Tue
Nov 27 2007
12:37:pm
Planning Commission reviews Policies Plan tonight
By: local_yokel  shortURL

This came across my email this morning: The Blount County Planning Commission will hold a called meeting on November 27, 2007 at 5:30 P.M. in the Blount County Courthouse Room 430. The purpose of the meeting is: continue revision of the Policies Plan and other plans for the County.

Copies of the Policies Plan and other plans and various analyses may be viewed at (link...) under the Plans section.

Note: If you wanted to provide input, Chairman Scully said last time that if they allowed it, they'd be there all night. So, they didn't allow public input. Unless they do tonight's meeting differently, you'll have to think up a different way of giving your thoughts toward this important planning process.

Topics:

Key points

Submitted by mello on Tue, 11/27/2007 - 15:37.

A few notes and quips from the Policy Plans thingie a couple of meetings back.

Townsend is the economic engine of the county-

No one wants 411 to go straight commercial but no one who complains owns land on 411 ( yeah, but what about those who live behind those frontage properties? Who speaks for them? )

Plan first then make regulations to fit the Plans

Additional note- if you go, print and take your own agenda / plans as they apparently are not required to provide this for citizens.

citizens input at library?

Submitted by just a citizen on Tue, 11/27/2007 - 22:04.

There were several citizens input held at the library, was there not? I attended everyone of those meetings, even with only 5 citizens that showed that night. The Planning director held them and a couple of commissioners attended these workshops. This is all volunteerily but is essential on listening and working together to make Blount the special place that we all call home. So to put your little judgemental comments to not only hinder this process but to belittle it. Have to commend you on that task. Call up Doug or Kathleen and ask how it went tonight. Makes me tired of listening to your whining. If you don't want to help the process so be it, but it's your place of residence aswell as the rest of the countians. As for the comments at our meetings on extra nights of the month that we are doing to speed up this process. There will be more meetings for the citizens, so attend those and make your comments then.

Question....

Submitted by commissionerwalker on Tue, 11/27/2007 - 22:19.

essential on listening and working together to make Blount the special place

Realizing that it is very difficult to communicate (sending and receiving) via email, this quote raises a question.

Are we trying to make Blount County a special place, or are we trying to perserve the special place it already is?

Not directed at you, just a general question to all...

was meant to say that blount

Submitted by just a citizen on Tue, 11/27/2007 - 22:23.

was meant to say that blount is the special place as it is and to continue

What, citizens not welcome

Submitted by mello on Tue, 11/27/2007 - 22:39.

What, citizens not welcome at special called meetings? Why once again are you defensive when nothing bad was said in the posts? Please, don't do this to yourself. It is not about you. It is an entity, not a person.

thanks mello

Submitted by just a citizen on Tue, 11/27/2007 - 22:55.

But the comment on us having to be there all night was to reflected towards me. And yes I will take offense to that. There have been times that the citizens did get to speak on something and I have allowed it. But as for the citizens arent allowed to come is false. It is encouraged. There are several ways to put your inputs to task and John Lamb has stated them several times at meetings, both at commission and public workshops.
One thing that was raised tonight and was also stated in another posting about the security lights on all hours. Well the new athletic fields at carpenters middle is on and noone there and the lighting blinds for a second over the road and goes across to the farmland. What was said tonight was that how do you regulate when the regulators break them? The schools disreguard instead of encourage and setting an example.
I go to as many community groups as I can and listen to see what is on thier minds and do report to the planning department and commission. Also to what department that would be directly responsible to help elleviate any problems.

Didn't mean to press a nerve

Submitted by local_yokel on Tue, 11/27/2007 - 23:57.

But the comment on us having to be there all night was to reflected towards me.

Not sure how that was directed toward YOU, JAC. I was repeating what Chairman Scully said when someone wanted to speak. How could that possibly be offensive to you? I didn't pass judgement, just didn't want people spending time on preparing a speech and then going there and potentially being disappointed.

But as for the citizens arent allowed to come is false.

And I certainly didn't say that citizens weren't allowed to come! Why else would I post the time and place?

And by the way, the lights are also on at the Heritage Football and Baseball fields at all hours of the night, with noone in evidence. Does anyone have an idea of what it costs to light a ball field per hour?

