Bravo to KnoxAction,8th district preservation association, FBPA, TN Clean Water Network, and the many other orgs I am forgetting (please post them here if you can think of them). And thanks to all the individuals, acting together and alone who made their views known to the commissioners.

How many times did we hear demoralizing condescending things said about our opposition?
"Its a done deal"
"the community never wins these things"
"that cow has left the barn"

So we won this round. Bravo indeed!

In preparing for the next round, in which the Sector Plan goes back to MPC, we should ask for changes more in line with what people in Knox Co really want, which clearly is not more sprawl inducing commercial/industrial development in far flung parts of the county.

But wait...we can infer a few things from the way that the battle of Midway has played out so far, but do we know what the people of Knox County really want? Have we ever asked them in a thorough, effective, and meaningful way?

I can tell you that the question "What do you want Knox County to look like in 20 years" is one that I've never been asked by any office holder, or anyone running for office, let alone anyone in the administrative bureaucracy at the City-County building.

Sure MPC has long range plans for the county, but how many of us have had any input into them? And yes, there is an elaborate public involvement process for creating sector plans. But how many people went through exactly this process with regard to Midway, only to have MPC turn their backs on them, with little or no explanation? How relevant is our existing process when sector plans are re-written to suit the interests of TDC or any other insiders.

What we need is a truly participatory planning process that asks people for their vision and makes it easy for them to answer and be heard. I can't think of a better place to start this than right here.

So, what is the Knox County you want to see in 20 years?

Ann's picture

Sector plan

I certainly intend to make my opinions known at the South Knoxville Sector Plan that is coming up for review soon.

Rachel's picture

Several things, and before I

Several things, and before I say them let me remind you that I'm the person who's driven some folks in govt crazy over the last ten years or so with my insistence on public participation.

1) But how many people went through exactly this process with regard to Midway, only to have MPC turn their backs on them, with little or no explanation? .

Just because something you want doesn't get into a sector plan doesn't mean you were ignored, or that MPC "turned its back" on you. You are not the only interest providing input into the sector plans. Other stakeholders have interests as well. MPC has to balance the needs and wants of all stakeholders.

Add to that the fact that we have professional planners for a reason. If we are just going to write plans based solely on public input, we can fire the professionals (and, I might add, we would have a gigantic water slide as part of the south waterfront plan). Their judgement, knowledge, and experience is also needed.

2) there is an elaborate public involvement process for creating sector plans.

I do hope TONS of folks will start participating in sector plans updates. It's very important. But if they don't, it's on them. All MPC can do is offer the meetings and publicize them well. After that, members of the public have to take responsibility for participating (as they certainly have in the east sector).

3) I can tell you that the question "What do you want Knox County to look like in 20 years" is one that I've never been asked by any office holder, or anyone running for office, let alone anyone in the administrative bureaucracy at the City-County building.

Then you missed the public meetings on the last update of the Knox County General Plan, which does exactly that, except with a 30 year time horizon. You can find a copy at knoxmpc.org.

sugarfatpie's picture

All MPC can do is offer the

All MPC can do is offer the meetings and publicize them well. After that, members of the public have to take responsibility for participating (as they certainly have in the east sector).

Yes they have participated in the east sector and have felt ignored or worse. It is a sad commentary on the state of affairs that one of the communities most involved in the sector plans now feels so alienated from MPC.

Then you missed the public meetings on the last update of the Knox County General Plan, which does exactly that, except with a 30 year time horizon. You can find a copy at knoxmpc.org.

I did miss the public meetings, which were poorly publicized. However, I am familiar with the General plan (now apparently a 23 year plan as it hasn't been updated in a while. I only knew of this because I stumbled across it while dealing with MPC on other issues.

Regardless, I don't think the kind of MPC public meetings we're used to cut it anymore. Too many people can't make them, and those that do often feel ignored if they bring up difficult issues, like Midway. I'm not sure what we need to make the process more truly participatory. A better web-presence, with online commenting by the public and mediation by an impartial party would be a good start. Come to think of it, that sounds like Knoxviews!

Rachel's picture

You quoted and replied to a

You quoted and replied to a part of my posts, but ignored this part. I think it's important, so I'll say it again:

Just because something you want doesn't get into a sector plan doesn't mean you were ignored, or that MPC "turned its back" on you. You are not the only interest providing input into the sector plans. Other stakeholders have interests as well. MPC has to balance the needs and wants of all stakeholders.

