A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

PBA chair apologizes, committee debates PBA role and appointments

February 26, 2026 | Rutherford County, Tennessee


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

PBA chair apologizes, committee debates PBA role and appointments
Gary Wischnewski, who identified himself as chairman of the Project Building Authority, opened a presentation to the Property Management Committee by apologizing for remarks made after the last steering committee meeting and by defending the PBA’s role.

"If it was taken that way, I truly apologize," Wischnewski said, adding that the PBA was established in the 1990s as a volunteer oversight body to help watch county construction projects and that it is not politically motivated. He asked that, when the county chooses to involve the PBA, it be done early so the PBA can assist throughout a project rather than only at the end.

Contractors and county staff who have worked with and without the PBA described tradeoffs. Several builders said monthly PBA meetings are insufficient for the day‑to‑day communication needed during fast‑moving construction phases, while county officials said the PBA can provide flexibility and has historically filled expertise gaps.

County legal counsel told the committee that, by statute, the PBA must have no fewer than seven members, serve without compensation, and that members are appointed by the mayor subject to county commission confirmation. The attorney also said appointments typically come through the steering committee before reaching the full commission.

Committee members asked about filling current vacancies and whether the PBA could meet more often. The county attorney said the mayor’s appointments to fill vacancies are scheduled for Monday’s steering committee agenda and then would go to the full commission for confirmation. Members also discussed whether the county should build more in‑house project management capacity or re‑engage the PBA for specific projects like schools and large capital efforts.

No formal action to change the PBA’s status or powers was taken at the meeting; the committee directed staff to proceed with the normal appointment process and to provide the committee with options and cost estimates for increasing in‑house engineering and design capacity if requested.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee