There are currently 7 users and 276 guests online.
Can Farragut secede from Knox County Metro Government?
Submitted by Number9 on Thu, 2007/04/05 - 11:56am.
In today’s Farragut Press there is one sentence that may forever change the debate on Metro Government in Knox County. It is a quote from Town of Farragut town attorney Tom Hale. When asked about how Metro Government would affect Farragut Mr. Hale responded that Farragut would have a couple options. The first option would be a referendum to do away with the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. Does that mean also abolishing the Town of Farragut?
Here is where is gets interesting. The second option is for a referendum to decide NOT to join Knox County Government. Mr. Hale said, “The decision would really be in the hands of the citizens”.
Would this second option mean seceding from Knox County and taking those Farragut property tax dollars away from Knox County? Does a Metro Government charter allow the people of Farragut to go their own way?
Today Farragut is a municipality in Knox County with property tax dollars going to Knox County. If in fact the people of the Town of Farragut would have the option via referendum to withdraw from Knox County and keep their property tax dollars it would seem that they are the key decision makers concerning any future Metro Government.
Tennessee does not have "independent cities" such as exist in Virginia. I don't think a town or city can exist independent of a county. However, they could work out a deal where they are exempt from some elements of Knox County government. How does this work with other municipalities in County-City government places? Any in Davidson, TN, Dade, FL, Jefferson, KY, Marion, IN? Or do the other municipalities get completely rolled into the metro county government?
Submitted by R. Neal on Thu, 2007/04/05 - 12:12pm.
I think Farragut could secede and create a Farragut County by an act of the Legislature. Not sure how, but that's how a county gets created. I wonder when the last county was created in Tennessee? Probably in the 1800s.
Hmmm...well would the voters of Farragut think about these options during a vote for metro? In short, would they say thanks but no thanks during a metro referendum, adding their numbers to the folks in North, East, and South Knox that are almost guaranteed to vote in numbers against consolidation? That would be almost insurmountable for metro supporters to overcome. The Lyons pdf that was posted the other day showed what little Knox Co support for metro in 1996 was in West Knox. Seems to me from what I read in the Farragut Press they aren't too keen on Metro at this time.
Conversely, would those Farragut citizens wanting their own little city/county/fiefdom vote for metro to spur a movement to secede?
If they formed their own county, they'd have to get their own money in the form of property taxes. Residents don't pay taxes for Farragut, but just to Knox County.
They'd have to fund their own schools, sheriff's department, and other things to be on their own.
Submitted by Number9 on Thu, 2007/04/05 - 12:35pm.
If they formed their own county, they'd have to get their own money in the form of property taxes. Residents don't pay taxes for Farragut, but just to Knox County.
They'd have to fund their own schools, sheriff's department, and other things to be on their own.
If I understand this correctly only Metro government would allow the opportunity for Farragut to go their own way.
With the property tax Farragut would have more than enough money for schools, a Sheriff's department, and Farragut already provides all of the other necessities.
In fact Farragut could have a lower property tax and become a tax haven for those people who desire very large lots and homes.
This is the law of unintended consequences on steroids.
"In fact Farragut could have a lower property tax and become a tax haven for those people who desire very large lots and homes."
But the specter of buildout means that taxes will go up as new tax generating properties disappear. Lot infill is usually what happens as property owners age, don't want to care for their huge properties, and/or need to raise capital for home maintenance or lifestyle maintenance.
Sequyoah Hills would be an example of this happening. Tewksbury, NJ (easily the most elite town in NJ) would be an example of the opposite effect where people generally against restrictions such as zoning, exclusive taxation and regulatory controls start adopting them like crazy to maintain their property values.
Talk about law of diminishing returns meeting unintended consequences.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by Johnny Ringo on Thu, 2007/04/05 - 12:36pm.
You're making this too complicated. All Hale means is that Farragut need not join metro. That doesn't mean that Farragut would exist outside Knox County - just that it would exist independent of the metropolitan government. Metro Nashville has several examples of this: Belle Meade, Forest Hills and Berry Hill all come to mind.
Submitted by Bill Lyons on Thu, 2007/04/05 - 7:08pm.
Nine's question about property tax rates in Farragut is a good one. It would appear that one possibility if the process somehow got to an actual draft charter is that employed in Nashville-Davidson. The smaller cities existing today decided to keep their charters and become part of the general services district - equivalent to areas outside of the present city of Knoxville. The old city of Nashville became the urban services district which had a higher tax rate and were provided more services. The smaller cities had the option of enacting their own additional property taxes and providing additional services but otherwise they would get the same services as anyone else outside the previous Nashville boundaries. The new government was required to offer at least the same level of services as had been provided before. So it would appear that Farragut would begin a life in metro government pretty much unaffected. I believe that means they would still vote for representatives within the new government and have their own executive and legislative body, land use policies, option to contract for more police protection, etc. See below for the section of Nashville's charter.
Sec. 18.15. Status of smaller cities and voluntary surrender of their charters; creation of suburban utility districts. Any city in Davidson County not abolished by this Charter shall continue to exist and to function the same as prior to adoption of this Charter; except, that no such city shall extend its boundaries by annexation of any area of the metropolitan government. Any such smaller city may contract with the metropolitan government for the administration and handling of any of its governmental functions by the metropolitan government; and such smaller city may surrender its Municipal Charter at any time pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated, section 7-1-106, with the approval of a majority of those voting in the smaller city at an election with respect to such matter. After surrender of Charter, the status of the smaller city in the metropolitan government shall be that prescribed in a resolution adopted by the council prior to such surrender, or otherwise the status shall be that of other areas outside the urban services district at the time of dissolution. It shall be the obligation of the metropolitan government to furnish smaller cities with governmental services so that such cities will be furnished with governmental services to no lesser extent than other areas outside the urban services district. In furnishing said services, the metropolitan government may take into consideration the governmental services available to the smaller city by the use of state aid and other distributable moneys not derived from local taxation by the smaller city; and in this respect the metropolitan government may contract with the smaller city as to the handling, use and expenditure of such moneys.