Add to that the fact that we have professional planners for a reason. If we are just going to write plans based solely on public input, we can fire the professionals (and, I might add, we would have a gigantic water slide as part of the south waterfront plan). Their judgement, knowledge, and experience is also needed.

slapshot's picture

"Just because something you

"Just because something you want doesn't get into a sector plan doesn't mean you were ignored, or that MPC "turned its back" on you. You are not the only interest providing input into the sector plans. Other stakeholders have interests as well. MPC has to balance the needs and wants of all stakeholders.

Add to that the fact that we have professional planners for a reason. If we are just going to write plans based solely on public input, we can fire the professionals (and, I might add, we would have a gigantic water slide as part of the south waterfront plan). Their judgement, knowledge, and experience is also needed."

Their judgment (MPC) was severely smacked down last Friday. That seems evident to everyone but you. Your "professional planners" proposed a Business Park on septic. So their credibility is very lacking. Do everyone a favor, take Midway out of the Sector Plan. Or do what you did with Lakeshore Park, and ignore what you were instructed to do on several occasions about TYP housing in City Parks. At some point MPC needs to listen and do what they have been instructed to do by local government and the courts.

I seriously doubt you will get that.

Rachel's picture

Or do what you did with

Or do what you did with Lakeshore Park, and ignore what you were instructed to do on several occasions about TYP housing in City Parks.

Please show me documentation showing where MPC did not follow Council's requests on rezoning parks (none of which, BTW, mentioned PSH - you sure just outed yourself on that one). In April, Council requested that MPC consider rezoning all parks to open space. Staff and Commission did so and both concluded that most parks did not fit the open space zoning requirements (open space is intended for large passive conservation areas - think Ijams). In November Council requested that MPC create a new park zone for the more active parks (something that was Mark Donaldson's suggestion, by the way). We did that in December AND we rezoned every city park to either OS-1 (the open space zone) or OS-2 (the new active park zone). We ordinarily wouldn't both create a new zoning district and rezone property to it in the same meeting, but we expedited the process at Council's request.

And please notice that throughout the preceeding paragraph I've used the word "request." Local government cannot "instruct" MPC to do anything. They can "request" that MPC consider doing something, and I know of no cases where MPC has refused to so consider.

If you have documentation that shows differently, let's see it. (And don't point to the "resolution" Duane Grieve read at a recent Council meeting. That resolution was never passed and sent to MPC. Councilman Grieve was confused.)

Their judgment (MPC) was severely smacked down last Friday.

Most types of MPC actions are RECOMMENDATIONS tht go to the appropriate legislative body to be approved, amended, or denied. This particular one was denied. That's how the process works. Your continuing refusal to demonstrate an understanding of that is tiresome.

slapshot's picture

"In April, Council requested

"In April, Council requested that MPC consider rezoning all parks to open space. Staff and Commission did so and both concluded that most parks did not fit the open space zoning requirements (open space is intended for large passive conservation areas - think Ijams)."

Playing silly word games seems to be an obsession with you. MPC was told to fix the problem. They did not. MPC has no ability to do anything other than recommend. When they refuse to do what government tells them to do there should be consequences.
MPC wastes time and energy playing word games. A solution is to fire MPC management. Another solution is to do what you are told to do. Midway was a great example of a MPC that doesn't listen. In real life when people don't listen they lose their jobs. That reality needs to reach out to MPC.

Rachel's picture

That's how the process works.

As I said above: Your continuing refusal to demonstrate an understanding of how the process works is tiresome.

Rinse and repeat.

And oh yeah, where's that evidence that MPC did not comply with a Council request?

slapshot's picture

"As I said above: Your

"As I said above: Your continuing refusal to demonstrate an understanding of how the process works is tiresome."

We understand how the process is supposed to work. The frustration is that MPC refuses to follow the process. Can you honesty and realistically say that MPC followed the process with Midway, Lakeshore, or Slope and Ridge?

MPC could have taken Midway out of the Sector Plan. They could have done what Council told them to do with Lakeshore. They could have allowed property owners to be notified on Slope and Ridge. They chose not to.

