Found this via the Metro-Pulse Earth Day issue. Take the home energy audit to learn how you can be more energy efficient in your home (and get free "stuff"!).

TVA Offers Energy Efficiency Kits With Home Energy Audit

Take the Home Energy Audit before June 30, 2008, and TVA will send you an Energy Efficiency Kit with tools to help you save energy and money. [Kits are mailed in four to six weeks.]

The kit includes the following items:
Two compact fluorescent bulbs
Outlet and light switch gaskets
A filter whistle
Two faucet aerators
A hot water temperature gauge
A home thermometer
"How to Save" brochure

TVA adds 5% fee on top of rate hike

The combined impact of the two rate hikes could add as much as $12 to the average customer bill from distributors...

This latest increase is called a fuel cost adjustment, and it changes quarterly based on the costs of fuel.

The article says the rate hikes will help fund $2.5 billion for the Watts Bar nuclear plant expansion.

In related news, TVA is purchasing another gas-fired power plant at fire sale prices.

TVA met with the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation on Wednesday to request a variance that would allow them to discontinue monitoring ambient sulfur dioxide (SO2) levels at six coal-fired power plants in Tennessee. The request was granted. Read more at TennViews.

Today's Atlanta paper had big front page article on recent discussions on Atlanta getting water from the TVA system.

The water is being used as a bargaining chip to get a rail line from Atlanta to Chattanooga . . . among other deals.

Interesting timing on the article, as 30,000+ Vol fans were roaming the streets today in Atlanta . . .

This just in from the KNS:

TVA violated federal clean-air laws more than 3,000 times in a two-year span at a northern Alabama coal-fired power plant, a federal judge ruled Monday.

UPDATE: Here's the full story with more details.

On a related note, I'm happy to see the KNS let relatively new and pretty smart reporter Andrew Eder off leash every now and then to get after TVA and DOE, who seem to have been off-limits in the past.

Apparently Eder isn't on the TVA PR fax distribution list (and probably won't be on the cocktail reception invitation list, either).

Hopefully other reporters will still have their precious "access" so they can keep us "informed". (Although I have to give Frank Munger credit for usually calling it like it is with regard to Oak Ridge.)

I've never heard of this before

The Tennessee Valley Authority shut down one of three units at the Browns Ferry nuclear plant on Thursday because water drawn from a river to cool the reactor was too hot, a spokesman said.

According to the article, the river is at least 90F.

Did anyone notice that it's hot outside?

KNS has a new article on the drought and its affect on TVA's operations which straightens out some of the PR happy talk from yesterday's "no worries" article.

The article summarizes a variety of problems, one of which had not occurred to me. TVA draws water from rivers and reservoirs for cooling at coal and nuclear power plants. When stream flows are down, discharging the heated water back into the waterway can raise water temperatures above acceptable levels. The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation regulates these discharges, and could require TVA to cut back or shut down power operations at affected facilities.

And as predicted, TVA does not rule out the possibility of rate increases, and in fact already raised the rate nearly one cent per KWH in April as part of a quarterly fuel cost adjustment.

Read all about it at Facing South...

UPDATE: I hate to see this really, not only because of safety reasons but because I'm pretty sure the folks at TVA are doing their best. At some point you have to start wondering, though, if their best is good enough. I'm still on the fence regarding nuclear power. I used to be 100% for it. Now I'm not so sure. Safety and nuclear waste disposal are serious concerns that we don't seem able or willing to deal with.

On a related note, see this excellent (and scary) report by Sue Sturgis at Facing South earlier this week regarding plans to make the South a nuclear waste dump. (And my follow up here.)

And before that, here is a disturbing report about the pending shutdown (which may have already occurred) of the Savannah River Ecology Lab which studies the effects of radioactive contamination on the environment. Their research is "specifically related to impacts from nuclear weapons related production. Such information is essential to the operation and closure of all DOE sites. SREL is recognized as a world leader in radiation ecology and provides unprecedented training for future scientists and engineers in this field."

TVA is set to reactivate Browns Ferry Unit 1 next month and is seeking approval for completing Watts Bar Unit 2. What do you think about TVA's record on nuclear power generation? Should they be in the nuclear power business? Will nuclear power help solve our energy problems, or is there too much risk? Read more after the jump...

The KNS had a report yesterday regarding a TVA proposal to share ownership of some of their power plants with distributors.

According to the article, the deal would let TVA finance expansion of their capacity "off the books", using tax exempt financing their distributors such as KUB are eligible for. This would help contain TVA's debt, which is currently around $25 billion. Distributors would get credit for the power produced at the plants they invest in.

One thing not mentioned in the article is the possible liability power distributors such as KUB might assume under the deal.

TVA's coal-fired power plants are becoming a huge liability. Even though they have successfully fought off New Source Review challenges, there always seems to be another lawsuit. Eventually, one of them might prevail and TVA will be held accountable for all the pollution. Or, a more environmentally friendly administration might come in to office and force TVA to accelerate installation of expensive pollution controls. Then there are the growing concerns about other toxic releases such as mercury.

Another looming problem is carbon sequestration. If (or when) Congress decides to tackle global climate change, developing and implementing carbon sequestration systems could cost TVA a fortune. In 2005, TVA coal-fired power plants emitted 105,000,000 tons of CO2. With carbon credits currently selling for $5 to $10 per ton on the retail market, this represents $500 million to $1 billion in offsets per year.

Widows Creek was mentioned in the article as one of TVA's existing coal-fired power plants being considered for the joint ownership deal. In criticizing TVA's progress on pollution controls, Sen. Lamar Alexander singled out Widows Creek in 2005: "These plants also produce nitrogen pollutants and mercury, which are hazardous to our health. TVA has the latest pollution control equipment on only two of the eight units at Widows Creek today. If we're really serious about clean air, TVA needs to put the latest pollution control equipment on all of its coal-fired units and/or build more nuclear power plants."

So we wonder if the power distributor trade group working on the joint ownership proposal with TVA has considered all this. Would Knox County residents want to be on the hook for all that liability by way of KUB? In one sense I guess it doesn't really matter, though. Ratepayers throughout the TVA system are going to have to pay the piper sooner or later.

TVA is complaining that the warm winter (so far) has lowered consumption and reduced power sales by about $95 million.

They are hoping for colder weather over the next few weeks and for an unusually warm spring to get "power sales humming along with air conditioners."

It seems like they should be happy about lower consumption, which means less pollution.

The Knoxville News Sentinel has an editorial today entitled "Knox County must do more for air quality." It's pretty hard to argue with that.

The editorial refers to the recent news that Knox County, previously declared by the EPA as being in "non-attainment" status, says it is now in compliance. The EPA has not verified the numbers yet. This will indeed be good news, assuming the EPA certifies the numbers.

But the editorial starts out by saying that "The improvement in air quality is largely due to the Tennessee Valley Authority's emission policies," and goes on to say:

[..] it is TVA that has made the most significant changes. The agency spent about $300 million from 2004 through September 2006 to reduce its emissions of nitrogen oxide, which contributes to ground-based ozone or smog.

That sounds pretty good. But according to EPA data for the three nearest coal-fired power plants (Bull Run, John Sevier, and Kingston, all upwind from Knoxville), NOX emissions have in fact gone up 5%, from 33,618 tons in 2004 to 35,427 tons in 2005.

Results for 2006 are not available, but hopefully they will show some of the improvement mentioned in the editorial. Otherwise, something doesn't add up.

TVA also likes to talk about how much they spend on emissions control, and the KNS likes to repeat it. $300 million in two years sounds good, but it's practically a rounding error in the big scheme of things. TVA revenues totaled about $15 billion for 2004 and 2005.

On the bright side, Sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions, the primary component of acid rain, were reduced by 11% at these plants, and TVA has reduced system-wide NOX emissions by 4% from 2004 to 2005. But carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, the greenhouse gas that causes global warming, went up by 8% to 23 million tons at these three plants, and system-wide were up 2% to 105,587,825 tons.

The editorial also talks about all the other things Knox County is doing, such as free bus rides for seniors, lower speed limits, and electrically powered comfort facilities at truck stops to reduce idling. It's doubtful that these measures had much of an impact.

A query of the EPA 2002 National Emissions Inventory (the most current year available) for Knox County, where two of the most heavily traveled Interstates in America intersect downtown, shows that NOX emissions are 18,844 tons per year for all mobile on-road sources.

Compare those emissions from millions of cars and trucks to the 35,427 tons from just three TVA power plants and make up your own mind where we can get the most bang for our buck in reducing emissions. Hint: it's not free bus rides. Or TVA PR puff pieces in the KNS.

Here's a roundup of reporting on TVA's adoption of stricter land use policies...

KNS: TVA puts lock on gate

Despite pleas to water down TVA's temporary ban on selling federal land for private residential development, the agency's board voted 8-1 Thursday to make the ban permanent.

[..]

Williams, who chaired the committee that drafted the new policy, said 92 percent of the more than 5,000 people who submitted comments favored making the ban permanent.

KNS: Developers not happy with TVA land policy

"Obviously, I think the residential part of development along TVA lakes is a viable, important part of the local economy," said Mike Ross, owner of Rarity Communities. Ross' land swap in 2003 for formerly public land for his Rarity Pointe development in Loudon County helped galvanize opposition to TVA land transfers.

Maryville Daily Times: TVA bans sale of protected shoreline along river

"The people spoke, and TVA listened," [wildlife research associate and instructor at the University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture Billy] Minser said. "This brand new board is a breath of fresh air."

The only board member voting against the new land policy was former board chairman Bill Baxter, who said the policy lacked flexibility for economic development projects.

Baxter served as the State of Tennessee's commissioner of Economic and Community Development for three years, from 1997 to 2000.

The Chattanoogan: TVA Votes to Protect Public Land

"Our committee worked through the comments from thousands of people and organizations to come up with a fair policy that protects public land while still allowing recreation and industrial development," said Director Williams, "The new policy reaffirms the usefulness and effectiveness of TVA's land planning process."

Associated Press: TVA: Limit Land Sales on Tennessee River

While the [high-end residential development] projects had supporters, the land deals behind them unleashed a storm of criticism from the environmental community and those who believed that land bought for public purposes generations ago should remain in public hands.

[..]

Some, including U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., worry the ban is too restrictive and will have a "substantial adverse impact" on the region.

Here's a link to the new TVA land use policy.

I have to say I am pleasantly surprised that the new board is reining in the go-go Baxter era and listening to the people. What's next, accelerating pollution controls at their coal-fired power plants instead of looking for ways to get out of it? Somehow I don't think this is what Bush had in mind when he restructured the board and "modernized" TVA.

As for the land use policy, this will probably drive the price of existing lakefront property even higher, if that's even possible. I predict that TVA will revisit the residential restrictions in a few years after a sort of "cooling off" period. If done properly, lakefront community development could be an asset to the region. And by "done properly", we mean something other than gated golf course communities with multi-million dollar homes, although every community ought to have a few.

Michael Silences has this front page report in today's Knoxville News Sentinel about the Nuclear Regulatory Commission being unable to contact the TVA Sequoyah nuclear plant via the agency's Emergency Notification System hotline for two hours Sunday morning. Do you feel safer?

Lisa Starbuck, whose family's land was taken by TVA for the Norris Dam impoundment, e-mails to let us know that you have until close of business tomorrow, Wednesday August 23 to comment on TVA's land use policy review.

You can e-mail your comments to landpolicyhearing@tva.gov

As Lisa says in her e-mail:

If TVA is unable or unwilling to preserve and manage these lands for public use and enjoyment, the property should be returned to the original owners, not sold to developers.

I agree.

The Tennessee House passed a resolution Wednesday urging "the Tennessee Valley Authority and its agents and agencies to refrain from the sale, trade, or otherwise transfer of lands it currently owns and has designated for public use to private developers or to any who might use such land for private development." The vote for the resolution was unanimous. The full text of the resolution is here (PDF format).

The next day, it was reported that the new TVA board will consider a moratorium on land deals involving transfer of public land for private development. According to the article, this follows recent controversy regarding land swap deals with Johnny "Thunder" Thornton and Mike Ross of Rarity (who is also involved in the Alcoa "R&D" Park condo/retail project) to build multi-million dollar gated golf communities on TVA lake shores.

The Tennessee House of Representatives is right on this one. This land was taken from farmers and regular people under eminent domain, some of it at gunpoint. At the very least, the original owners or their heirs should have the right of first refusal to buy back the land at the original price paid to them by TVA so they can benefit from the sale to developers.

Beyond that, I think most people would agree that some development is warranted, especially development that is open to the public such as parks and recreation areas, wildlife habitat and preserves, and public resorts/marinas such as the new Sequoyah Lodge and Lake Resort on Tellico Lake in Monroe Co. that will benefit not only the public but the surrounding community and its economy.

As part of TVA's historic reorganization, Bill Baxter has stepped down from his position as board chairman. He remains on the new board as a director.