Submitted by Bill Lyons on Thu, 2007/04/05 - 12:38pm.
When in doubt there is always the Tennessee Constitution... Article 10 Section 4 addresses the formation of new counties.
"New Counties may be established by the Legislature to consist of not less than two hundred and seventy five square miles, and which shall contain a population of seven hundred qualified voters; no line of such county shall approach the court house of any old county from which it may be taken nearer than eleven miles, nor shall such old county be reduced to less than five hundred square miles.." followed by a list of exceptions within which I did not see one that would apply here.
According to the town of Farragut web site "The Town of Farragut encompasses 16.2 square miles..."
By the way I think the whole of Knox County is a bit over 500 square miles with the city of Knoxville taking up a bit over 100. I don't think all of the above would allow for any possible secession and formation of a new county from within Knox County unless I missed it in the list of exceptions somewhere.
Submitted by Andy Axel on Thu, 2007/04/05 - 12:56pm.
Metro Nashville has several examples of this: Belle Meade, Forest Hills and Berry Hill all come to mind.
And in the case of Berry Hill and Belle Meade, that means that you have to watch your speed, since their PD's collect speeding tickets as a means of garnering revenue.
In the case of Forest Hills, that means almost zero police & fire protection. It's awful. You have estate homes in that area (anywhere from $400,000 - $3,000,000 and up) and people aren't really made aware of the downfall of living in unincorporated Metro areas. Residents have to contract their own trash pickup, for one. Police and fire response is pathetic.
There was a home invasion on Otter Creek Road a few months ago and it took the cops over 45 minutes to respond to a 911 call. The suspect is a serial rapist who's been haunting Forest Hills for several years. Metro PD has not (and probably will not, as history shows) make solving this case a priority.
So, have at it, brave citizens of Farragut. Forewarned is fore-armed.
If I understand this correctly
As always, that's the million dollar qualifier, innit?
____________________________
People getting rich. Some people saying "Markets!" More death. Neil Young. Death.
>And in the case of Berry Hill and Belle Meade, that means >that you have to watch your speed, since their PD's collect >speeding tickets as a means of garnering revenue.
There's a Faustian bargain for you Nine: a Farragut that rejects metro but ends up resorting to red light cameras...
Submitted by Knox Insider 007 on Thu, 2007/04/05 - 12:58pm.
were to decide not to be a part of a Unified Government. Then it would stand to reason that its citizen's would be ineligible to serve in elective office within the new Metro government. Mayor Ragsdale?
I personally think 95 counties is a bit much for a state of TN's size and population as it is.
If I recall correctly, Tennessee's counties were originally formed in such a way that one could ride from the county line to the county seat in a half-day (or something along those lines).
My woe at the number of counties is that I wanted to get a precincts shapefile for each county from the state election folks, and they wanted to charge me $10 a pop. Guess I'll have to tell Tiny Tim there won't be a Christmas this year...
Submitted by Pamela Treacy on Fri, 2007/04/06 - 1:44pm.
If Metro government went into effect, what would the relationship be between the county and town with respect to schools? Would all county services including education be an opt in situation? I apologize in advance if this is an obvious answer.
Submitted by Bill Lyons on Fri, 2007/04/06 - 2:19pm.
Of course a lot of this depends on any charter that might be written, but since the schools are presently a county function I don't seen any way that anything regarding the schools would change regardless of what Farragut might decide to do.
Submitted by Tamara Shepherd on Fri, 2007/04/06 - 4:05pm.
But Bill, Farragut would still be obligated to pay Knox County taxes of some sort to compensate the county for prior investment (and continuing debt)for existing schools, libraries, roads, etc? I mean, Farragut couldn't just skip off with that volume of capital projects Knox County had already undertaken in their community?
I'm not following Nine's thought that property taxes there could drop?
Submitted by Bill Lyons on Fri, 2007/04/06 - 4:26pm.
Tamara, if you read and apply the Nashville model for pre-existing small cities (I think the charter that failed in 1996 took this approach also but don't have it handy) Farragut could either keep the status quo in the new metro government - continuing to exist as a city and paying the "general services" tax rate" - which is for everyone outside Knoxville - and continuing to be included in the Knox County school system. Or, on the other hand, they could choose to relinquish their charter as a town and be on the same ground with everyone else outside the city, and still be part of the Knox County school system. I don't see the latter happening under any circumstances. In any case I don't see any way Farragut is not part of the Knox County school system.
PS.. Nice to meet and speak with you at the Smart Growth Conference!
George Korda asks ten questions about Metro Government in his op-ed column in today's News Sentinel. In fact you could call Korda's questions the "Top Ten Questions about Metro".
But so far no one has asked the biggest questions yet so I will.
Since the Town of Farragut will not be required to join the Urban Services District this means the people that live in Farragut will not see a large property tax increase. That is a huge advantage for those people that live in Farragut. Since Farragut has the power of annexation and since there must be a referendum for annexation, wouldn't other people in West Knoxville like to live in Farragut to receive the same protection?
What is to stop Farragut from annexing to Cedar Bluff Road?
What is to stop the residents from voting to join Farragut?
People vote their pocketbook. Think about it, wouldn't people voluntarily vote to join Farragut to protect themselves from the Urban Services District and the higher property taxes that would come with it?
Did anyone think of this possible outcome? Talk about the law of unintended consequences.
Since the Town of Farragut will not be required to join the Urban Services District this means the people that live in Farragut will not see a large property tax increase.
