There are currently 0 users and 197 guests online.
Live Blogging 5th Dist Appointment Hearings
Submitted by reform4 on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 11:39am.
Tom Baer, Richard Briggs, and Pam Tracey interviewed. Piehl (?) was a no-show. some supporters spoke for Briggs, one citizen spoke to support Pams thought that Briggs shouldn't be appointed early.
Sproles spoke (not seeking appointment) to the same point, pointing out the voters didn't have a chance to speak out for him yet. Since Lambert was absent, Scott Moore had to embarass commission by asking Sproles what his views on gun control and abortion are. Sproles pointed out those issues aren't relevant to commission. Audience broke out in applause.
sigh...
Other than Scooby's question, questions were good- TIFs, development, budget priorities/education, what they hope to accomplish, as well as background (conflicts of interest, unpaid taxes). The process appears very open.
Submitted by Tamara Shepherd on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 11:52am.
I don't know Tom. I *do* know Pamela, and while I'm sure she'd make a fine "seatwarmer" over these next few months, in this 5th District vacancy (and in the 8th District vacancy), the primary winner is unopposed in the general.
My thought would be to appoint Briggs in the 5th (and Wright in the 8th), rather than make this any harder than it has to be???
Submitted by Lisa Starbuck on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 12:00pm.
Tamara, Briggs is facing Don Sproles in the general election - so it would be wrong to appoint him now and give him an incumbent advantage, IMO. I do agree that Wright should go in the 8th, since he really is unopposed and it makes no sense to have a seatwarmer there.
Pamela would make a great interim commissioner! I would also support Victoria DeFreese in the 9th and Bob Wolfenbarger in the 2nd for these temporary seats.
Submitted by Pamela Treacy on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 12:13pm.
Tamara -- tried to reach you this morning to let you know about the Independent candidate. Lisa, thanks for clarifying.
The only reason I am pursuing appointment is I believe we need to let the election process run its course. Elections are a great time to get the issues on the table, get the public's opinion and evaluate the candidates.
I approached Briggs and Sproles before the meeting started to let them know I like the both but feel neither should get a temporary appointment.
Submitted by reform4 on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 12:53pm.
Don Sproles made an interesting argument that with so many Democratic votes still in the 5th unheard from, it would be illogical to assume that Briggs is a shoe-in. I haven't looked at the numbers myself, so I'd be curious. I suspect that Commission will "horse trade" a D appointment in #1 with an automatic R appointment in #5, and choose a lot of caretakers elsewhere.
Interestingly, the issue of Briggs' job and how responsive he would be was asked. He said he has a 24 hour answering service and would utilize his personal assistant. He said he usually gets back to his patients immediately, and even on surgical days within a few hours, but that same day. He noted that having other partners in his practice to hand off non-emergencies to would allow him flexibility.
If he was appointed and didn't come through on his promised responsiveness to constituents, that would be something Sproles would hammer him on in the campaign.
I don't know about you, but my doctor's and my wife's doctors don't really have a great track record at making return calls within the same WEEK ...(usually they just never return the call at all). Dr. Briggs really put himself out on a limb there, IMHO.
Submitted by B Hornback (not verified) on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 12:57pm.
Tamara, It would be an unfair to the fifth district to appoint Briggs, when Sproles is an Independent candidate. Pamela represented herself well. I personally covered this for Brian's Blog and will be posting the report later today.
R. Larry Smith was a disappointment in that he asked Thomas Baer if he had a criminal past or had not paid his taxes. But, he did not ask the same question of Briggs or Treacy. Come on R. Larry, if you are going to ask one question of one ask it of all. It was just grandstanding on R. Larry's part.
I asked all Commissioner's today if they were running to be appointed Chairman on February 25, 2008. I even secured a telephone interview with Greg Lambert to obtain his answer. Tune into Brian's Blog this evening for our report.
Submitted by Tamara Shepherd on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 1:53pm.
So sorry, Pamela (and others)! I glanced at my "sample ballot," saved from the N-S, and saw that no Dem ran in the 5th District primary. I forgot all about Sproles, the Independent!
Yes, I absolutely agree that no candidate in any on-going race should be appointed. I was simply thinking that the 5th was concluded in the primary.
Let me amend, then, to suggest that since just the 8th District race is concluded, just that primary victor (Dave Wright) should now be appointed.
Submitted by Tamara Shepherd on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 2:47pm.
I don't know anything about this, Betty. Details?