Donaldson and Johnson need to go. Insubordination is grounds for termination. In the next City Election for Mayor this may be an issue. Wonder what Mayor Burchett is thinking about MPC?

Rachel's picture

Can you honesty and

Can you honesty and realistically say that MPC followed the process with Midway, Lakeshore, or Slope and Ridge?

We have had no application dealing wtih Lakeshore specifically. Yes, we followed the process for this iteration of the East County Sector Plan, the Hillside/Ridgetop Plan, and for the parks rezoning. And the process is still going on with all three - the East County Sector plan is coming back to us, the Hillside/Ridgetop Plan is on its way to the legislative bodies, and the parks rezoning will be on the 1/11 Council agenda.

(I will add that MPC made a mistake when it amended the east county sector plan in 2006. That mistake was in amending a sector plan w/o stating any of the conditions necessary for such a change. Which is precisely why Fansler ruled against MPC - and should have.)

They could have done what Council told them to do with Lakeshore.

For the 47th time, a) Council cannot tell us what to do, and b) Council never asked us to "do" anything with Lakeshore specifically. Please show me documentation to the contrary.

And BTW, when we made recommendations for rezoning of all the City parks, we recommended rezoning Lakeshore OS-2, the new "active" parks district. You might want to read up on the permitted uses in an OS-2 zone.

They could have allowed property owners to be notified on Slope and Ridge. They chose not to.

The exact same notification procedures were used for the Hillside/Ridgetop Plan as are used for every other plan.

Insubordination is grounds for termination.

Do tell. I once fired someone for that very reason. Buz and Mark work for the Metropolitan Planning Commission. Please cite an instance of their insubordination to us.

Wonder what Mayor Burchett is thinking about MPC?

I assume he's thinking about appointing good people when the time to do so comes around.

Look, it's been fun listening to you babble incoherently, but I've got Christmas to get back to now and you're not exactly full of the Christmas spirit. So do yourself a favor & go have an egg nog or something.

Don J. 's picture

are you sure?

"The exact same notification procedures were used for the Hillside/Ridgetop Plan as are used for every other plan."

Do you mean the little black signs MPC puts up on property to be rezoned? This was a rezoning wasn't it?

Rachel's picture

Do you mean the little black

Do you mean the little black signs MPC puts up on property to be rezoned? This was a rezoning wasn't it?

No, this wasn't a rezoning. It was a PLAN. It is not land use regulation, like rezoning. It is a PLAN.

Little black signs go up for rezonings, not for plans.

slapshot's picture

"No, this wasn't a rezoning.

"No, this wasn't a rezoning. It was a PLAN."

Word games. It has the power and consequence of a rezoning. This is why you and others on MPC have no credibility.

Don J. 's picture

"No, this wasn't a rezoning.

"No, this wasn't a rezoning. It was a PLAN. It is not land use regulation, like rezoning. It is a PLAN."

Could you explain that? I don't understand how it is a plan. Didn't one of the MPC Commissioners say it was the same as a county wide rezoning?

rikki's picture

Didn't one of the MPC

Didn't one of the MPC Commissioners say it was the same as a county wide rezoning?

MPC commissioners said some silly things during the discussion of the slope protection plan.

It's a plan because it has broad scope and suggests a number of changes. Adopting the plan doesn't actually change anything. Following through on the suggestions in the plan is a different process, and one that county commission must initiate. If county legislators decide to do that, it will be their duty to inform citizens, and they have procedures for doing so.

A rezoning is initiated by a property owner, and the black signs go up to notify neighbors and surrounding property owners. By contrast, with slope protections, an elected body with governing authority would be initiating the change, so there is no "same as" here. Adopting new laws is very different from making a change to a specific parcel of land.

Don J. 's picture

"A rezoning is initiated by a

"A rezoning is initiated by a property owner, and the black signs go up to notify neighbors and surrounding property owners. By contrast, with slope protections, an elected body with governing authority would be initiating the change, so there is no "same as" here. Adopting new laws is very different from making a change to a specific parcel of land."

The end result of Slope and Ridge is the same as a rezoning so notification should be required. Blaming County Commission and holding them responsible for what MPC does is poor government. The notification is the responsibility of MPC. Also, the question was addressed to the MPC member.

Rachel's picture

Rezonings are also legal

Rezonings are also legal regulation; a plan is a roadmap to get where we want to go. Rezonings, at least in the City, are actually ordinances.

rikki's picture

DSM-IX

Alex, can you smell a thick whaft of indigestion in slapshot's repetitive emanations? He will not explain his accusations amid noisy insistence that they are grave and substantial. That's the scent of digititis.

He takes his own misunderstanding of events and morphs it feverishly into affronts he thinks should cost people their jobs and reputation. The Didgit is basically raw outrage attempting to glom to whatever cause might justify it. Whatever name he chooses, symptoms soon manifest.

sugarfatpie's picture

Hmmm, you could be right.

Hmmm, you could be right. But unfortunately these symptoms are fairly common in the general public. I think some sort of language analysis would help. We could compare the reading level (length of sentences, size of words) of the didgit, slapshot, and other suspect aliases.

Here's a link to a free online service that does this.
(link...)

I've got to get back to my paying job, but will try this later.

CA's picture

I know of a case

And please notice that throughout the preceeding paragraph I've used the word "request." Local government cannot "instruct" MPC to do anything. They can "request" that MPC consider doing something, and I know of no cases where MPC has refused to so consider.

Not so Rachel.
Not long ago the entire Knox County Commission voted for a resolution telling the MPC that they did not want commercial landscaping mixed into the Knox County neighborhoods. That resolution meant squat. It was ignored. Very strange to go up against the Commissioners, knowing that they had the last say.

The MPC flat out REFUSED to honor the resolution or REQUEST as you want to say. Wonder why? The Halls Shopper covered the story.
Then the MPC voted to bring it back to the Knox County Commission anyway and tried to add landscaping storage yards on top of it. Insult to injury. That disrespect was bold to say the least. You voted for it as I remember. It failed.

Rachel's picture

"Consider" does not mean

"Consider" does not mean bring back a pre-determined result. It means to put it on your agenda, let the staff make a recomendation, think about it, talk about it, and vote on it using your best judgment.

Sometimes the resulting recommendation will be accepted by the legislative body, sometimes it won't.

MPC considered what Commission sent us to consider and made a recommendation. In this case, Commission decided they didn't like our recommendation. That's the process.

(And as an aside, that entire issue was complicated and messy - and it will stay that way until we rework the ag zoning part of the county zoning ordinance.)

CA's picture

Long Overdue Changes

that entire issue was complicated and messy

It was indeed messy and strange.

MPC made it that way. Many people wondered why the MPC kept on and on and on pushing this against the community. Same as Midway. Powerful people behind the scene unwilling to give up.
It was just a show of power and the Commission has the power as you found out.
Several issues lately have the people of this town wondering what is really going on with the MPC.
Midway was just the last one to get the attention. We have a good Mayor now and he is watching. Hope he will change the way things get done in this town. Long overdue changes.

rikki's picture

symptoms

Vague, dire, prejudicial accusations, no links or even enough detail to allow factchecking, serious muddling of the tale to the point that the rationality of the observer comes into question...

CA's picture

Seek and you will find

CTV has many meetings on this archived.
The Hall Shopper did many articles on this also archived.
The resolution by the Knox County Commission is on record. Every Commissioner voted for it.
Nothing vague. Seek and you will find.

rikki's picture

If I were lying about

If I were lying about something and didn't actually want anyone to check into my claims, I'd point vaguely in the direction of some archives too. Good move.

CA's picture

If you were lying

The truth is there. No need for any lying. Read it or see it. Do your own work silly. Then come back and tell what you find.

rikki's picture

come back and tell what you

come back and tell what you find

Your search for "evidence that CA has a grip on reality" returned no results.

CA's picture

Reality in public records.

Why are you so angry rikki? The reality of what did happen with the Commissions Resolution is public record. Do you know how to access that information? If so chill out and let the truth set you free. Then you may not feel so angry.

Rachel's picture

Pot, kettle.

Pot, kettle.

CA's picture

Pot,kettle,blanket

Pot, kettle, blanket

rikki's picture

First you try to project the

First you try to project the burden of proof onto me, and now you're projecting your emotions? Let me see if I can stop snickering at your incompetence long enough to work up some anger.

Nope, still snickering.

Oops, I snickered again.

CA's picture

Snickering

No need to prove what has already been decided.
Lets snicker together.

Scarlett's picture

Tisk Tisk

“Fools laugh at others. Wisdom laughs at itself.”

I was present during that MPC vs. Commission process. A sad attempt to control the community and oppose the higher power of the Commissioners. There was no snickering from the MPC after the last vote.

Now go waste someone elses time with oblivious to fact- childish snickering. Since this was such a huge part of Knox county politics and you obviously know nothing of it. ;)

slapshot's picture

Your defense of MPC despite

Your defense of MPC despite what has been proven shows you could use a little time in the reality department. Along with the Development Corporation MPC doesn't look very good these days.

But by all means, continue to snicker. What else can you do?

rikki's picture

Your defense of MPC despite

Your defense of MPC despite what has been proven

You're getting way ahead of yourself. I haven't defended MPC, and I'm not even sure what I'd be defending them from, other than lunatic ravings that must be deciphered by trawling through unspecified back issues of the Shopper and untold hours of CTV video.

The only thing that has been proven is that you are unwilling to offer proof.

sugarfatpie's picture

No offense, CA but I think

No offense, CA but I think you are being lazy in a way that hinders discussion forums like Knoxviews from contributing as much as possible to public participation in the planning process. It's not that you don't have some important points to convey. You're just not bothering to provide enough information to backup statements made.

CA's picture

No offence, sugarfatpie

No Offense taken sugarfatpie.
Rachel made a statement that I called her out on. That's all. I do not feel that I need to backup information that is so easy for anyone to find on the internet. I did tell where the information is. That is if one is really interested.

R. Neal's picture

If the info is so easy to

If the info is so easy to find, why not post some links?

Scarlett's picture

I found the resolution that

I found the resolution that CA was referring to.

Lazy people...

LINK HERE

See article: R-08-11-905

Is a Resolution stronger then a request?
Well, I guess it didn't really matter in the end. ;)

Ben Stanley's picture

Sure looks like it

Is a Resolution stronger then a request?

Sure looks like it was to the 17 commissioners that made it. If the commissioners made a resolution saying that they did not want something, and they all voted for that resolution, why did the MPC not honor it? Has this happened before or just over this case? That is just really weird. If they knew that it had to go back to the commissioners in order to be passed whats the point? Seems like a big waste of time. Consider is not the word that comes to mind.

Don J. 's picture

"Sure looks like it was to

"Sure looks like it was to the 17 commissioners that made it. If the commissioners made a resolution saying that they did not want something, and they all voted for that resolution, why did the MPC not honor it?"

Very good point.

Rachel's picture

Our host has asked us to stay

Our host has asked us to stay on topic. If you guys want to continue to bash MPC, why don't you just start your own thread about it?

Don J. 's picture

"If you guys want to continue

"If you guys want to continue to bash MPC, why don't you just start your own thread about it?"

Telling the truth isn't bashing. A statement was made and challenged and it turns out CA was right. Since most of us can't start a thread, why don't you if you want to have that discussion.

Rachel's picture

Our host has asked us to stay

Our host has asked us to stay on topic.

Scarlett's picture

Just Consider

That sounds like a "request". Now "consider" it you all.
Rachel needs to move away from this topic . Just read that link and "consider" it for yourself. No disrespect intended. Happy Holiday!

Rachel's picture

God help me, I will be happy

God help me, I will be happy to discuss this with ya'll in detail - AFTER the holidays. To discuss it now requires me to backtrack and pull up a bunch of old minutes and agendas. (It's been about a year and a half and I've slept since then.) I'm not willing to expend that kind of time and energy this week.

Also, someone will need to start a thread about this topic specifically.

Rachel's picture

I said MPC had never failed

I said MPC had never failed to consider anything a legislative body has asked us to consider. That's true, no matter how much "calling out" you think you did.

In this case, MPC made a recommendation subseqently rejected by County Commission. One does not make a recommendation w/o considering.

sugarfatpie's picture

Add to that the fact that we

Add to that the fact that we have professional planners for a reason. If we are just going to write plans based solely on public input, we can fire the professionals (and, I might add, we would have a gigantic water slide as part of the south waterfront plan). Their judgement, knowledge, and experience is also needed.

