Although I am tired of talking about the Crestpointe issue, it’s important to note some observations about the financial aspects of the Crestpointe proposal and some potential alternatives.
City estimates of Crestpointe finances (see http://www.cortn.org/summit/summit-crestpoint.pdf) show a net yearly gain to the city (including our schools) of $511,389 for the first year of operation. This assumes, among other things, that the $10.5 million city contribution is paid off over 20 years at $842K per year, that the city captures the county portion of the property tax, that the shopping center nets $60 million in new sales to the city (this is the portion of sales not cannibalized from existing businesses), that loss of sales at existing local stores (including closure of existing stores) due to competition from Crestpointe do not cost the city any revenue other than the lower sales taxes collections at these stores, and that the existence of the shopping center does not require the city to increase spending for municipal services.
Taking that analysis at face value (not arguing with those assumptions), I ask “What other options does this city have for raising that amount of new revenue?” Recognizing that not every option is good, I’ve reviewed a few possibilities:
*The city could increase property taxes. To raise an additional $511,389 per year, the property tax rate would need to go up by 3.1% to 3.2% (depending on whether the calculation uses a basis of $15,985,000 from the city’s FY 2007 budget or $16,436,000 from the city’s Crestpointe presentation). That’s an 8-cent increase in the tax rate, from $2.55 to $2.63. On a home with an appraised value of $100,000, that’s $20 per year. (For comparison, the Crestpointe proposal asks the city to kick in more than $800 in public money for every household in the city — to help a developer build a shopping center that we hope will produce enough sales tax revenue to allow people to equal what could come from that $20 per year in added property taxes.)
As a bonus, the higher property tax rate would also increase the yearly in-lieu of tax payment from U.S. DOE by about $50,000, so the total gain in revenue from this tax increase would be over $560,000 a year.
*The city could cut spending, on the principle that “a penny saved is a penny earned.” Of course, if it were easy to find half a million dollars that could be cut from the budget, that amount would have been cut a long time ago. However, every item in the budget should be justified, and almost anyone can find at least a few items in the budget to question. I would start by pointing to the $8000 to $8500 per month (that’s $96,000 to $102,000 per year) that goes to a lobbying firm in DC (see blog category Oak Ridge > Lobbyists); the city also pays $4,650 a month (almost $56,000 annually) for lobbying in Nashville.
[Hmm… This post was longer when I wrote it, but a big chunk got lost somewhere.  )
Added April 7th, attempting to re-create lost content:
*Additional property and sales tax revenues could be generated by fostering retail in or near existing retail districts. Until Crestpointe was proposed, most Oak Ridgers thought we had an excess of retail sites, not a shortage. It appears to me that opportunities to foster retail abound. Here are just a few:
*Elsewhere I’ve referred to the failed promise of the city center (mall) redevelopment. Even a partial redevelopment of that site would boost property valuations in the center of town (thus increasing property tax revenue) and increase sales tax revenues.
*Oak Ridge has more than its share of other unoccupied and under-utilized sites that are currently zoned for retail and fully served by appropriate infrastructure. Out-of-town retailers interested in tapping this market have plenty of options. If businesses are rejecting certain sites because the sites are over-priced or have existing structures that aren’t suitable for new uses, perhaps the Chamber of Commerce (or perhaps one of the other economic development organizations that receives public funds to market Oak Ridge) should be working to convince the private property owners to market their sites more realistically.
*Bob Monday’s 43-acre site behind Dean Stallings Ford would be, in many respects, an ideal location for a big-box store. If just 19 acres of that site were developed for a Target store, with the remainder remaining as undeveloped woods and wetland, and Target’s property value and sales results are the same as the city staff assumed in its presentation on Crestpointe, the city would receive $91,000 a year in added property taxes and $368,000 in sales tax on sales revenue new to the city. If the city had to spend $1,050,000 (a wild guess, but likely to be in the ballpark) to develop new public road access to that site and paid off the debt for the expense over a 20-year period at a cost of $84,000 per year, the new annual revenue of $375,000 per year would be nearly 3/4th of the revenue projected for Crestpointe, at 1/10th the cost to the city, without spending money solely to benefit private property, and without Crestpointe’s deleterious effects on existing retail.
Bottom line: It’s clear that Crestpointe is far from the only way to enhance the city’s financial bottom line.
In less than 24 hours, I experienced two events that illustrate some of things that people value in this community.
Tuesday evening’s staged reading of the one-act drama “Remembering Miss Meitner” at the American Museum of Science and Energy attracted a diverse crowd. We came to see some accomplished local actors tell a story that is fascinating to many Oak Ridgers, but would get little attention in most other places. Lise Meitner was one of the most brilliant physicists of her generation and had a central role in the discovery of fission, but was denied the recognition she deserved for reasons of politics (her family was Jewish and the Nazis controlled Germany) and strong male egos (she was a woman). I knew the story only in very broad outline, so I learned some science and history, while enjoying some fine performances. Few communities offer so many rich opportunities for people who appreciate science and the arts.
Next, the featured speaker at Wednesday’s Literacy Luncheon, Mim Eichler Rivas, told about the interesting directions her life has taken — as an increasingly successful author, co-author, and ghostwriter — following her formative years in Oak Ridge (where she grew up the daughter of a physicist who had a strong interest in film and drama). Several times in her talk she remarked about Oak Ridgers of her generation who are achieving a diverse variety of worthwhile things and explain it by saying “we’re from Oak Ridge — it’s what we are supposed to do.” I wish that every child could go out into the world with the same special sense of self-confidence, personal worth, and duty to serve that she described. I’m not sure that today’s local kids feel quite as special as her generation did. However, by raising funds for adult and child literacy programs in the local area, the sponsors of the Oak Ridge Literacy Luncheon (Altrusa International of Oak Ridge and the Oak Ridge Breakfast Rotary Club, with support from many other local businesses and organizations) aim to help as many people as possible to live full and productive lives.
At Monday night’s City Council meeting, I asked several questions and made several comments about the action that Council was about to take regarding the Crestpointe proposal (more about those points later).
Mayor David Bradshaw challenged opponents of Crestpointe, who believe with me that Oak Ridge can and should do better, to find and present viable alternatives. As long as 3 years ago I was posting comments about the need to redevelop the City Center and I made similar comments not long ago (see Instead of Crestpointe, let’s redevelop the City Center), so it’s no secret that I favor that direction. Furthermore, I have commented here and in other venues about the potential merits of a retail development on Bob Monday’s land. However, Council members and staff sneer when Bob Monday’s property or the City Center are mentioned, and the Mayor cut me off on Monday night when I attempted to tell them that the reasons they give for dismissing Bob Monday’s proposal are not valid.
Thus, it seems that I need to tell the story here. (Please be assured I that I have no financial interest in any Oak Ridge real estate other than the place where I live. I am not trying to promote anyone’s property; I am just trying to give Oak Ridgers the facts we need to make an informed decision.)
 Here’s what Monday wrote to the community on March 8 (a thumbnail version of one of his site maps is at the right; click on it to open a larger version in a new window, showing two big-box stores adjacent to the DOE boundary, a parking lot to the north of them, and details of the proposed access road to South Illinois Ave.):
Dear Mayor Bradshaw, the Oak Ridge City Council, the Anderson County Commission, and Concerned Citizens of Oak Ridge,
As both a commercial developer and as an Oak Ridge taxpayer, I would like to make all aware of an alternative site that can accommodate a big box center in the City of Oak Ridge. The site is adjacent to the existing City Services Center along the commercial corridor of S. Illinois Avenue. It is an ideal location that deserves your attention.
I have developed and presently own various shopping centers throughout East Tennessee. Through the years, my company has been involved in 11 successful anchored developments in our area. We are a 30 year member of the International Council of Shopping Centers with local understanding that I feel is important to the present situation.
Monday Properties has a long-standing history with the city of Oak Ridge that stretches over a 30 year period. Beginning in 1976, we sold land, clearing the way for Dean Stallings Ford, Oak Ridge Lincoln Mercury, Oak Ridge Storage, the nearby dentist s office and the car wash along S. Illinois Ave. Our subsequent developments, which we presently own, serve the Oak Ridge community well. In 1979 we located the Quincey s restaurant (now Super China Buffet). Over the next five years we struck agreements to bring McDonalds and Sagebrush Steakhouse to Illinois Avenue. From 1991 to 1993, we partnered with a reputable developer to purchase, re-zone, and develop the Kmart and Kroger Shopping Center. Much of the raw land was below grade and required site work, which we readily provided. Finally in 1998, we sold a portion of our land clearing the way for the Oak Ridge City Services Center. These developments have stood the test of time, by their own merits, and without government subsidy. They have provided untold amounts of sales tax, property tax revenue, and jobs to the City of Oak Ridge and to Anderson County.
The 43 acre parcel, which we are now proposing, sits adjacent to the City Services Center at the end of Woodbury Lane. The site is already zoned commercial. To provide primary access from South Illinois Avenue, Target would need the city to provide a red light and roadway bridging East Fork Poplar Creek. Fortunately, this work would also have the positive effect of improving access to the existing City Services Center. Super Target would face South Illinois Avenue oriented toward the downtown area. For further explanation, please refer to the attached conceptual site plans and aerial photographs.