(Isn't Larry a registered adult of some sort with Boy Scouts? When I first registered, I had to undergo a criminal background check--did so with Girl Scouts, too.)
Submitted by Bbeanster on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 2:59pm.
R. Larry was arrested and charged with raping his estranged wife in the early '80s. The rape charge was dismissed in General Sessions Court because his estranged wife, who had filed for divorce and was living apart from him, had not yet served him with divorce papers. This happened before the spousal rape law changed in Tennessee -- at that time, a man could not be charged with raping his wife.
The judge was a Republican, fwiw, and the record was expunged. There are still a very few traces of the case, however, in an old newspaper clip, divorce filings and in the memory of the retired KPD detective who investigated it.
And no, it never became a story, because the former wife did not want to discuss it.
Submitted by Anonymously Nine (not verified) on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 1:44pm.
What was the point of waiting until after the Primary? It was so the voters could be heard. Now after the voters have been heard people say that picking the winner of the Primary disenfranchises the voters. Great. Some people say pick the second place candidate. Some people say look at the resumes and ignore the Primary.
This is madness. Why didn't Mark Harmon and Mike Hammond think of this? We are in this mess because of them. This was their idea. The appointments could have been made in December, but nooo, Mike Hammond couldn't get a sub for a Lady Vol's basketball game. So the whole County had to wait.
Commission needs to get this done.
Even with Tank as the Chair it will be another train wreck.
Scoobie is often misunderstood. When he asked about views on abortion and gun control, he meant whether it was appropriate for commission meetings to be summarily aborted so discussions could take place in the back hallway, and whether Lumpy should be seated closer to the audience to provide commission with additional gun control in case of citizen outrage.
Submitted by B. Paone (not verified) on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 2:34pm.
I'm about halfway through encoding the video of the meeting for internet streaming. About 76 minutes in is the Moore vs. Sproles encounter.
If you look in the extreme lower right hand corner of the video, you can see a certain 4-B candidate's reaction to Moore's line of questioning. My wife got a kick out of it.
I like the background action best - Steve's reaction to the question, Wojnar heading out of the room only to stop dead in his tracks, then comes back in to listen to it...
Just goes to show that the county commission doesn't have to be in the CCB to be entertaining.
Submitted by Pam Strickland on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 10:45pm.
I don't know Mr. Sproles, but I admire his response to Moore's insanity. Clearly, Moore was picking on Sproles because he's an Episcopalian for we are a misunderstood religion.
pgs
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
Submitted by B. Paone (not verified) on Sat, 2008/02/09 - 11:35pm.
Just go to Political Knoxville, look for the "PK Live and Archived Video" section in the center of the page, and select "5-C Appointees' Forum (archived)" in the dropdown menu.
If anyone sees anything wrong with the playback, please let me know.
Now, if you folks will excuse me, I'm taking the rest of the night off to play some Madden. All work and no play makes Brian want to launch his laptop from a catapult.
Submitted by Bbeanster on Sun, 2008/02/10 - 12:46am.
I got to know Tom Baer and his late wife, Margaret, about 20 years ago when his son, Tommy, was murdered. Tommy was the victim in the famous "frat house murder" at UT in 1988. He was stabbed to death by a drunk who was trying to crash a frat party.
The Baers were very decent, intelligent people, and they worked tirelessly on the issue of campus crime. They changed a lot of things at UT and around the country. I think Tom Baer would be an excellent choice in the 5th District.
I think Smith/Moore did Briggs more harm than good and created a scenario where Briggs could lose. The Fourth District has a lot of independent thinkers.
-----------------------------------------
Fighting for Reform and Representation, Fourth District
Steve Drevik, Commission Seat 4-B Link...
For those who want that kind of information, enjoy! It contains a brief bio and a link to their resume, as well as quicklinks to contact commissioners about a particular appointee. As the forums go on, it will also include video footage of their time at the podium thanks to Google Video.
Let me know if I screwed anything up on the profiles. Thanks! :)
I know what it's like fighting with technology to get these kinds of things done. For every one of us that say "thanks," there's dozens more that also appreciate the legwork that saves us all the trip downtown.
(Do your web stats show more hits from users at the knoxnews.com domain??)
-----------------------------------------
Fighting for Reform and Representation, Fourth District
Steve Drevik, Commission Seat 4-B Link...
Glancing thru the appointee possibles it looks like the 2nd district has more than its share of high quality candidates. Why don't you guys spread the wealth a bit?
In district 9 I thought DeFreese did a good job when the South-Doyle homeowners battled Jernigan. They did their homework. That looks like an obvious selection to me. I cannot recall the gentleman that also spoke for SD homeowners but he should run for County Commissioner at some point.
Submitted by Anonymously Nine (not verified) on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 9:02am.
I think Smith/Moore did Briggs more harm than good and created a scenario where Briggs could lose. The Fourth District has a lot of independent thinkers.
Briggs is in the 5th. I am not aware of lots of independent thinkers in the 5th. There are however a lot of Republicans. Smith and Moore are not highly regarded in the 5th.
Submitted by Bbeanster on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 9:05am.
Looking at the 5th from a distance, Dr. Briggs looks pretty damn invincible. He also seems extremely independent. That being said, Sproles is a very good man -- smart, successful without TIFs -- and the kind of person we should want to be involved in government. Hammond and Leuthold will be term limited out in 2010, so maybe he'll have a shot then.
Submitted by Anonymously Nine (not verified) on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 9:59am.
Mike Hammond had an Independent candidate in the 5th run against him. A West Point grad. I think Hammond got 62% of the vote. But he had Tyler Harber and spent $30,000. His opponent spent $1,200. It is a tough sell for an Independent in the 5th. I can't think of any District where an Independent will be competitive.
People like Briggs. I don't think Smith and Moore will affect his popularity at all.
Submitted by Sandra Clark on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 10:08am.
I like both men. Either would improve the character and intelligence quotient on County Commission.
But Don made a strategic error in not contesting in the Republican primary where a simple plurality was sufficient to win. Now he faces Briggs alone, needing 50 percent plus 1 to win. -- s.
Submitted by Lisa Starbuck on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 10:12am.
But I have to wonder how hard/easy it will be to communicate with a busy physician? I know he said he had a personal assistant who would answer his phone, but still.
That said, I have to agree with the poster who said that all of the 5th District potential appointees and candidates showed more class than most of the sitting commission. Briggs certainly seems like he offers a lot of leadership skills.
I think it was him though that said he felt that property owners had a right to do with their property what they wished as long as it didn't hurt others. I would have added "as long as it's zoned for the use and/or the land use plan will accommodate it." We have got to stop all these variances and changing the sector plan willy-nilly.
Submitted by Tamara Shepherd on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 11:29am.
"I think it was him though that said he felt that property owners had a right to do with their property what they wished as long as it didn't hurt others."
It was Briggs who said this, Lisa, and I made note of it, too.
I agree that all those 5th District appointment contenders looked pretty strong, including Briggs, but that remark caused me to want to go take a look at Briggs' financial disclosure, which I hadn't done.
Submitted by Bbeanster on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 11:40am.
Well, since Briggs stopped taking contributions when developers started sending him money, his disclosure will tell you very little -- except he didn't take developers' $$, or much of anybody else's.
Submitted by Tamara Shepherd on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 11:48am.
What's this, Betty? I'm not understanding what you mean by "when developers started sending him money?" Do you mean that he returned some developer's (developers') contribution(s)?
Submitted by Tamara Shepherd on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 11:45am.
Well, reporting back on Briggs' financial disclosure: Per the copy posted at Political Knoxville, he raised $20,400 during the "pre-primary" filing period. Of that amount, $20,000 was his own contribution to the campaign, and another $400 was donated from three separate contributers, none of them developers.
Submitted by Bird_dog on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 2:07pm.
Without watching the whole video again, I think he did advocate following the long-term master plan. So that property owners do have rights - within the long-term plan. This is much preferable to me than CC overruling the MPC staff recommendations, which follow the sector plans, and pandering to vocal opposition from neighbors.
I have noticed that most people are opposed to any nearby development - after their own. We have rights regarding our own property, but not rights to, for instance, our scenic views and surrounding property. If folks want the neighbor's farm to stay in green pastures, when a subdivision is allowed under the sector plan, then they should pay the market value and buy the farm.
Submitted by Bird_dog on Mon, 2008/02/11 - 3:21pm.
and governments create zoning and planning for that purpose. Or NGO's buy land for protection (quoted below). I think that's what long-term planning is about. I think that's a good thing... But what I see happening, though, is a land-owner wants to sell to a developer - for a purpose that is allowed within the sector plans - and the immediate neighbors object over MPC staff approval. Then they appeal to CC who overrules MPC. That is a case of individuals, rather than the existing zoning or easements, taking away the property rights (as allowed by local government) of the land owner.
from the link:
"For example, a local government might create a zoning overlay district restricting tall buildings in a scenic corridor, or it might withhold extension of public infrastructure into sensitive viewsheds in order to discourage development.
Non-governmental organizations involved in scenic protection, including land trusts, may collaborate to support one or more of these governmental programs, or may choose to work independently by making targeted land acquisitions. "
I don't know Tom. I *do* know Pamela, and while I'm sure she'd make a fine "seatwarmer" over these next few months, in this 5th District vacancy (and in the 8th District vacancy), the primary winner is unopposed in the general.
My thought would be to appoint Briggs in the 5th (and Wright in the 8th), rather than make this any harder than it has to be???
Tamara, Briggs is facing Don Sproles in the general election - so it would be wrong to appoint him now and give him an incumbent advantage, IMO. I do agree that Wright should go in the 8th, since he really is unopposed and it makes no sense to have a seatwarmer there.
Pamela would make a great interim commissioner! I would also support Victoria DeFreese in the 9th and Bob Wolfenbarger in the 2nd for these temporary seats.
Tamara -- tried to reach you this morning to let you know about the Independent candidate. Lisa, thanks for clarifying.
The only reason I am pursuing appointment is I believe we need to let the election process run its course. Elections are a great time to get the issues on the table, get the public's opinion and evaluate the candidates.
I approached Briggs and Sproles before the meeting started to let them know I like the both but feel neither should get a temporary appointment.
Sorry for spelling your name wrong.
-----------------------------------------
Fighting for Reform and Representation, Fourth District
Steve Drevik, Commission Seat 4-B
Link...
Don Sproles made an interesting argument that with so many Democratic votes still in the 5th unheard from, it would be illogical to assume that Briggs is a shoe-in. I haven't looked at the numbers myself, so I'd be curious. I suspect that Commission will "horse trade" a D appointment in #1 with an automatic R appointment in #5, and choose a lot of caretakers elsewhere.
Interestingly, the issue of Briggs' job and how responsive he would be was asked. He said he has a 24 hour answering service and would utilize his personal assistant. He said he usually gets back to his patients immediately, and even on surgical days within a few hours, but that same day. He noted that having other partners in his practice to hand off non-emergencies to would allow him flexibility.
If he was appointed and didn't come through on his promised responsiveness to constituents, that would be something Sproles would hammer him on in the campaign.
I don't know about you, but my doctor's and my wife's doctors don't really have a great track record at making return calls within the same WEEK ...(usually they just never return the call at all). Dr. Briggs really put himself out on a limb there, IMHO.
Tamara, It would be an unfair to the fifth district to appoint Briggs, when Sproles is an Independent candidate. Pamela represented herself well. I personally covered this for Brian's Blog and will be posting the report later today.
R. Larry Smith was a disappointment in that he asked Thomas Baer if he had a criminal past or had not paid his taxes. But, he did not ask the same question of Briggs or Treacy. Come on R. Larry, if you are going to ask one question of one ask it of all. It was just grandstanding on R. Larry's part.
I asked all Commissioner's today if they were running to be appointed Chairman on February 25, 2008. I even secured a telephone interview with Greg Lambert to obtain his answer. Tune into Brian's Blog this evening for our report.
So sorry, Pamela (and others)! I glanced at my "sample ballot," saved from the N-S, and saw that no Dem ran in the 5th District primary. I forgot all about Sproles, the Independent!
Yes, I absolutely agree that no candidate in any on-going race should be appointed. I was simply thinking that the 5th was concluded in the primary.
Let me amend, then, to suggest that since just the 8th District race is concluded, just that primary victor (Dave Wright) should now be appointed.
Be sure to interview the losers and come back with some of that brilliant logic!
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
R. Larry ought to be glad nobody asked the "criminal past" question when he was running.
I don't know anything about this, Betty. Details?
(Isn't Larry a registered adult of some sort with Boy Scouts? When I first registered, I had to undergo a criminal background check--did so with Girl Scouts, too.)
R. Larry was arrested and charged with raping his estranged wife in the early '80s. The rape charge was dismissed in General Sessions Court because his estranged wife, who had filed for divorce and was living apart from him, had not yet served him with divorce papers. This happened before the spousal rape law changed in Tennessee -- at that time, a man could not be charged with raping his wife.
The judge was a Republican, fwiw, and the record was expunged. There are still a very few traces of the case, however, in an old newspaper clip, divorce filings and in the memory of the retired KPD detective who investigated it.
And no, it never became a story, because the former wife did not want to discuss it.
I'm sorry to learn this. I know this former wife, Dr. V., and I think very highly of her.
It wasn't Dr. V. Mr. Family Values has two ex-wives.
What was the point of waiting until after the Primary? It was so the voters could be heard. Now after the voters have been heard people say that picking the winner of the Primary disenfranchises the voters. Great. Some people say pick the second place candidate. Some people say look at the resumes and ignore the Primary.
This is madness. Why didn't Mark Harmon and Mike Hammond think of this? We are in this mess because of them. This was their idea. The appointments could have been made in December, but nooo, Mike Hammond couldn't get a sub for a Lady Vol's basketball game. So the whole County had to wait.
Commission needs to get this done.
Even with Tank as the Chair it will be another train wreck.
All of this mess is indeed the fault of Mark Harmon and Mike Hammond.
*eyeroll*
Scoobie is often misunderstood. When he asked about views on abortion and gun control, he meant whether it was appropriate for commission meetings to be summarily aborted so discussions could take place in the back hallway, and whether Lumpy should be seated closer to the audience to provide commission with additional gun control in case of citizen outrage.
Yup, Randy really needs cubes.
Scoobie is often misunderstood.
Rather, I think Scoobie is misunderestimated.
I'm about halfway through encoding the video of the meeting for internet streaming. About 76 minutes in is the Moore vs. Sproles encounter.
If you look in the extreme lower right hand corner of the video, you can see a certain 4-B candidate's reaction to Moore's line of questioning. My wife got a kick out of it.
...thanks to one of the websites I love to hate, YouTube, I managed to get the Moore vs. Sproles incident up for view.
Link...
I like the background action best - Steve's reaction to the question, Wojnar heading out of the room only to stop dead in his tracks, then comes back in to listen to it...
Just goes to show that the county commission doesn't have to be in the CCB to be entertaining.
I don't know Mr. Sproles, but I admire his response to Moore's insanity. Clearly, Moore was picking on Sproles because he's an Episcopalian for we are a misunderstood religion.
pgs
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
Yes, that was quite a moment you captured there. I need to download it off and hold a caption contest.
-----------------------------------------
Fighting for Reform and Representation, Fourth District
Steve Drevik, Commission Seat 4-B
Link...
Just go to Political Knoxville, look for the "PK Live and Archived Video" section in the center of the page, and select "5-C Appointees' Forum (archived)" in the dropdown menu.
If anyone sees anything wrong with the playback, please let me know.
Now, if you folks will excuse me, I'm taking the rest of the night off to play some Madden. All work and no play makes Brian want to launch his laptop from a catapult.
I got to know Tom Baer and his late wife, Margaret, about 20 years ago when his son, Tommy, was murdered. Tommy was the victim in the famous "frat house murder" at UT in 1988. He was stabbed to death by a drunk who was trying to crash a frat party.
The Baers were very decent, intelligent people, and they worked tirelessly on the issue of campus crime. They changed a lot of things at UT and around the country. I think Tom Baer would be an excellent choice in the 5th District.
This 5th district voter will be campaigning and voting for Don Sproles but for now an appointment of Pamela Treacy would make sense.
Sproles handled his time in the limelight impressively.
I think Smith/Moore did Briggs more harm than good and created a scenario where Briggs could lose. The Fourth District has a lot of independent thinkers.
-----------------------------------------
Fighting for Reform and Representation, Fourth District
Steve Drevik, Commission Seat 4-B
Link...
And just for Steve, we've made an index table accessible for easy linkage.
Link...
For those who want that kind of information, enjoy! It contains a brief bio and a link to their resume, as well as quicklinks to contact commissioners about a particular appointee. As the forums go on, it will also include video footage of their time at the podium thanks to Google Video.
Let me know if I screwed anything up on the profiles. Thanks! :)
I know what it's like fighting with technology to get these kinds of things done. For every one of us that say "thanks," there's dozens more that also appreciate the legwork that saves us all the trip downtown.
(Do your web stats show more hits from users at the knoxnews.com domain??)
-----------------------------------------
Fighting for Reform and Representation, Fourth District
Steve Drevik, Commission Seat 4-B
Link...
Glancing thru the appointee possibles it looks like the 2nd district has more than its share of high quality candidates. Why don't you guys spread the wealth a bit?
In district 9 I thought DeFreese did a good job when the South-Doyle homeowners battled Jernigan. They did their homework. That looks like an obvious selection to me. I cannot recall the gentleman that also spoke for SD homeowners but he should run for County Commissioner at some point.
