johnson's Buildings light bills.

This packet suggested if the Recreation Department didn't pay the light bills for the Andrew Johnson Building then the Recreation Department would be $15,000 under budget. This is not true.

The bills included bills that belonged to the Nathanael Greene Museum, Main Street: Greeneville, Emergency Management, CASA, Greeneville Credit Union and some other square footage.

The money for the Andrew Johnson building utility bills are placed in the Recreation Department budget to pay the entire building's light bill.

So, if another department is appointed to pay this utility bill, then the money allocated from the city wouldn't be left in the Recreation Department to be used to balance their budget.

These funds would be placed in the fund of the utilities for the Andrew Johnson building that are paid out of Expenses that are part of the yearly budget.

They should be looked at regularly by each department, and, if an uncertainty is obvious, then explanations and assurances should be sought as to whether money has been allocated to that department to cover such expenses.

The point is, the Parks and Recreation Department did pay the light bill for all these organizations housed in the Andrew Johnson Building out of its budget, like they have for many years, and still their budget was under budget $15,000 for the first time in years.

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.

As the city works on next year's 2010 budget plan we can determine if the combining of the ball field maintenance with the street department maintenance workers has saved Greeneville taxpayers money or not and if more work is being done without overtime.

Then, at that time, if sufficient savings and improvements are not being made for the town of Greeneville, the departments could look into needed separations.

If the move back costs us money, then the savings lost by moving these men will result in cuts in other departments.

One option we heard from city officials is to raise yearly deductibles and raise yearly premiums.

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.

What happens to the maintenance workers if moved this time of year? There is no mowing or weed eating this winter.

The basketball games are being managed with fewer workers and there are fewer teams participating.

The city, just like what the governor and local businesses have done, would be forced to lay off until the grass begins to grow again in the spring.

We have found something productive for these employees to do and still be doing this winter rather than overstaff ballgames or layoffs. I have to believe that they are happier, too.

All of these men have done an outstanding job once they were given some direction and we recognized their good work.

Every department across town asked for extra workers: police, fire -- some are just as important as the Recreation Department.

With all this said, Greeneville residents and the Board of Mayor and Aldermen need to focus our attention on jobs and next year's budget.

As Mayor King said in her memo, we should move on.

We need to be having workshops on what we can do to make Greeneville more attractive to companies wanting to locate here.

There are businessmen in Greeneville who have put up their own money and time to build buildings to house industries and we need to give them as much help as possible to try to attract clients to Greeneville and create jobs for our citizens. Thank you.