I would expect that Metro would design a special tax just to charge the Farragutians. They would still have jurisdiction over the entire county?
Farragut is allowed to annex into unincorporated Knox County. It is not allowed to annex into the City of Knoxville. I suspect with metro, it would not be allowed to annex into the area governed by metro either.
Submitted by Number9 on Mon, 2007/04/09 - 10:25am.
Farragut is allowed to annex into unincorporated Knox County. It is not allowed to annex into the City of Knoxville. I suspect with metro, it would not be allowed to annex into the area governed by metro either.
I hate to point out that Farragut could annex before the Metro vote. There is a lot of unincorporated Knox County land in West Knoxville. More than enough for a poison pill to kill Metro.
This is exactly what Frank Leuthold warned of when he said this needed to be slowed down and thought out.
Farragut was a party to the Knox County Growth Policy agreement. As such, it has an urban growth boundary and can only annex within that boundary without a referendum.
I doubt that folks who don't want to be part of Knoxville want to be part of Farragut either.
Farragut was a party to the Knox County Growth Policy agreement. As such, it has an urban growth boundary and can only annex within that boundary without a referendum.
Let me explain slowly, the point is there WOULD be a referendum. People would voluntarily vote to join Farragut to be spared from the Urban Services District because that is what will make property taxes go up.
Other than trying to obfuscate this, do you have a point?
Given a financial motivation people will vote to protect their wallets. They will choose the wallet over the Zip Code every time. You do know that Farragut has its own Zip Code don't you?
Submitted by Bill Lyons on Mon, 2007/04/09 - 1:19pm.
Again, using the Nashville model for dealing with existing cities as the basis for what may be in a hypothetical charter that might be written here, see the section in brackets below from what I posted a while back. There are presently existing limits on what Farragut can annex both in state law governing annexation and in the urban growth agreement that Rachel referenced.
Sec. 18.15. Status of smaller cities and voluntary surrender of their charters; creation of suburban utility districts. Any city in Davidson County not abolished by this Charter shall continue to exist and to function the same as prior to adoption of this Charter; except, [that no such city shall extend its boundaries by annexation of any area of the metropolitan government.]
Again, using the Nashville model for dealing with existing cities as the basis for what may be in a hypothetical charter that might be written here, see the section in brackets below from what I posted a while back. There are presently existing limits on what Farragut can annex both in state law governing annexation and in the urban growth agreement that Rachel referenced.
What if Farragut acts preemptively? What if they annex before Metro? Or what if the annexation referendum is at the same time as the Metro referendum?
Even if Farragut annexes only the Choto Basin and east to Pellissippi Highway, it would change the break even point for Metro Government drastically.
Submitted by Bill Lyons on Mon, 2007/04/09 - 3:39pm.
#9, just to follow the hypothetical, I think you are probably right that Farragut could go ahead and annex whatever it is legally able to annex in a preemptive move. I just am having a hard time seeing the reasons they would want to. Farragut does not have a property tax so they would not gain anything there. Farragut would already be protected from being brought into a future urban services zone. There is no reason to believe that the folks they might annex would want to come in other than some calculus that they might want protection against later inclusion in an urban services zone for which the new government would have to demonstrate that they could deliver fire protection and street lighting, leaf collection, etc. They would weigh this against a calculus that they might make relative to being included within the umbrella of Farragut's land use policies and certain exposure to any property tax that Farragut might someday implement.
Submitted by Andy Axel on Mon, 2007/04/09 - 4:08pm.
I just am having a hard time seeing the reasons they would want to.
What is being discussed here is the Farragut as viewed through the eyes of the digit, not Farragut as it exists as an entity in what you might refer to as the common plane of existence.
____________________________
People getting rich. Some people saying "Markets!" More death. Neil Young. Death.
#9, just to follow the hypothetical, I think you are probably right that Farragut could go ahead and annex whatever it is legally able to annex in a preemptive move. I just am having a hard time seeing the reasons they would want to. Farragut does not have a property tax so they would not gain anything there.
Farragut gets their revenue from Sales Tax. So annexing the farm land of the Southwest and Northwest Quadrants of Knox County up to Pellissippi Parkway or even as far east as Cedar Bluff Road would bring Farragut additional revenue as shopping centers and restaurants are built. So there would be a motivation for the Town of Farragut. The motivation for the residents and business owners would be to avoid the Urban Services Fee. So it would be a win win on both sides.
Farragut would already be protected from being brought into a future urban services zone. There is no reason to believe that the folks they might annex would want to come in other than some calculus that they might want protection against later inclusion in an urban services zone for which the new government would have to demonstrate that they could deliver fire protection and street lighting, leaf collection, etc. They would weigh this against a calculus that they might make relative to being included within the umbrella of Farragut's land use policies and certain exposure to any property tax that Farragut might someday implement.
Many people would like the Farragut land use policies. Also Farragut has a vastly superior Storm Water ordinance. The third rail of politics in Farragut is no property tax so people would weight a certain property tax increase from the Urban Services District versus the history of no property taxes.
Submitted by Bill Lyons on Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:50pm.
#9, I guess we don't read the motivations of all involved in the same way. Just as a "for instance," if present property owners were interested in maximizing their potential profits for commercial development in the area I just don't think they were prefer the more stringent land use controls of Farragut over the baseline zoning and sign regulations in the county generally. I could be wrong.
That aside, continuing with this exercise, if the town of Farragut were to decide to pursue a strategy of preemptive annexation they would, of course, be bound by the urban growth boundaries they agreed to with Knox County and the City of Knoxville under the requirements of Tennessee Chapter 1101 - the state's urban growth policy act. These boundaries are listed in the following report. Even within the boundaries the areas annexed would need to be contiguous to existing boundaries.
