I fear the same thing happening in East Knoxville around the stadium. It is imperative that we kept the property and consequently the rising wealth that goes with it in the present community. We must develop a new model for dealing with gentrification of neighborhoods.

Ford is rapidly finding out that the business friendly atmosphere of Tennessee is not really so business friendly. It is based on a feudal/slave type labor system that is rapidly falling out of favor with workers. Now it is turning to stripping those same workers from their generational wealth right at a point where that wealth is beginning to mature. I look for a jump from Tennessee to Mississippi or Alabama. Hell, even George Wallace knew that providing free textbooks to public schools was vital. We've regressed from that sort of forward thing in Tennessee with the past 60 years.

They want to take away control of their town.

The town was run into the ground by the white leaders. Now that the African-American's are in control and slowly getting a handle on things the State of Tennessee wants to intervene. Hmmmm...

Whose property are the sewer and water plants in this town? Seems like that might be quite an asset to hold in times like these. I am not surprised that it appears the state has taken a heavy handed approach to this. They'll need those water plants to develop the property. Whoever controls those, controls development.

First, nobody, but nobody, has mentioned using eminent domain to acquire property in Mason. Nobody.

Second, any government with jurisdiction or (believe it or not) a railroad can exercise eminent domain. That means the United States, State of Tennessee, Tipton County or the Town of Mason can force someone to sell their property to them under certain circumstances.

But again, nobody has even mentioned it in connection with Mumpower's decision to assert oversight of the city's finances. The town must repay its water and wastewater division over the next two years and get Mumpower's permission to spend other funds. Private property isn't part of the equation.

I did not intend to ridicule you or anyone else, and apologize for coming across that way.

Under Tennessee's constitution and state law, which was made tougher after the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo decision, land can only be taken through eminent domain for a clearly defined public purpose. The power of eminent domain can't be used for private development.

As I mentioned, there are four layers of government, plus any railroad, that can exercise eminent domain in any particular city. The federal, state or county governments don't need the city's permission to exercise their rights.

You don't have to do any digging at all. A housing authority acts as a government's agent. KCDC, for example, is the city of Knoxville's housing authority and can obtain blighted property through eminent domain to build low-income public housing.

State law doesn't allow a government to use eminent domain to acquire property to turn over to a private developer.

The city of Mason doesn't have its own housing authority, though Tipton County does.

Industrial parks, whether they are purchased on the open market or through eminent domain by a government entity or agent, are typically subdivided and the individual parcels sold to manufacturing companies.

The story was from MSNBC,

"Tennessee Comptroller Jason Mumpower, a white Republican, took a step back Tuesday from his racist plan to essentially erase from the map Mason, Tennessee, a predominantly African American town of about 1,500 that stands to benefit from the construction of a $5.6 billion Ford plant planned nearby."
...
"after what he called a “very positive meeting” with Mason officials, Mumpower acknowledged the steps they’ve taken to get out of debt and said his office’s financial oversight could end as soon as July. "
...
"...doesn’t eliminate the stench of racism that’s accompanied his dealings with the town. "

"...evidence [that Mason has been paying off its debt] was available from the start, but Mumpower didn’t request it. “He just came in with a demand...”

I've been driving around the County, including within the city limits, and while your point is valid, the construction on what I presume is the affordable housing along Dandridge/Summit Hill is well underway. I would strongly support another development of this size, and depending upon when the next housing crash is, wouldn't be surprised to see it happen soon after.

I see the real problem with affordable housing being the ongoing gentrification of properties all the way out to Burlington by developers after the stadium is built. Without some sort of programs and regulation to maintain, upgrade and keep these houses within the population of these traditional communities, this County is looking at a massive loss/drain of capital from those communities as well as a turnover from the local cultures to the folks being recruited to move here. Based on back-checking facebook posts with public records, this is not going to end well.

Knox County is being marketed as some sort of right wing paradise (think a Villages ( (link...) ) type development for KKK wannabes) and they have been driving both the anti-mask and Glenn Jacobs agenda. When buying property in new developments and near those like minded, thus far it has worked to the extent that we mostly live in peace. I think there is the strong possibility for pushback as these folks attempt to move into the city in more traditional urban neighborhoods. Knoxville City taxes are not high relative to what they offer, and it won't take vulture capitalists long to realize this.