I totally agree. We need professional planners who have the guts to stick to their principles no matter who is breathing down their neck.

I think more substantive public involvement would help, not hinder that goal.

Rachel's picture

We need professional planners

We need professional planners who have the guts to stick to their principles no matter who is breathing down their neck.

And perhaps they did just that on Midway. This time you didn't agree with their professional judgement and are unhappy they stuck with it in the face of community opposition. My guess is that on Hillside/Ridgetop you're happy they stuck with their judgement in the face of opposition from developers and some property owners.

I think more substantive public involvement would help, not hinder that goal.

You'll get no argument from me that more substantive public involvement is a great idea. And BTW, it would be helpful on two fronts. One, it would give MPC and the legislative bodies more input from stakeholders. Two, it would help more citizens (and god help us, some legislative body members) gain a better understanding of how the planning/zoning process is supposed to work. Maybe even slapshot/digit/jack would learn something.

Just wondering's picture

Agriculture zones being sucked into the sprawl

Midway was a bad deal from the start. Rezoning so much of our Agriculture land ALSO is a bad deal in this Sector Plan. Why so much?
This decision is by people that do not care what the people want. They draw maps and smile from offices that are like ivory towers. Just try and see who really hides behind the curtain. They have the power to take that right of decision from us. Change our way of life. Tell us what we can no longer do because our land zone has been changed.
Sad state of affairs for us country folk. All this because they want us to believe that it is in our best interest. This is a open invitation for urban sprawl east. From the ill conceived Midway back to Strawberry Plains Pike you will find many farms. What happens to them then?

Rachel's picture

They draw maps and smile from

They draw maps and smile from offices that are like ivory towers.

You obviously have never visited the MPC office.

Just wondering's picture

illusions

The ivory towers are just an illusion like the illusion of concern they show for the people. LOL

FireMikeEdwardsNow!'s picture

Need to flush the existing recruiting/development teams - all

they've got nothing to show for the millions throw into their clubby little organization known as the SuperChamber and they've been outmaneuvered by everybody from Chattanooga to Clinton to Morristown, including Blount and Loudon County and all points in between. They have nothing to show for their tenure in these positions and in my opinion, they should be dismissed ASAP and retain some qualified, competent, and proven business recruiters.

Look no further than Dowell Springs on Middlebrook as to the direction we need to be headed in. While many of these businesses are longstanding businesses, this is the type of development we need to move forward with, professional offices, administrative, some light manufacturing, but these constant land grabs for the sake of enriching a few in the loop property flippers in insane. Dowell Springs was developed with private money, private effort, and the SuperChamber had nothing to do with any aspect of that project.

Acknowledging we have the wrong people in place to recruit business and industry to Knoxville and Knox County is step one towards unfolding and implementing a new strategy, particularly now that we have a trusted friend in the governor's office.

jbr's picture

no text

no text

EricLykins's picture

I know of no safe depository

I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion by education.

says Thomas Jefferson in the Tennessee Planning Commissioner Handbook

One of the cardinal facts of planning in Tennessee is that it has survived the period of decline and disinterest which succeeded the naive enthusiasm of the early New Dealers...Local Commissions, despite their ups and downs, are now numerous and active.
From: "An Evaluation of Planning in Tennessee," Government in Tennessee, by Lee Greene and Robert Avery

sugarfatpie's picture

One change we could make

One change we could make would be to stop letting TDC stack the deck on county commission via their board.

As it stands there are 3 commissioners who sit on the TDC board. These three, and their allies (see the Briggs-Saunders voting patterns) have been reliable "yes men" for TDC on commission.

If TDC needs coordination with county government, they should be able to do that through the county mayor.

Crawfish's picture

Shouldn't this "job creation"

Shouldn't this "job creation" role be under the office of the County Mayor? The Development Corporation is not elected and they have shown to be completely unaccountable.

Why not dissolve the Development Corporation and have the County Mayor office try job creation? It would cost taxpayers much less and at least the Mayor is elected.

The Development Corporation has been here since 1991 and has a pitiful track record. Can anyone explain what victories the Development Corporation has had? Sysco and Green Mountain Coffee were not Development Corporation accomplishments. I can't think of anything we have gotten for out tax dollars.

On a further note, why do taxpayers fund the Knox Chamber?