Anyway, interesting discussion all around, from the secession idea to the annexation hypotheticals and various strategies various entities might pursue. I keep returning to one fact that leads me to my interpretation of Farragut's leaders' motivations. After all, if they were motivated to somehow annex a great swath of land for purposes of some future commercial sales tax, would they not have shown some signs of doing this, or would not there have been just a bit of discussion toward this end. After all, such motivations would exist independent of a looming metropolitan government charter such as we have been discussing here.
I tend to subscribe to the wisdom of Occam's razor - one should choose the simplest explanation. In this case that logic would hold that, if somehow all obstacles were overcome and we got to the point of a proposed charter that let Farragut just continue to exist as it is, then Farragut would choose to do just that.
And thanks for the lovely compliment, Nine (about how I was trying to obfuscate). You know damn well that wasn't my intention.
Instead of "never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity", you subscribe to "never ascribe to good intentions that which can be explained by conspiracy and malice."
Just as a "for instance," if present property owners were interested in maximizing their potential profits for commercial development in the area I just don't think they were prefer the more stringent land use controls of Farragut over the baseline zoning and sign regulations in the county generally.
In the last Farragut annexation the signs of businesses were grandfathered as were the setbacks and other land use ordinances.
I keep returning to one fact that leads me to my interpretation of Farragut's leaders' motivations. After all, if they were motivated to somehow annex a great swath of land for purposes of some future commercial sales tax, would they not have shown some signs of doing this, or would not there have been just a bit of discussion toward this end.
I believe the Town of Farragut has a policy to place an annexation referendum on the ballot if neighborhoods come to the Town and request annexation. I could see people along the Orange Route desiring the land and sign use ordinances of Farragut as preferable to those of Knox County. Turkey Creek has even more stringent sign requirements than Farragut and it does not seem to hurt business.
In the end I believe it comes down to money. Residents and businesses will vote their pocketbook. My concern is the worst of all worlds where the Town of Farragut grows and Metro fails.
The supposed cost savings of Metro Government is sketchy to me. Often when large organizations merge the cost actually go up in the short term. Would the future savings ever offset the start up costs? With a more powerful bureaucracy my concern is that there would be empire building and there would never be the promised cost savings.
We will soon see as the various committees meet. Governments are like weeds, they like to grow. People need to remember when Nashville went Metro it was a different time. The build out in West Knox and North Knox County may make Metro an impossibility.
The build out in West Knox and North Knox County may make Metro an impossibility.
In a perfect world, they would make metro more feasible. Urban areas belong in a muncipality. I know that's not a popular view among folks who like all the benefits of living in an urban area w/o the property taxes, but it's still true.
And yes, I know it's not a perfect world.
And Bill, here's a question - I know metro (if it ever got so far as to make the ballot) would have to be approved by voters in both the COK and unincorporated Knox County. Would it now also have to be approved by a majority of Farragutians? I'm assuming "yes" but haven't heard anyone mention this.
Submitted by Bill Lyons on Tue, 2007/04/10 - 7:39am.
Rachel, for what it is worth my understanding of any metropolitan government vote is that concurrent majorities in favor of a new charter are required inside and outside the municipality that would be be combined with the county. In the case of Knoxville-Knox County that would apply to the one majority inside the city of Knoxville and another majority among the rest of those voting outside the city in Knox County. This second majority would include the residents of Farragut counted among the others residing outside the city. However a separate majority of those living in Farragut would not be required as long as Farragut was going to continue to exist and thus not be combined with county government in the manner that the city of Knoxville's would be. Taking that one step further, my understanding is that a separate majority among those voting in Farragut would be required if the proposed charter in fact eliminated Farragut as a municipality.
Tamara, just to clarify - Farragut already has responsibility for upgrading and maintaining its own roads, except for any national (I-40) or state (Kingston Pike) routes that run through it. The schools and library are part of the county system.
Speaking of Farragut's sales tax. I wonder, rather than contribute the minimum required by law (20%, I believe) would getting them to kick in the same percentage towards the school system as the city of Knoxville (70%, if memory serves)be a fair exchange for some concessions on the whole Hardin Valley rezoning mess.
Then again, I recall reading that Farragut's sales tax receipts were down, on account of competition from Turkey Creek.
edens, I've been wondering if the issue of funding schools through the sales tax would resurface now that Farragut elections are coming up and school rezoning is the hot topic of the season. I thought that the town was required to contribute 50%, but that city and county each contributed 70%, making the difference 20%. But 20% more or 50% more; for those of us who came along after the court battle the issue is crowded in confusion, full of rumors and speculation and void of any verifiable facts.
This might be a good time for someone with the facts to get the issue out there. Wouldn't surprise me if 21st century Farragut parents, given solid information, choose schools over parks.
Is the official incorporated name of the city the "Town of Farragut"? Seems kind of pretentious.
I know some states have differing classifications of borough, township, town, city, etc., but TN does not.
Submitted by Pamela Treacy on Tue, 2007/04/10 - 10:22pm.
Everyone loves to bring up the difference in Farragut's contribution to the sales tax going to schools. So I started asking questions. What would the change be worth annually? No one has been able to give me an answer. When reviewing the Town of Farragut annual report, I found approximately $2 million dollars comes from state tax dollars. My best guess, the value of the 50% and 70% difference is only $1,000,000 per year. Farragut's total revenues are only around $6,000,000. I don't understand how $1 million dollars will change the schools. The knox county school budget and captial debt service approaches $350 million. So financially this isn't as big as deal as people make it. However, for consistency, it would be nice if Farragut contributed the same as the city of Knoxville and county. But let's not make this more than what it is.
You also have to take in account the property tax revenue based on the home values in Farragut. If one tries to make the case that Farragut folks aren't paying their fair share in taxes, I think you need to check out the numbers.