I think Smith/Moore did Briggs more harm than good and created a scenario where Briggs could lose. The Fourth District has a lot of independent thinkers.
Briggs is in the 5th. I am not aware of lots of independent thinkers in the 5th. There are however a lot of Republicans. Smith and Moore are not highly regarded in the 5th.
oops! Surely, though, Sproles will get a bump from that interaction.
-----------------------------------------
Fighting for Reform and Representation, Fourth District
Steve Drevik, Commission Seat 4-B
Link...
Looking at the 5th from a distance, Dr. Briggs looks pretty damn invincible. He also seems extremely independent. That being said, Sproles is a very good man -- smart, successful without TIFs -- and the kind of person we should want to be involved in government. Hammond and Leuthold will be term limited out in 2010, so maybe he'll have a shot then.
Mike Hammond had an Independent candidate in the 5th run against him. A West Point grad. I think Hammond got 62% of the vote. But he had Tyler Harber and spent $30,000. His opponent spent $1,200. It is a tough sell for an Independent in the 5th. I can't think of any District where an Independent will be competitive.
People like Briggs. I don't think Smith and Moore will affect his popularity at all.
I like both men. Either would improve the character and intelligence quotient on County Commission.
But Don made a strategic error in not contesting in the Republican primary where a simple plurality was sufficient to win. Now he faces Briggs alone, needing 50 percent plus 1 to win. -- s.
But I have to wonder how hard/easy it will be to communicate with a busy physician? I know he said he had a personal assistant who would answer his phone, but still.
That said, I have to agree with the poster who said that all of the 5th District potential appointees and candidates showed more class than most of the sitting commission. Briggs certainly seems like he offers a lot of leadership skills.
I think it was him though that said he felt that property owners had a right to do with their property what they wished as long as it didn't hurt others. I would have added "as long as it's zoned for the use and/or the land use plan will accommodate it." We have got to stop all these variances and changing the sector plan willy-nilly.
"I think it was him though that said he felt that property owners had a right to do with their property what they wished as long as it didn't hurt others."
It was Briggs who said this, Lisa, and I made note of it, too.
I agree that all those 5th District appointment contenders looked pretty strong, including Briggs, but that remark caused me to want to go take a look at Briggs' financial disclosure, which I hadn't done.
Think I will now...
Well, since Briggs stopped taking contributions when developers started sending him money, his disclosure will tell you very little -- except he didn't take developers' $$, or much of anybody else's.
What's this, Betty? I'm not understanding what you mean by "when developers started sending him money?" Do you mean that he returned some developer's (developers') contribution(s)?
Tamara, I said what I meant to say.
Well, reporting back on Briggs' financial disclosure: Per the copy posted at Political Knoxville, he raised $20,400 during the "pre-primary" filing period. Of that amount, $20,000 was his own contribution to the campaign, and another $400 was donated from three separate contributers, none of them developers.
Without watching the whole video again, I think he did advocate following the long-term master plan. So that property owners do have rights - within the long-term plan. This is much preferable to me than CC overruling the MPC staff recommendations, which follow the sector plans, and pandering to vocal opposition from neighbors.
I have noticed that most people are opposed to any nearby development - after their own. We have rights regarding our own property, but not rights to, for instance, our scenic views and surrounding property. If folks want the neighbor's farm to stay in green pastures, when a subdivision is allowed under the sector plan, then they should pay the market value and buy the farm.
"...rights to, for instance, our scenic views and surrounding property."
Is that what "Scenic Easements" and the "Uniform Conservation Easement Act" are about?
Link...
and governments create zoning and planning for that purpose. Or NGO's buy land for protection (quoted below). I think that's what long-term planning is about. I think that's a good thing... But what I see happening, though, is a land-owner wants to sell to a developer - for a purpose that is allowed within the sector plans - and the immediate neighbors object over MPC staff approval. Then they appeal to CC who overrules MPC. That is a case of individuals, rather than the existing zoning or easements, taking away the property rights (as allowed by local government) of the land owner.
from the link:
"For example, a local government might create a zoning overlay district restricting tall buildings in a scenic corridor, or it might withhold extension of public infrastructure into sensitive viewsheds in order to discourage development.
Non-governmental organizations involved in scenic protection, including land trusts, may collaborate to support one or more of these governmental programs, or may choose to work independently by making targeted land acquisitions. "
Post new comment