Don J. 's picture

"The Development Corporation

"The Development Corporation is not elected and they have shown to be completely unaccountable."

Like the PBA it seems we are paying twice for the services of the Development Corporation. These jobs should be done by county employees shouldn't they? Why the expensive duplication of efforts and money? Is there any savings? There don't appear to be.

jbr's picture

No Midway, what's next for land, Knox job growth?

News report on WBIR tonight.

Quite a stretch that Midway Road had any impact at all, past, present or future, on the circumstances of the man in the story.

Redefine the TDC mission and expand it to recruit business ties and sponsorship of schools. Academic programs, internships, facilities, curriculum offerings with direct input from
businesses in the area.

It seems like they are missing some things in of their algorithm.

In the wake of Knox County's decision not to move forward with a business park near I-40 in East Knox County, it's still not clear what will happen to the land and where Knox County will turn for jobs.

The WBIR news story .. as one of the comments said, seems pretty slanted
http://www.wbir.com/news/article/148625/2/No-Midway-whats-next-for-land-Knox-job-growth?odyssey=tab|topnews|texth|FRONTPAGE|default|s

Tim Pony's picture

Look who advertises on WBIR (then boycott them)

WBIR and the daily rag are essentially one in the same. Look at who does the local advertising on their programing and in their newspaper and you'll see why they come down on the side of build something so when can hawk on that first chance we get.

The proble with economic development in Knox County is the people charged with leading the effort. What are Mike Edward's credentials and experiences which make him suitable to lead this effort? None. He was going to run for mayor and he was named Chairman/COO of the SuperChamber.

See if WBIR will take a hard look at his qualifications and experience. Name 10 businesses in Knox County that they have recruited/relocated to Knox County during the past 8 years? Virtually none. Why are other communities growing and adding good jobs? they've got experienced and seasoned business recruiters/relocators on staff with a proven track record of success. All Edwards knows is what his paid consultants have told him.

sugarfatpie's picture

Knox County will turn for

Knox County will turn for jobs to the same places it always has.
Over the short term, small businesses are the engine of job growth, locally and nationally.

Longer term, BLS data shows that Midway was a loosing bet for job growth from the get go as it focused on a declining source of employment for Knox Co.

Growth is projected in the service sector, particularly what BLS calls Professional and Business Services.

This is the sector that helps us work smarter, so you can see how there's plenty of room for growth here.

Rachel's picture

To get back on topic: I'm

To get back on topic:

I'm interested in exploring how public participation in the sector planning process can be improved. We're about to start on an update of the south city sector plan (near and dear to my heart). The first scheduled public meeting is 6 p.m. on January 20 at South Doyle Middle School.

Early meetings tend to consist of explaining the sector plan process and what's in the old plan. It's really critical for folks to understand that so turn out for that first meeting is important. What can we do to increase turnout? What other methods can we use to inform the public and receive input?

sugarfatpie's picture

Meetings are important, and I

Meetings are important, and I think turnout would be boosted by more and better mediated online discussion forums like what we have here.

You, Rachel, are doing great work engaging all these angry citizens, and you should be getting more help from MPC and others in government.

I don't know how likely we are to get more MPC staff and commissioners fielding questions on Knoxviews or the Blab, but it would certainly improve public participation.

An alternative to relying on Knoxviews and the Blab would be for MPC, or City-County govt as a whole to start its own well-mediated public discussion forums.

One KEY would be to recognize mediating these discussion forums as work, as in part of what a person gets paid for, rewarded for, promoted for.

To ensure that the requisite expertise participates, it should obligatory for all local government officials to get online with some regularity and respond to citizens, with the requirement that they integrate the outcomes of such interactions into their work as public servants. Again, this should be part of what a person gets paid for, rewarded for, promoted for.

So far I've only seen Rachel(an unpaid volunteer) and Bill Lyons do this with any regularity, though David Brace did this too recently when he saw he needed to.

Rachel's picture

I don't know how likely we

I don't know how likely we are to get more MPC staff and commissioners fielding questions on Knoxviews or the Blab

Given the abuse I've taken here, I'd say the odds of that are approximately zero. And there have been at least two occasions when I wrote KV a farewell note; then didn't push "save." I may end up doing it yet. I really want to engage, share info, and hear input, but there's only so much personal flogging my psyche can handle.