Craig Luethold gave me a number awhile back when I inquired about the diffence in tax contribution to schools. With 9 districts in the county, each fair share would be 11% of revenues. I belive the number he gave me for the 5th district was 26%. I can't find my notes. If someone else has better information, please share it. I do realize that the 5th district is more than Farragut so they number would go down some to reflect just Farragut.
Also, the Farragut money isnt' just spent on parks. The town has done a good job to improving roads.
The good news is that times are changing in Farragut. Today's election broke Mayor Ford's voting block. New independent thinkers in Farragut government will look to ways to help Knox County Schools.
Now is the time for ALL Knox Countians to stick together and take our governement back. The lack of planning that has occured over the last 20 years has caused so many problems especially school zoning.
Let's get the party started and start making things happen.
Tennessee does not have "independent cities" such as exist in Virginia. I don't think a town or city can exist independent of a county. However, they could work out a deal where they are exempt from some elements of Knox County government. How does this work with other municipalities in County-City government places? Any in Davidson, TN, Dade, FL, Jefferson, KY, Marion, IN? Or do the other municipalities get completely rolled into the metro county government?
I think Farragut could secede and create a Farragut County by an act of the Legislature. Not sure how, but that's how a county gets created. I wonder when the last county was created in Tennessee? Probably in the 1800s.
Hmmm...well would the voters of Farragut think about these options during a vote for metro? In short, would they say thanks but no thanks during a metro referendum, adding their numbers to the folks in North, East, and South Knox that are almost guaranteed to vote in numbers against consolidation? That would be almost insurmountable for metro supporters to overcome. The Lyons pdf that was posted the other day showed what little Knox Co support for metro in 1996 was in West Knox. Seems to me from what I read in the Farragut Press they aren't too keen on Metro at this time.
Conversely, would those Farragut citizens wanting their own little city/county/fiefdom vote for metro to spur a movement to secede?
If they formed their own county, they'd have to get their own money in the form of property taxes. Residents don't pay taxes for Farragut, but just to Knox County.
They'd have to fund their own schools, sheriff's department, and other things to be on their own.
If they formed their own county, they'd have to get their own money in the form of property taxes. Residents don't pay taxes for Farragut, but just to Knox County.
They'd have to fund their own schools, sheriff's department, and other things to be on their own.
If I understand this correctly only Metro government would allow the opportunity for Farragut to go their own way.
With the property tax Farragut would have more than enough money for schools, a Sheriff's department, and Farragut already provides all of the other necessities.
In fact Farragut could have a lower property tax and become a tax haven for those people who desire very large lots and homes.
This is the law of unintended consequences on steroids.
Would Metro cause an exodus? Wow, that would shake things up around Knoxville et all.
"In fact Farragut could have a lower property tax and become a tax haven for those people who desire very large lots and homes."
But the specter of buildout means that taxes will go up as new tax generating properties disappear. Lot infill is usually what happens as property owners age, don't want to care for their huge properties, and/or need to raise capital for home maintenance or lifestyle maintenance.
Sequyoah Hills would be an example of this happening. Tewksbury, NJ (easily the most elite town in NJ) would be an example of the opposite effect where people generally against restrictions such as zoning, exclusive taxation and regulatory controls start adopting them like crazy to maintain their property values.
Talk about law of diminishing returns meeting unintended consequences.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
You're making this too complicated. All Hale means is that Farragut need not join metro. That doesn't mean that Farragut would exist outside Knox County - just that it would exist independent of the metropolitan government. Metro Nashville has several examples of this: Belle Meade, Forest Hills and Berry Hill all come to mind.
That doesn't mean that Farragut would exist outside Knox County - just that it would exist independent of the metropolitan government.
If as you write Farragut would exist independent of Knox County, what would that mean as to the property tax rate?
Why if Farragut existed independent of Knox County could they not keep their property taxes within the Town of Farragut?
Nine's question about property tax rates in Farragut is a good one. It would appear that one possibility if the process somehow got to an actual draft charter is that employed in Nashville-Davidson. The smaller cities existing today decided to keep their charters and become part of the general services district - equivalent to areas outside of the present city of Knoxville. The old city of Nashville became the urban services district which had a higher tax rate and were provided more services. The smaller cities had the option of enacting their own additional property taxes and providing additional services but otherwise they would get the same services as anyone else outside the previous Nashville boundaries. The new government was required to offer at least the same level of services as had been provided before. So it would appear that Farragut would begin a life in metro government pretty much unaffected. I believe that means they would still vote for representatives within the new government and have their own executive and legislative body, land use policies, option to contract for more police protection, etc. See below for the section of Nashville's charter.
Sec. 18.15. Status of smaller cities and voluntary surrender of their charters; creation of suburban utility districts. Any city in Davidson County not abolished by this Charter shall continue to exist and to function the same as prior to adoption of this Charter; except, that no such city shall extend its boundaries by annexation of any area of the metropolitan government. Any such smaller city may contract with the metropolitan government for the administration and handling of any of its governmental functions by the metropolitan government; and such smaller city may surrender its Municipal Charter at any time pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated, section 7-1-106, with the approval of a majority of those voting in the smaller city at an election with respect to such matter. After surrender of Charter, the status of the smaller city in the metropolitan government shall be that prescribed in a resolution adopted by the council prior to such surrender, or otherwise the status shall be that of other areas outside the urban services district at the time of dissolution. It shall be the obligation of the metropolitan government to furnish smaller cities with governmental services so that such cities will be furnished with governmental services to no lesser extent than other areas outside the urban services district. In furnishing said services, the metropolitan government may take into consideration the governmental services available to the smaller city by the use of state aid and other distributable moneys not derived from local taxation by the smaller city; and in this respect the metropolitan government may contract with the smaller city as to the handling, use and expenditure of such moneys.