Does anyone have an idea of

Submitted by ABlevins on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 00:24.

Does anyone have an idea of what it costs to light a ball field per hour?

I wondered about that myself, Local. More money for schools, I am all for that, but waste, I can't figure that. I can't afford waste. We can't afford waste.
We want school money to educate children (all children) not to light empty fields.
Like my Daddy would tell me, "Turn off the light when you leave the room."
It ain't brain surgery, ya'll.

I totally agree

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 00:52.

But why doesn't anyone ask that or want to take on the wastes of the school system? That's what I have been saying all along. Why do we have to pay to babysit 304 pre-kindergarden school kids? The state is only paying for 6 classrooms for that. The amount the state gave is $482,293.14 for the pre-k grant. The pre-k program is voluntary and not state mandated. So why would we have babysitting in all these "over-crowded" schools? We have also have these pre-k classrooms in our middle schools, what is the age groups on those kids?? The State does not even recognize the pre-k in the ADM and is not a funding mechanism. It is only a local decision and it is not a state decision and they do not recognize it in part of the BEP. So why is the school board fudging the numbers in the schools? So I know that this is not part of locals posting but I cannot start a post. Because I think there should be one for the wastes on the schools budget and not going towards the state recognized school aged classes.
And as for the part of citizens not allowed at meetings was not from you local but from mello.

I did not say that

Submitted by mello on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 08:39.

And as for the part of citizens not allowed at meetings was not from you local but from mello.

Why would I suggest people print their own plans proposal and agendas if I was saying they were not allowed at the meetings?

You have clearly come out of the closet on this one by your own words. Please, take a moment and introduce your real self to the world.

Turn off the Light when you leave the Room

Submitted by BeyondLeft on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 16:57.

Electrical waste will be the downfall of us all here in East TN. Have you ever tried to count Coal Cars at a Railroad Crossing? It's dizzying, and it's all going up in smoke, as fast as the trains can get it there--and the fallout can be seen on Clingman's Dome, lack of rainfall, brown Horizons, etc. It is true: no one needs to light an empty field, all night long. It would be grand to see some Electrical statistics and pie charts from MUB and AUB, on power consumption--departmentalized and time-wise. We could really make a difference if we started weeding out the waste of energy, just one 100W bulb at a time. Just making the numbers and charts public, should convince most thinking folks to change.

viva Evo Morales

Society check

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 02:03.

So why would we have babysitting in all these "over-crowded" schools?

Because either both parents have to work to make ends meet or because some sacrifice child rearing to have nicer things. Those issues are not of taxes or square footage - they are societal. If you really want to do something for "those kids" - TEACH THEM!

If these kids don't have somewhere to be other than at school - that's the school's problem?

Then don't have kids then

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 09:02.

Because either both parents have to work to make ends meet or because some sacrifice child rearing to have nicer things.

Now that is a good one to say, So in other words I (WE) should have to pay for them??? Be a little more receptive then that. The state does not acknowledge PRE-K. The county school board, alvin hore are the ones that want to dictate to the citizens that the state "told them" to do so. It's a bunch of bull*&^%. Yes I called the State Board in Nashville, like I do with any questions that cannot be answered here. If I have any questions in anything, I go to the source and ask questions. I do not take hearsay as the truth or " by god" seriously it is a shame about what is passed around and if it has just a little adjective in it that is widely used, then "by god" IT HAS TO BE TRUE. WRONG. So go ahead and call up nashville, go ahead and call the school board, go ahead and visit the schools and the under-sized built new schools. But PRE-K is a farce and I am not going to listen the BS that is being spewed out from the school board. I fought for the teacher's raises. But in the end the kids suffered because of that raise. Since the school board decided to use the textbook money to go towards the raises.
Yes I know what I said in the other replies and you all knew who I was when I started against local yokels blasting and false statements. you all even said who I was months ago. So who is hiding who? I don't give a rats behind I am vocal just like you all are. Just different views with facts.

Coming soon Blount Memorial Birthing Center

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 09:28.

Alvin and the chimpmunks will be awaiting for delivery of the newborns to be bused to your locally school. So go ahead and breed them since you can't feed them. The schools and tax payers will be more than happy to do that for you.