Civil online discussions could be helpful (although you need to remember that lots of folks don't have the internet, or wouldn't want to participate in that kind of thing), but the freewheeling insult-slinging that goes on here is of little value.

slapshot's picture

"What can we do to increase

"What can we do to increase turnout? What other methods can we use to inform the public and receive input?"

Listen. That would be the best thing.

jbr's picture

Have the staff speak to the

Have the staff speak to the principles and teachers in the immediate area and guest speak to classes or in school assembly. Speak to teachers about having students attend meeting and write a report on discussing it with their parents and comparing their view with their parents.

Market the meeting in the community. Not just a Widget meeting Jan. 20 sign. Maybe let the marketing class students submit marketing the meeting suggestions. They are in the community. They know what
Matters to people and grabs their attention.

The Midway Road result could provide a wave of community participation. In the past you didn't go to meeting because you thought it was useless. As one elderly person told me once about a zoning variance meeting regarding next door property, "They will just wear you down and do it anyway"

So they did not go to meeting because of that. Midway Road is potentially a lot more than just Midway Road. It could really ramp up community enthusiasm.

R. Neal's picture

The topic of this post is

The topic of this post is "The next step in the Battle of Midway: A Participatory Plan for Knox Co."

Keep it on that topic or take it somewhere else.

Thanks.
Mgmt.

Rachel's picture

Randy, Please grant me a

Randy,

Please grant me a Christmas present and let me make one more OT post, and then I'm done, I swear:

"Defending MPC" is not the same as "defending a particular MPC vote." Lots of folks disagree with particular MPC votes (or Council votes or Commission votes). I disagree with them myself every time I vote with the minority.

It's the jump from "I don't like the way that particular vote went" to "MPC (or Council, or Commission, but for some reason MPC seems to get the worst of it) is totally messed up, in the pockets of developers (or TDC, or the evil group of the week),insubordinate, disrespectful, uncaring, etc. etc. etc.

Most of what I've tried to do here wrt to MPC is help people understand the land use planning/regulation process, which in some cases gets really complicated - and sometimes to point out that few decisions are black and white.

Why that engenders so much anger and personal animosity I don't understand. Maybe it's easier to think black/white, my side/your side, with me/against me. But it's rarely correct.

My wish for the New Year is that we can all engage in a civil fashion. Like most wishes, I don't expect it to be granted.

And now, Randy, I'm really, truly finished with this topic. Thanks for indulging me and have a happy holiday!

R. Neal's picture

Rachel, obviously we

Rachel, obviously we appreciate your participation here, and everything else you do. Please keep it up. Your contribution on our obscure little venue is valuable to the community, we think.

We constantly struggle with ways to keep the discussion civil and productive while being open to varying points of view on local issues. We'll keep working on it. Hope you will, too.

And for everyone else, the best thing to do is to ignore dumbasses, else you just encourage them. Keeping in mind, of course, that disagreeing with a point of view doesn't necessarily make someone a dumbass. (And, they might not actually be #9).

Anyway, if anyone thinks anything crosses the line into off-topic, inappropriate personal attacks just let us know and we will review. Honestly, I have a hard time telling sometimes, on any given side of any particular issue. And, like you (and most other folks who participate here), I don't get paid to.

Up Goose Creek's picture

Experiment station

How about brainstorming with UT about some sort of agricultural experiment station.

Since UT recently gave up their farm to build an, um... er, office park (on sewer I presume) they might be looking for some land.

My thought is focus on home agriculture/gardening. Have dorms and an inn so there's an agrotourism element. Since the grandparents who had farms and victory gardens are fading away soemone needs to teach the younger generation to garden.

sugarfatpie's picture

Ag station, ok Inn, ok Dorms,

Ag station, ok
Inn, ok
Dorms, definitely not ok. Think of the commutes! They would be completely unpopular with students.

Up Goose Creek's picture

Dorms

Sugar, I'm talking about dorms for schoolkids like at Tremont.

Rachel's picture

Just for a second, I thought

Just for a second, I thought you were calling him by a term of endearment. :)

sugarfatpie's picture

OK that sounds completely

OK
that sounds completely reasonable

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

    State News

    Wire Reports

    Lost Medicaid Funding

    To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

    Search and Archives