When in doubt there is always the Tennessee Constitution... Article 10 Section 4 addresses the formation of new counties.
"New Counties may be established by the Legislature to consist of not less than two hundred and seventy five square miles, and which shall contain a population of seven hundred qualified voters; no line of such county shall approach the court house of any old county from which it may be taken nearer than eleven miles, nor shall such old county be reduced to less than five hundred square miles.." followed by a list of exceptions within which I did not see one that would apply here.
According to the town of Farragut web site "The Town of Farragut encompasses 16.2 square miles..."
By the way I think the whole of Knox County is a bit over 500 square miles with the city of Knoxville taking up a bit over 100. I don't think all of the above would allow for any possible secession and formation of a new county from within Knox County unless I missed it in the list of exceptions somewhere.
Guess that answers that. Could they join Loudon Co.?
I personally think 95 counties is a bit much for a state of TN's size and population as it is.
And in the case of Berry Hill and Belle Meade, that means that you have to watch your speed, since their PD's collect speeding tickets as a means of garnering revenue.
In the case of Forest Hills, that means almost zero police & fire protection. It's awful. You have estate homes in that area (anywhere from $400,000 - $3,000,000 and up) and people aren't really made aware of the downfall of living in unincorporated Metro areas. Residents have to contract their own trash pickup, for one. Police and fire response is pathetic.
There was a home invasion on Otter Creek Road a few months ago and it took the cops over 45 minutes to respond to a 911 call. The suspect is a serial rapist who's been haunting Forest Hills for several years. Metro PD has not (and probably will not, as history shows) make solving this case a priority.
So, have at it, brave citizens of Farragut. Forewarned is fore-armed.
As always, that's the million dollar qualifier, innit?
____________________________
People getting rich. Some people saying "Markets!" More death. Neil Young. Death.
>And in the case of Berry Hill and Belle Meade, that means >that you have to watch your speed, since their PD's collect >speeding tickets as a means of garnering revenue.
There's a Faustian bargain for you Nine: a Farragut that rejects metro but ends up resorting to red light cameras...
He's been using Hobson's choices recently. Must've been mentioned in The Fountainhead or something.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
were to decide not to be a part of a Unified Government. Then it would stand to reason that its citizen's would be ineligible to serve in elective office within the new Metro government. Mayor Ragsdale?
I personally think 95 counties is a bit much for a state of TN's size and population as it is.
If I recall correctly, Tennessee's counties were originally formed in such a way that one could ride from the county line to the county seat in a half-day (or something along those lines).
My woe at the number of counties is that I wanted to get a precincts shapefile for each county from the state election folks, and they wanted to charge me $10 a pop. Guess I'll have to tell Tiny Tim there won't be a Christmas this year...
So Farragut cannot secede from Knox County. And Farragut can just stay Farragut if there is a metro. Interesting to look at the Nashville charter.
If Metro government went into effect, what would the relationship be between the county and town with respect to schools? Would all county services including education be an opt in situation? I apologize in advance if this is an obvious answer.
Of course a lot of this depends on any charter that might be written, but since the schools are presently a county function I don't seen any way that anything regarding the schools would change regardless of what Farragut might decide to do.
But Bill, Farragut would still be obligated to pay Knox County taxes of some sort to compensate the county for prior investment (and continuing debt)for existing schools, libraries, roads, etc? I mean, Farragut couldn't just skip off with that volume of capital projects Knox County had already undertaken in their community?
I'm not following Nine's thought that property taxes there could drop?
Tamara, if you read and apply the Nashville model for pre-existing small cities (I think the charter that failed in 1996 took this approach also but don't have it handy) Farragut could either keep the status quo in the new metro government - continuing to exist as a city and paying the "general services" tax rate" - which is for everyone outside Knoxville - and continuing to be included in the Knox County school system. Or, on the other hand, they could choose to relinquish their charter as a town and be on the same ground with everyone else outside the city, and still be part of the Knox County school system. I don't see the latter happening under any circumstances. In any case I don't see any way Farragut is not part of the Knox County school system.
PS.. Nice to meet and speak with you at the Smart Growth Conference!
George Korda asks ten questions about Metro Government in his op-ed column in today's News Sentinel. In fact you could call Korda's questions the "Top Ten Questions about Metro".
But so far no one has asked the biggest questions yet so I will.
Since the Town of Farragut will not be required to join the Urban Services District this means the people that live in Farragut will not see a large property tax increase. That is a huge advantage for those people that live in Farragut. Since Farragut has the power of annexation and since there must be a referendum for annexation, wouldn't other people in West Knoxville like to live in Farragut to receive the same protection?
What is to stop Farragut from annexing to Cedar Bluff Road?
What is to stop the residents from voting to join Farragut?
People vote their pocketbook. Think about it, wouldn't people voluntarily vote to join Farragut to protect themselves from the Urban Services District and the higher property taxes that would come with it?
Did anyone think of this possible outcome? Talk about the law of unintended consequences.
Since the Town of Farragut will not be required to join the Urban Services District this means the people that live in Farragut will not see a large property tax increase.
I would expect that Metro would design a special tax just to charge the Farragutians. They would still have jurisdiction over the entire county?
Adrift in the Sea of Humility
Farragut is allowed to annex into unincorporated Knox County. It is not allowed to annex into the City of Knoxville. I suspect with metro, it would not be allowed to annex into the area governed by metro either.
Farragut is allowed to annex into unincorporated Knox County. It is not allowed to annex into the City of Knoxville. I suspect with metro, it would not be allowed to annex into the area governed by metro either.
I hate to point out that Farragut could annex before the Metro vote. There is a lot of unincorporated Knox County land in West Knoxville. More than enough for a poison pill to kill Metro.
This is exactly what Frank Leuthold warned of when he said this needed to be slowed down and thought out.