Because either both parents have to work to make ends meet or because some sacrifice child rearing to have nicer things. Those issues are not of taxes or square footage - they are societal. If you really want to do something for "those kids" - TEACH THEM!

If these kids don't have somewhere to be other than at school - that's the school's problem?

Now That is good, so your mentality of our wasteful spending from the schools is to pay pay pay for it. State of Tenn. "requires children ages 6-17 to attend school. So the state does not give us money for these babies to teach, feed and shelter. And the state does not give us money for all the teachers and everyone of the classrooms have atleast 1-2 teachers aids. So all these babysitters are being paid by who..............by the taxpayers. So take out this bull..oney out of the schools then you will see a bigger difference in these false numbers.

Your idea of reality and reality

Submitted by Dumping Ground on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 15:52.

Do you know what societal means? You're incoherent tirades aren't going to fix the problem and neither is the local school system. Your problem is with the "tax payers", i.e. the same people who either can't afford daycare or choose to let somebody else raise their kids. It's just like these people who get on here bitching about "illegal" immigrants "taking" construction jobs, but they are not willing to call their builder/developer buddies on it. (link...)

Face it, many have to keep their kids at school because they can't afford "babysitting" or daycare. This may be a result of a single parent not making enough or a married couple just not being able to climb out of their socioeconomic position. We also live in a day and age were people are willing to get up and shop at 4am in morning to get more "stuff". The materialistic pursuit of having "things" is driving the issue of latch key kids in some corners.

Either way, you know in Blount County there are both 800 sq/ft homes where families can't make ends meet and surely could not do with any less and there are 5,000 sq/ft homes that could do with a lot less. The prior typically doesn't vote and the latter won't vote against their own interest. Like I said, it's a societal effect of living in a free nation that is 50 years removed from the Rockwell sterotype and consumed by materialism. I'm afraid you are going to have to move to an area on the globe that puts child rearing above everything else to find what you seek - if you want to see it in your lifetime.

well direct that to your school board

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 16:24.

It has nothing to do with my own feelings. Has to do with wasteful spending by a board that does not have to answer to anyone. It is the only board that does not have to answer to anyone after it gets thier budget. Do you really think that the numbers are accurate? Is a school intolerable at 80% of its capacity? or is 90-95% more realistic? You tell me how you would justify intolerable?

Why squawk about capacity now?

Submitted by local_yokel on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 17:25.

The Planning Commission and County Commission have already removed the regulation that had to do with planning around capacity, so why beat the dead horse on how those labels are calculated? At this point, they are no more than an internal management tool for the school system and not fodder for the Planning Commission.

And you said this, JAC:

Has to do with wasteful spending by a board that does not have to answer to anyone.

How do they not have to answer to anyone? They are a.) elected by the people, and b.) their budget has to pass by the Commission same as every other department's does.

Thought I heard that

Submitted by Dumping Ground on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 17:42.

I thought I heard Dr. Bell say they no longer used that formula at the last CC meeting. You didn't know this JAC?

not true

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 17:56.

Only part that you stated and did not finish was that yes the commission passes thier budget. But after they get that money they can change and do what they want, where they want and how they want. Remember the 40 million dollars???? where did all that money go and what was it supposed to be used for? Not to be used for other projects and uses. This was not thier budget. It was earmarked. Also it is not a dead horse issue. If it was then just do away with it and do not bring it to the commission or the planning commission. But that is not what the planning commission is asking. The planning commission did not take out the schools for concidering subdivisions. It took out the fudged numbering systems of intolerability.

Oh?

Submitted by local_yokel on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 17:58.

In what way does the Planning Commission consider schools as precedent for subdivision platting?

deleted text

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 18:02.

It took out the 4 lot deal only. All that did was raise the prices of housing and taxes for the whole county because of the fudged numbering systems of intolerability.

Okay...

Submitted by local_yokel on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 18:10.