Because being a TVA board member is no longer a full-time job, Baxter announced new career plans, saying he has accepted a position with the Knoxville News Sentinel as "Senior Environmental News Editor." His duties will involve monitoring the News Sentinel's TVA fax hotline for breaking press releases on TVA's fifty-year program to upgrade pollution controls at its eleven coal-fired power plants, and penning a new weekly column entitled "Baxter Clears the Air on Coal: Why It's Good For You and Critical to My Friend President Bush's Clear Skies Initiative." As part of his duties, Baxter will also have editorial control over all News Sentinel environmental reporting.

In a press conference announcing Baxter's hiring, News Sentinel publisher Bruce Hartmann said, "We couldn't be more happy to have Bill on board. I've felt for some time that our reporting on TVA could be more balanced. I talked to our editor Jack McElroy about it and he suggested Baxter for the new post, citing their long-standing relationship and Baxter's extensive background in editing News Sentinel coverage of TVA. It's a win-win for everybody, and especially the environment."

News Sentinel environmental reporter Scott Barker was out on assignment covering the breaking South Knox Waterfront story and could not be reached for comment.

The Knoxville New Sentinel TVA Public Relations Service ran a big article on the front page of the business section yesterday praising everything TVA is doing to keep the air clean and make it cleaner. It is apparently part of an urgent PR blitz in response to North Carolina's recent lawsuit against TVA for being a "public nuisance" because of their air pollution.

Read the rant after the jump...

The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, along with state and local governments and a coalition of other environmental groups, won a federal lawsuit upholding the New Source Review provisions of the Clean Air act.

The Bush administration had attempted to weaken New Source Review by not requiring pollution control upgrades if the cost of modifications to increase power output at a coal-fired power plant did not exceed 20% of the cost of the plant. The U.S. Court of Appeals said that:

...such an exemption clearly violated Congress’s intent, as expressed in the Clean Air Act’s New Source Review (NSR) provisions. Specifically, the three judge panel ruled that the equipment replacement projects fit within the statutory category of “physical changes,” and therefore are subject to regulation under NSR.

Stephen Smith, director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, added:

"This was a gross example of how the Bush administration and industry conspired to dismantle the clean air act. This behavior was irresponsible, unethical, and illegal."

TVA has been fighting New Source Review in the courts for a long time. This is a major setback, so you can probably expect another rate increase. But that's the price we have to pay for clean air along with our electricity. Well, that and millions in bonuses for TVA executives.

I can't believe the Knoxville News Sentinel would print this Bill Baxter op-ed (registration required) on the front page of today's editorial section. Don't they have any editors or fact checkers over there?

In it, Baxter takes credit on behalf of TVA for some recent economic development, including the Denso expansion in Maryville, the new Aisin Auto facility in Clinton, and for Knoxville being ranked in the top 10 for business relocation by some obscure trade magazine.

He forgot to mention the millions in corporate welfare incentives local and state governments are handing out to make this happen. He also doesn't explain TVA's role in all this. Perhaps he's saying, hey, these guys wouldn't come here if we didn't have electricity. Sorry, FDR gets credit for that.

Baxter also says that TVA "wants to make sure we maintain and grow the steady supply of low-cost, reliable electricity."

He forgot to mention that in the past six months TVA has announced rate increases totaling nearly 18%. He mentions "reliable", so he can strike fear into the community by raising the specter of "brownouts in California and the Northeast" from which TVA is of course protecting you, so you can take comfort in that.

And electricity at what cost? Baxter says "TVA is investing $5.6 billion to reduce emissions at TVA's power plants" and "TVA's emissions already are down 78 percent -- and the air in the valley is cleaner."

Down 78% since when? 1959? And $5.6 billion over what time period? How much of that have they already been forced by the courts to spend (past tense v. "is investing")? Over how many years will the rest of it be spent?

Baxter and the KNS keep forgetting to tell you this every time they mention the $5.6 billion figure (which used to be "$1 million per day", which is $365 million per year, which doesn't sound as good as "$5.6 billion" in the powerball age). They also never mention how much of that is litigation expense related to TVA's ongoing fight against environmental regulations since 1970. You'd think somebody would ask those simple questions. Or ask why pollution controls are not even a line item in TVA's annual report?

As for actually reducing emissions, the biggest investment I can recall TVA making in the last year or so was installing SO2 scrubbers at Bull Run. That was $300 million, a rounding error in TVA's $7+ billion operations. In fact, under the Bush "Clear Skies" program, TVA sulfur dioxide emissions (which are destroying the Great Smoky Mountains National Park and eating the paint off your car) actually INCREASED from 2001 to 2003 (which is curiously the last year for which TVA has data on their website), and CO2 emissions (green house gas that causes global warming) continue to climb.

Baxter wraps up his KNS propaganda fax by saying how great Sen. Dr. Bill Frist and President Bush are for appointing "six outstanding new nominees" to the "modernized" and expanded TVA board. He forgets to mention that they are a bunch of unqualified GOP insiders. None has any background in environmental issues, and the first five had no experience at all in running a utility. There are no Democrats and no minorities in the bunch, either.

Which is really the point of this propaganda piece. The Senate finally exercised their oversight responsibility last week to block the nominations. So TVA lit up their Baxter-fax-o-turf hotline to "news" papers across the South.

Apparently, Bill Baxter lives in the Bush/GOP world of Clear Skies and Healthy Forests, where up is down, black is white, fear-mongering is security, and misleading propaganda is the gospel truth if you repeat it often enough.

OK, then.

Greg Johnson's KNS op-ed column today says that appointing unqualified Bush/GOP insiders to the TVA board is progressive, and that a move by Senate Democrats to block the nominations is somehow linked to Islamic jihad.

OK, then.

In huge news that is not getting any coverage, Senate Democrats have taken a stand against White House cronyism and one-party GOP government.

A while back, Sen. Bill Frist ushered through legislation to expand the Tennessee Valley Authority board of directors and appoint a first-ever CEO to oversee operations. The intent was to run the giant federal utility more like a business and less like a government within a government with no elected officials.

The problem is that all six new Bush nominees are unqualified GOP insiders with little or no utility experience. And the current chairman, Bill Baxter, who was recently appointed to that post by Bush, is already a generous Bush/GOP supporter.

But the fact that they aren't qualified isn't what got the Senate Dem's panties in a bunch. This Knoxville News Sentinel exclusive article (registration required) explains:

Senate Democrats Friday blocked approval of six nominees to the Tennessee Valley Authority's board of directors and said President Bush and Senate Republicans are "trying to stack" the nine-member board just with Republicans.

The six were denied a final Senate vote under an open-ended procedural move that could extend beyond the current recess and well past the Senate's next series of votes starting Feb. 28.

"All we're asking for is a guarantee of one Democratic nominee, and to date they have been unwilling to provide those assurances," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

It's not a filibuster of a Bush Supreme Court Nominee, but it's pretty huge, and a nice battle for Senate Dems to pick.

Why?

TVA is one of the nation's largest electric utilities. It is a quasi-federal agency that operates in seven Southern states. It serves more than 8 million people and generates approx. $7 billion in revenues. It operates a system of hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, and fossil fuel facilities including 11 coal-fired power plants. Their operations have a significant impact on the diverse economy of the Tennessee Valley and surrounding states.

They are a huge consumer of coal and natural gas. They are also one of the worst polluters in the South. Their coal-fired power plants are some of the dirtiest in the nation, and they have a long history fighting EPA regulation of coal fired power plant emissions.

Earlier in the nomination process, Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) threatened to hold up the nominations if Bush didn't nominate somebody from Georgia, where TVA operates. Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and Isakson introduced a bill that would require representation from each of the seven states in TVA's service area. This bill quietly went away and the nominations proceeded. Maybe they got called on Sen. Dr. Frist's carpet.

This week, noting that there were no minority nominees (hey, we already mentioned they are all GOP insiders, right?) a Knoxville News Sentinel editorial (registration required) called for a minority appointment. That didn't go anywhere, either.

So, the six nominees sailed through committee, and Dr. Sen. Frist virtually guaranteed confirmation in the full Senate. With this most recent setback, now Sen. Dr. Frist is complaining about "obstruction" and Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) accused Senate Dems of "playing politics."

I don't know where the Senate Dems finally found their backbone, or why they picked this particular battle. Maybe they are testing the waters off the national media radar. Whatever the reason, it's a far more important battle than the coverage it's getting would suggest.

If nothing else, the TVA board's policies and decisions have an enormous impact on the environment and affect the health and welfare of millions of people. It only seems reasonable for the board to have more diverse, experienced, and open-minded (and yes, bi-partisan) representation. That's not "playing politics". It's just common sense, and the right thing to do.

OK, then.

(P.S. Lest anyone think I'm delusional, I realize the nominations will go through once trading resumes. But it was a nice gesture.)

UPDATE: Stupid is as stupid does.

Someone at TVA got back to me on the fossil plant emissions data that has not been updated on TVA's website since 2003. They said that emissions data is typically posted around March of the following year. The "raw data" that was being provided for each fossil plant (as shown in the example here) should have been updated for 2004 but was apparently "lost in the shuffle of updates."

TVA also noted that the 2004 information is available as part of their 2004 Environmental Performance Update. The easiest way to find the raw data is to look at the "Charts for 20 Key Indicators" and click on the chart of interest. A window pops up with the TVA system total by year along with newly established targets. TVA said that the next biannual report would be released in April 2006.

These reports and charts provide a good overview, but they don't' provide the raw data for each fossil plant. I miss that feature because it enabled you to track improvements (or lack thereof) by individual plant and by overall totals in a spreadsheet similar to the one I've been maintaining for years. And as you know, I like to put my own spin on the data. Heh.

Anyway, thanks to TVA for getting back to me and pointing me in the direction of the reports.

OK, then.

North Carolina's attorney general has filed a lawsuit in federal court against TVA for, according to the report, "harming the state's economy and the health of its residents by failing to reduce pollutants from its coal-burning power plants." (Thanks to Michael Silence for bringing this to our attention.)

Clearly the AG hasn't been reading the Knoxville newspaper. If he had, he'd know that the air is clean and getting cleaner, that TVA spends $1 million per minute or something like that on pollution controls, that TVA has virtually eliminated pollution from its power plants, and that coal fired power plant pollution is a myth anyway because everybody knows that air pollution is caused by volcanoes and bovine flatulence.

On a related note, I was recently checking the TVA website to see if they had posted any new emissions data lately. The most recent fossil plant emission data is for 2003. I sent an e-mail asking why it hadn't been updated, and where I could find the data for 2004, and when they would have the data for 2005. I'll let you know what I find out. I'm not holding my breath.

There were a couple of recent articles in the Knoxville News Sentinel about local developments and business expansions that will add hundreds of new jobs and millions of dollars to the region's economy.

According to the first article (registration required), a Houston company recently purchased 18.5 acres of a property from Target Corp. for $8.95 million to build a new shopping center.

Here's the interesting part. According to the article, the property is part of a 30.5 acre parcel that Target Corp. purchased from Knox County in January 2005 for $7.6 million. The property was formerly part of the 74 acre Knox Farmer's Market site. So, Target just made a windfall profit of $1.35 million (yeah, I know, it's a rounding error on their books) and, bonus, got 12 acres of commercial property for free. Sweet!

You have to wonder how the value of this property appreciated so dramatically in one year. A new shopping center with Target as the anchor would certainly explain an increase in nearby property values. But why wouldn't Knox County have figured that out when they, like, sold the property to Target to develop a new shopping center?

And as I recall (someone please correct me if I'm wrong), Target said when they bid on the property that they didn't need all of it and planned to sell some of it off. Why didn't Knox County just sell them what they needed and sell the rest for the higher price it is apparently worth? Wouldn't this have been a better deal for taxpayers? These guys don't sound like very good bidnessmen, but maybe there's more to the story. Regardless, I'm sure Target isn't complaining about a $1.35 million windfall and 12 free acres of land.

There has been plenty of other controversy about this deal, some of which Betty Bean reported on before.

The second article is about a new luxury boat/yacht building company moving to the Tellico West Industrial Park in Monroe County. According to the article, the expansion will create approx. 350 new jobs -- jobs that are sorely needed in the Tellico region.

(More than twenty years ago, TVA promised that the Tellico Dam project would grow the region's economy and revitalize its industrial and residential prospects. Unfortunately, those promises haven't quite panned out, unless you are a real estate developer building multi-million dollar homes in exclusive lakeshore neighborhoods on property taken from farmers and residents for pennies on the dollar. Not that there's anything wrong with that -- maybe I will own one some day!)

Anyway, here's the interesting part. According to the article, Monroe County came up with $8 million in bonds and other incentives to lure the company there. The company also got incentives from the state, although these have not yet been disclosed (which is reminiscent of the recent secret legislation our state passed to give Nissan nearly $200 million to relocate their headquarters to Tennessee.) The article also says Phil Bredesen was personally involved in recruiting the company, so one would expect there are some pretty nice incentives coming from the state.

We can sure use the jobs, and it's great that East Tennessee is becoming a nationally recognized center of pleasure boat manufacturing (SeaRay, Allison, Mastercraft, and others are already here). But at what cost to taxpayers? You can argue the long term benefits, but you can also ask what other long term benefits we might get from tending to some basics, such as education and infrastructure, that would make our region more attractive to companies in the first place.

OK, then.