Farragut was a party to the Knox County Growth Policy agreement. As such, it has an urban growth boundary and can only annex within that boundary without a referendum.
I doubt that folks who don't want to be part of Knoxville want to be part of Farragut either.
Farragut was a party to the Knox County Growth Policy agreement. As such, it has an urban growth boundary and can only annex within that boundary without a referendum.
Let me explain slowly, the point is there WOULD be a referendum. People would voluntarily vote to join Farragut to be spared from the Urban Services District because that is what will make property taxes go up.
Other than trying to obfuscate this, do you have a point?
Given a financial motivation people will vote to protect their wallets. They will choose the wallet over the Zip Code every time. You do know that Farragut has its own Zip Code don't you?
Again, using the Nashville model for dealing with existing cities as the basis for what may be in a hypothetical charter that might be written here, see the section in brackets below from what I posted a while back. There are presently existing limits on what Farragut can annex both in state law governing annexation and in the urban growth agreement that Rachel referenced.
Sec. 18.15. Status of smaller cities and voluntary surrender of their charters; creation of suburban utility districts. Any city in Davidson County not abolished by this Charter shall continue to exist and to function the same as prior to adoption of this Charter; except, [that no such city shall extend its boundaries by annexation of any area of the metropolitan government.]
Again, using the Nashville model for dealing with existing cities as the basis for what may be in a hypothetical charter that might be written here, see the section in brackets below from what I posted a while back. There are presently existing limits on what Farragut can annex both in state law governing annexation and in the urban growth agreement that Rachel referenced.
What if Farragut acts preemptively? What if they annex before Metro? Or what if the annexation referendum is at the same time as the Metro referendum?
Even if Farragut annexes only the Choto Basin and east to Pellissippi Highway, it would change the break even point for Metro Government drastically.
#9, just to follow the hypothetical, I think you are probably right that Farragut could go ahead and annex whatever it is legally able to annex in a preemptive move. I just am having a hard time seeing the reasons they would want to. Farragut does not have a property tax so they would not gain anything there. Farragut would already be protected from being brought into a future urban services zone. There is no reason to believe that the folks they might annex would want to come in other than some calculus that they might want protection against later inclusion in an urban services zone for which the new government would have to demonstrate that they could deliver fire protection and street lighting, leaf collection, etc. They would weigh this against a calculus that they might make relative to being included within the umbrella of Farragut's land use policies and certain exposure to any property tax that Farragut might someday implement.
What is being discussed here is the Farragut as viewed through the eyes of the digit, not Farragut as it exists as an entity in what you might refer to as the common plane of existence.
____________________________
People getting rich. Some people saying "Markets!" More death. Neil Young. Death.
#9, just to follow the hypothetical, I think you are probably right that Farragut could go ahead and annex whatever it is legally able to annex in a preemptive move. I just am having a hard time seeing the reasons they would want to. Farragut does not have a property tax so they would not gain anything there.
Farragut gets their revenue from Sales Tax. So annexing the farm land of the Southwest and Northwest Quadrants of Knox County up to Pellissippi Parkway or even as far east as Cedar Bluff Road would bring Farragut additional revenue as shopping centers and restaurants are built. So there would be a motivation for the Town of Farragut. The motivation for the residents and business owners would be to avoid the Urban Services Fee. So it would be a win win on both sides.
Farragut would already be protected from being brought into a future urban services zone. There is no reason to believe that the folks they might annex would want to come in other than some calculus that they might want protection against later inclusion in an urban services zone for which the new government would have to demonstrate that they could deliver fire protection and street lighting, leaf collection, etc. They would weigh this against a calculus that they might make relative to being included within the umbrella of Farragut's land use policies and certain exposure to any property tax that Farragut might someday implement.
Many people would like the Farragut land use policies. Also Farragut has a vastly superior Storm Water ordinance. The third rail of politics in Farragut is no property tax so people would weight a certain property tax increase from the Urban Services District versus the history of no property taxes.
Maybe Metro isn't that great of an idea?
#9, I guess we don't read the motivations of all involved in the same way. Just as a "for instance," if present property owners were interested in maximizing their potential profits for commercial development in the area I just don't think they were prefer the more stringent land use controls of Farragut over the baseline zoning and sign regulations in the county generally. I could be wrong.
That aside, continuing with this exercise, if the town of Farragut were to decide to pursue a strategy of preemptive annexation they would, of course, be bound by the urban growth boundaries they agreed to with Knox County and the City of Knoxville under the requirements of Tennessee Chapter 1101 - the state's urban growth policy act. These boundaries are listed in the following report. Even within the boundaries the areas annexed would need to be contiguous to existing boundaries.
Link...
Anyway, interesting discussion all around, from the secession idea to the annexation hypotheticals and various strategies various entities might pursue. I keep returning to one fact that leads me to my interpretation of Farragut's leaders' motivations. After all, if they were motivated to somehow annex a great swath of land for purposes of some future commercial sales tax, would they not have shown some signs of doing this, or would not there have been just a bit of discussion toward this end. After all, such motivations would exist independent of a looming metropolitan government charter such as we have been discussing here.
I tend to subscribe to the wisdom of Occam's razor - one should choose the simplest explanation. In this case that logic would hold that, if somehow all obstacles were overcome and we got to the point of a proposed charter that let Farragut just continue to exist as it is, then Farragut would choose to do just that.
What Bill said.
And thanks for the lovely compliment, Nine (about how I was trying to obfuscate). You know damn well that wasn't my intention.
Instead of "never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity", you subscribe to "never ascribe to good intentions that which can be explained by conspiracy and malice."
Grow up.
Just as a "for instance," if present property owners were interested in maximizing their potential profits for commercial development in the area I just don't think they were prefer the more stringent land use controls of Farragut over the baseline zoning and sign regulations in the county generally.