So again, in what way does the Planning Commission consider schools as precedent for subdivision platting - now that there is no 4-lot limit?

did they exhaust all options

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 18:22.

did they exhaust all options to rectify thier intolerability? the answer is NO. Redistrict is one. But Talbot told his constituants that they will never be moved. Well the 2 new schools that being built sure does go against what mr horde said at the meeting on the new location sites being looked at for a new school for porter. Well let's go back to the 2 new schools on union grove, How far away is eagleton to porter??????? they cant redistrict because???? well the 2 new schools is the about the same and less then that of eagleton and porter. So again here we come to the same situation that once again is a thorn on our educated educators. I asked alvin about what the city of maryville and what the city of louisville has done.... He knew nothing about the 126 lot subdivision that wraps around middlesettlement elementary. Along with the 221 acre subdivision with "phase 1" having 28 acres of commercial and "allowable" 198 homesites lots. Well 28 acres was alot more allowed on a still in use farming of land then what was allowed for the sports complex restrictions. So if alvin doesn't know about what the other cities in the county is doing and just what the county planning commission is doing which is not even 1/3 of what they are doing to our schools. So go chew on that for awhile.

Good golly, you'd make a great politician

Submitted by local_yokel on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 18:52.

You said:

The planning commission did not take out the schools for concidering subdivisions.

I am simply asking you, for the third time: In what way does the Planning Commission consider schools as precedent for subdivision platting?

Is that schooling district over capacity?

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 18:59.

If so then the planning commission has the right to turn down a major subdivision. It's in the regulations. But the school board has agreed that there isn't any at this time but there may be a time in the future. It is not a clear cut and dry answer. There is laws in tact that can say otherwise and the proof would be on the school board. A developer can sue or a citizen can sue just like in any lawsuit. there are 2 sides to everything. So to be honest with you there are several things to consider. But you know that and if not I am sure you can make a call to a school board member, you know the number.

Are you saying...

Submitted by local_yokel on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 21:41.

...that the school board says there are no intolerable schools right now?

You said:

But the school board has agreed that there isn't any at this time...

Also, if the "proof" of intolerable capacity is up to the school board, why are you quibbling with the formula they use to calculate that?

Thirdly, I don't know a single school board member who has any statutory authority to approve/deny a subdivision plat. Nor do any of them have the training required by law to do so.

And I don't know any Planning Commissioners with the statutory authority to ascertain school capacity, school budget, etc. Ditto on the mandatory training.

So I'm confused at why anyone on the Planning Commission should feel that since they disagree with the school board's dutifully submitted figures, that they get a free pass to refuse to act on the state regulations which require the PC to consider infrastructure. I mean, you could certainly point to the school board's labeling as "intolerable" as defense for your actions, in the face of criticism, AND you would have done your job. Maybe the PC could just focus on the job of Planning instead of trying to do the school board's job, too.

When the 4-lot limit was voted IN, it was because John Lamb said there had to be a way to quantify what was crowded and what wasn't, as well as a hard figure of what size subdivision would be allowed and in which circumstances - otherwise, the developers could sue on the grounds of "arbitrary and capricious" decision-making. So frankly, I think that now that you've taken that whole section out of the regulations, you really don't have any way to consider schools in platting. That's why I was surprised to hear you say that the Planning Commission still does. I think they DON'T.

I mean, just mentioning that "Gee, this 300 house subdivision is going in at [insert intolerable school district here]," but then approving it anyway isn't really "considering" the infrastructure.

well you know all

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 23:29.

you have certainly turned this all around. The districts I talked about was not in the county's planning region. And the school superintendant did not care or do anything outside that the county planning commission was the only one that listens to all the critizism that really is injustice. But you want to change it go ahead and keep chewing.

The superintendent?

Submitted by local_yokel on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 00:27.

the school superintendant did not care or do anything

Nobody's twisting anything. But please tell me what it is the Director of Schools can do about Planning? The Director of Schools can only oversee his own department and not the cities/county's planning departments. His job - and that of the school board - is to identify where there's a problem with school capacity and communicate it to those planning bodies. After that, it's pretty much out of his hands. Sure, the Mayor and County Commission could and should apply pressure to those other planning regions within Blount County to follow state law by considering Blount County schools as infrastructure. I'm sure that if the Blount County Planning Commission brought the inequities to their attention that they would. That is well within the scope of the Planning Commission's ability to recommend and is a darn good point.