It's not just new development that needs attention, but gentrification of the area within walking distance from the stadium that will be an issue. While East Knoxville is integrated to a greater extent than most places in Knox County, an active right wing presence will bring the same sorts of problems to Knoxville, specifically violent crime, that Mayor Jacobs keeps railing about. If folks move in with hate and determined to change local culture to match their personal philosophy, we have the two-fold problem of losing affordable neighborhoods and increasing conflict between neighbors.

These "refugees from Blue States" have driven the advance of covid to the point where our local county government has instituted policy that has delivered three times the deaths of not only progressive states in America, but countries like Cuba, Guatemala, and Jamaica. In addition, we have had to effectively shut down our hospitals for over nine weeks a year to deal with covid, denying service for those legitimately in need who are actively participating in the mitigation of the disease. We are trading dead citizens for smiling fascist children in our schools. Not really a fair trade-off in my opinion.

So, while I see your point, I think you may only be touching on the tip of the iceberg. The stadium can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on how we react to it, and while there is a clear need for more affordable housing, there is also a need to protect the affordable housing, and upgrade and maintain that housing that we already have. Twenty fives years of no management is catching up to the County and spilling into the city.

Well, that was certainly a pivot. KCDC is the city’s redevelopment authority and its mission, as defined by state law, goes beyond public housing. Your estimate of the size of the Magnolia Avenue Warehouse District is pretty darn close. It’s 279.6 acres. And not one bit of it, other than Austin Homes, is intended for public housing.

WARNING AND APOLOGY: Sorry this is so long, but I thought it might be useful to go into detail.

In 2009, at City Council’s request, the planning commission developed a Magnolia Avenue Corridor Plan that included the warehouse district and Magnolia Avenue to Burlington. KCDC, also at the direction of Council, then came up with the warehouse district redevelopment plan, which was approved in 2011. The redevelopment plan covers the warehouse district but not the entire Magnolia Avenue corridor.

The plan is legally binding and must be followed (that’s why it recently had to be amended to create a TIF district). The plan designates the area as blighted, but acknowledges there are individual parcels that are not blighted. It states that the plan’s intent is to “avoid public intervention” in properties that comply with city regulations. While that doesn’t say that KCDC would absolutely not acquire those properties, I think a decent lawyer could probably argue that the language precludes it. And the plan only authorizes KCDC to acquire blighted properties.

Governments can’t just seize property. The plan lays out the process, which follows state law. It’s long and involved.

First, if KCDC identifies a property as blighted as defined by law, it must give the owner the opportunity to come up with a corrective action plan. An advisory board consisting of stakeholders as outlined in state law would then review the plan, discuss it with the property owner (who can revise the plan as a result), and make a recommendation to KCDC.

If KCDC approves the corrective action plan, the owner must enter into an agreement to implement it. If the owner doesn’t follow through, KCDC can begin taking steps to acquire it.

If KCDC rejects the corrective action plan or if the owner fails to submit one within the allotted time frame (90 days), KCDC can begin the acquisition process. If KCDC rejects the corrective action plan, the owner has 60 days to submit a new one.

KCDC must first attempt to negotiate the purchase of the property at fair market value as determined by one or more independent appraisals.

If the owner doesn’t sell, KCDC can then exercise its eminent domain powers. The KCDC must approve, and the owner can request that City Council hear it too. All these meetings are in public. If KCDC acquires the property, it must provide relocation assistance. The rest is a court proceeding. KCDC would have to pay fair market value for the property, this time defined as no less than the last tax appraisal (often tax appraisals are lower than market appraisals), and could have to pay incidental expenses such as the cost of equipment removal.

To my knowledge, and I admit I haven’t researched this, KCDC has not used eminent domain to acquire property in the district during the 11 years the redevelopment plan has been in place.

Most of the privately-held land in the warehouse district south of the railroad tracks, where the stadium site is located, is owned by Randy Boyd or David Dewhirst and will be developed without the need for KCDC to acquire it. KUB owns a huge chunk as well, so that’s already in public ownership. In fact, a large portion of the warehouse district is owned by KUB, the city and the county.

Wow. Thanks for the link.

Yes!

Their lawsuit seems quit reasonable, whereas the State's takeover seems very unreasonable and possibly racist.