In the last Farragut annexation the signs of businesses were grandfathered as were the setbacks and other land use ordinances.
I keep returning to one fact that leads me to my interpretation of Farragut's leaders' motivations. After all, if they were motivated to somehow annex a great swath of land for purposes of some future commercial sales tax, would they not have shown some signs of doing this, or would not there have been just a bit of discussion toward this end.
I believe the Town of Farragut has a policy to place an annexation referendum on the ballot if neighborhoods come to the Town and request annexation. I could see people along the Orange Route desiring the land and sign use ordinances of Farragut as preferable to those of Knox County. Turkey Creek has even more stringent sign requirements than Farragut and it does not seem to hurt business.
In the end I believe it comes down to money. Residents and businesses will vote their pocketbook. My concern is the worst of all worlds where the Town of Farragut grows and Metro fails.
The supposed cost savings of Metro Government is sketchy to me. Often when large organizations merge the cost actually go up in the short term. Would the future savings ever offset the start up costs? With a more powerful bureaucracy my concern is that there would be empire building and there would never be the promised cost savings.
We will soon see as the various committees meet. Governments are like weeds, they like to grow. People need to remember when Nashville went Metro it was a different time. The build out in West Knox and North Knox County may make Metro an impossibility.
The build out in West Knox and North Knox County may make Metro an impossibility.
In a perfect world, they would make metro more feasible. Urban areas belong in a muncipality. I know that's not a popular view among folks who like all the benefits of living in an urban area w/o the property taxes, but it's still true.
And yes, I know it's not a perfect world.
And Bill, here's a question - I know metro (if it ever got so far as to make the ballot) would have to be approved by voters in both the COK and unincorporated Knox County. Would it now also have to be approved by a majority of Farragutians? I'm assuming "yes" but haven't heard anyone mention this.
Rachel, for what it is worth my understanding of any metropolitan government vote is that concurrent majorities in favor of a new charter are required inside and outside the municipality that would be be combined with the county. In the case of Knoxville-Knox County that would apply to the one majority inside the city of Knoxville and another majority among the rest of those voting outside the city in Knox County. This second majority would include the residents of Farragut counted among the others residing outside the city. However a separate majority of those living in Farragut would not be required as long as Farragut was going to continue to exist and thus not be combined with county government in the manner that the city of Knoxville's would be. Taking that one step further, my understanding is that a separate majority among those voting in Farragut would be required if the proposed charter in fact eliminated Farragut as a municipality.
Thanks, Bill. That seems a reasonable answer.
>Thanks, Bill. That seems a reasonable answer.<
You're welcome Rachel. Unfortunately reasonable and correct are not necessarily synonymous. I am pretty sure this is correct.
Tamara, just to clarify - Farragut already has responsibility for upgrading and maintaining its own roads, except for any national (I-40) or state (Kingston Pike) routes that run through it. The schools and library are part of the county system.
Speaking of Farragut's sales tax. I wonder, rather than contribute the minimum required by law (20%, I believe) would getting them to kick in the same percentage towards the school system as the city of Knoxville (70%, if memory serves)be a fair exchange for some concessions on the whole Hardin Valley rezoning mess.
Then again, I recall reading that Farragut's sales tax receipts were down, on account of competition from Turkey Creek.
edens, I've been wondering if the issue of funding schools through the sales tax would resurface now that Farragut elections are coming up and school rezoning is the hot topic of the season. I thought that the town was required to contribute 50%, but that city and county each contributed 70%, making the difference 20%. But 20% more or 50% more; for those of us who came along after the court battle the issue is crowded in confusion, full of rumors and speculation and void of any verifiable facts.
This might be a good time for someone with the facts to get the issue out there. Wouldn't surprise me if 21st century Farragut parents, given solid information, choose schools over parks.
Someone should ask.
>I thought that the town was required to contribute 50%, but >that city and county each contributed 70%, making the >difference 20%.
Ah...knew 20% was stuck in my head for some reason. It was late and I didn't bother to look it up.
Is the official incorporated name of the city the "Town of Farragut"? Seems kind of pretentious.
I know some states have differing classifications of borough, township, town, city, etc., but TN does not.
Everyone loves to bring up the difference in Farragut's contribution to the sales tax going to schools. So I started asking questions. What would the change be worth annually? No one has been able to give me an answer. When reviewing the Town of Farragut annual report, I found approximately $2 million dollars comes from state tax dollars. My best guess, the value of the 50% and 70% difference is only $1,000,000 per year. Farragut's total revenues are only around $6,000,000. I don't understand how $1 million dollars will change the schools. The knox county school budget and captial debt service approaches $350 million. So financially this isn't as big as deal as people make it. However, for consistency, it would be nice if Farragut contributed the same as the city of Knoxville and county. But let's not make this more than what it is.
You also have to take in account the property tax revenue based on the home values in Farragut. If one tries to make the case that Farragut folks aren't paying their fair share in taxes, I think you need to check out the numbers.
Craig Luethold gave me a number awhile back when I inquired about the diffence in tax contribution to schools. With 9 districts in the county, each fair share would be 11% of revenues. I belive the number he gave me for the 5th district was 26%. I can't find my notes. If someone else has better information, please share it. I do realize that the 5th district is more than Farragut so they number would go down some to reflect just Farragut.
Also, the Farragut money isnt' just spent on parks. The town has done a good job to improving roads.
The good news is that times are changing in Farragut. Today's election broke Mayor Ford's voting block. New independent thinkers in Farragut government will look to ways to help Knox County Schools.
Now is the time for ALL Knox Countians to stick together and take our governement back. The lack of planning that has occured over the last 20 years has caused so many problems especially school zoning.
Let's get the party started and start making things happen.
Post new comment