I'm just saying, the planning department can't skip their job because they don't like the job the school department is doing and vice versa. The schools HAVE to educate all who come there. They cannot, at some point, just close the door. So they will play the cards they are dealt by the planning commission, but the education game will inevitably suffer.

If the 4-lot limit wasn't the right number, then come up with another one. I think that number was chosen because anything above that is considered a "major" subdivision. But if you pick what you consider a reasonable number and put it back in the regulations, then you will help direct the development traffic into the sections of the county - like Eagleton School - that space remains. That was the intent of the 4-lot limit, I think. Not to stop growth, but to direct it where it fits.

The Director of Schools can

Submitted by just a citizen on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 01:30.

The Director of Schools can only oversee his own department and not the cities/county's planning departments. His job - and that of the school board - is to identify where there's a problem with school capacity and communicate it to those planning bodies.

Exactly He did not do his job in going to other commissions. Only the county's commission he talks to. sending a letter to maryville and alcoa is not enough period. So do you think that since the schools are overcrowded that they should bring in 304 pre-k students and take up more classrooms? that should be the state regulations that they supposed to follow?? Am I wrong in asking that? So who is harming who there? Who is trying to dictate to which body? Who falsifying statements? I will quote from the letter that was passed to the full commission and planning by Brian Bell

>" One further change is the addition of Pre-school students and Head Start students to the individual school's enrollment. The State Department of Education now requires school systems to report both of these figures.

The State asked how many they had enrolled so they can cut them a grant and were given $482,293.14 for only 6 classrooms. The state does not recognize the pre-K as part of thier ADM or BEP. This is something new that the state is looking at and it is all voluntary and is NOT required or mandated. So who is putting words in who's mouth and who is "voluntarily" over burdening who? Take the pre-K out of the schools that are "intolerable" and those schools come off thier list per thier own criterias. Planning Commission has no say so in the schools that is correct, but the planning department does when it comes to where the schools are to be built, but the schools do not follow state law there either. Not trying to argue your points but to clarify mine. That is correct that they have to provide an education for every child that comes through thier doors, but move them where there is openings.

Pardon my ignorance

Submitted by local_yokel on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 10:19.

So are you saying that while the state mandates preK, it is the local school system who determines where those preKs are located?

And what state law are you referencing that the Planning Department dictates school placement?

Ignorance you are

Submitted by just a citizen on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 11:59.

I did not say the state mandates PRE-K. total opposite go back and read it. I said that the state doesnt ever recognize it. It is only a voluntary program and it is NOT mandated. State law as for the schools go look it up yourself.

I am ignorance?

Submitted by local_yokel on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 12:23.

You are the one that said:

So do you think that since the schools are overcrowded that they should bring in 304 pre-k students and take up more classrooms? that should be the state regulations that they supposed to follow??

How else would I interpret your remark?

Pardon my Ignorant..

Submitted by Dumping Ground on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 12:27.

but I'm just curious to see how small a reply box can get.

Thanks for the laugh!

Submitted by local_yokel on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 12:32.

Looks like they can get pretty small!

Pardon my Ignorant too

Submitted by mello on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 12:37.

But I have not worn this small of a size in a long time....

lol mello

Submitted by just a citizen on Thu, 11/29/2007 - 12:41.

cute

Are there better examples?

Submitted by Dumping Ground on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 17:11.

It has nothing to do with my own feelings.

Whose feelings are these?; It's a bunch of bull*&^%

Do you really think that the numbers are accurate? Is a school intolerable at 80% of its capacity? or is 90-95% more realistic? You tell me how you would justify intolerable?

Would you take a child to the doctor with a 102 degree temperature or would you wait until it's 104? Again, it's subjective, but I'd personally rather be proactive than reactive.

What do other systems use as a standard?

Noone else in the state

Submitted by just a citizen on Wed, 11/28/2007 - 17:14.

Not one system in the state usues the same method as ours do. They say that all of thier schools would be intolerable.

Comment viewing options

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

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

    State News

    Wire Reports

    Home » Blogs » local_yokel's blog
    Home » Blogs » local_yokel's blog
    Copyright (C) All Rights Reserved