When comparing our 43 acre site to the much larger proposed power center site, we draw the following conclusions: Developing a smaller site that is closer to the city center makes good sense and is in better alignment with the Oak Ridge City Council s published strategic plan. While a brand new power center in Oak Ridge may seem very nice, it would vacate much of the downtown area retail. This would leave an eyesore and future economic challenges. When Super Target comes to town it should come with less surrounding shop space. A Super Target on the 43 acre parcel would be better integrated with the existing retail district. It would not require such a large public expenditure, saving taxpayers a great deal of money.
Based on our experience, we strongly believe that Target will pursue the Oak Ridge market beyond April and that a rushed decision is not in the city s long-term best interest. Target has already expressed a desire to locate in Oak Ridge and will pursue any and all opportunities available. Regardless of a particular site or subsidy, it is highly likely that Target will be in Oak Ridge within the next 5 years.
We hope that the community will take more time to fully evaluate its options, since we are concerned that the City of Oak Ridge and Anderson County are giving away tax money unnecessarily. If possible, we would like for the 43 acre site to be put on the agenda and into consideration. Whatever decision is made, I sincerely hope that it will be in the long-term best interest of the Oak Ridge Community.
I am certainly open to a lively discussion and would like to hear any feedback from community leaders and the people of Oak Ridge. My office line is 865-219-9000.
Best Regards,
Bob Monday President, Monday Properties
City staff asserts that Monday’s land is unsuitable for a Target store because it is in a wetland, lacks access to Illinois Avenue, lacks the desired visibility to drivers on Illinois Avenue, and is too small for the “power center” development that GBT Realty has proposed. What’s the reality?
Wetlands are an issue I know about; I am known to have annoyed several development proponents by raising concerns about the effects of their projects on wetlands and streams. Perhaps the largest wetlands tract in Oak Ridge lies adjacent to East Fork Poplar Creek in the area of Bob Monday’s land, so almost as soon as I received his map, I showed it to a person who is very familiar with the location of the wetlands in that area. I was surprised by what I learned — the property where Monday would place stores and parking is on high ground, outside the wetland. Other maps confirm this. Wetland boundaries would need to be delineated as part of a building project, but the parcel has a good-sized area of buildable land that is not wetland.
Access is a bit more complicated. Right now, the only access is from Woodbury Lane, the new-ish road that cuts off Wilberforce to give access to the city’s Services Center. Bob Monday told me that some time ago he and city staff explored the possibility of an access road across the site of the federal NOAA Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Division facility. That route would have affected a large amount of wetland and it was unacceptable to NOAA, so it was rejected. Since then, however, Monday has identified the possibility of a new road between two existing businesses, connecting to Illinois Ave. across from Quincy Road. Several problems would need to be overcome to make that work (acquiring land from its owners, bridging East Fork Poplar Creek, dealing with a natural stream that flows in a ditch on the road alignment, and minimizing traffic impacts on Quincy Road in the Woodland neighborhood), but all of these appear to be solvable. Furthermore, they could be solved at far less cost than the massive earthwork that would happen at Pine Ridge in order to develop Crestpointe.
Visibility is a non-issue. Bob Monday pointed out to me that store buildings on his property would sit at a higher elevation than Dean Stallings Ford and other existing businesses on Illinois Avenue, so stores would be readily visible to drivers over the roofs of those businesses. I confirmed this on maps — drivers would have no problem seeing the stores.
Finally, parcel size is a nonissue. Yes, the parcel is “only” 43 acres, and some of that is not buildable (due to wetlands, for example). However, Monday’s sketch plans show that it is plenty large enough for one or two big box stores plus parking, and possibly a few smaller shops. The clamor in the community is for Target, with the new shopping opportunities, sales tax revenue, and positive vibes that a Target is supposed to bring to nearby stores. This site is plenty big enough for a Target, and the nearby stores receiving positive vibes would be existing and new stores in our existing commercial areas, not newly built stores in a 60-acre isolated shopping center. GBT Realty wants to develop 60 acres, but there’s no solid evidence that Oak Ridge can successfully absorb that much additional shopping (and plenty of reason to believe it can’t absorb it…). If a new shopping center is overbuilt, either the new center will fail to meet its objectives or the competition will have devastating effects on existing stores. Oak Ridge has already been through this once, when the mall was overbuilt (and correspondingly overpriced for its tenants). I hope we are smart enough not to try that failed experiment all over again.
I’m too young for Medicare, and my elderly family members don’t live in the local area, so I’m no expert on this matter, but I do want to pass along this “word to the wise”…
Covenant Health (the operators of Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge, Fort Sanders, and several other major Knoxville-area hospitals) will no longer accept “Medicare Advantage” insurance from any provider except Cariten Senior Health and the company that used to be called John Deere, now called United HealthCare of the River Valley (also called “Secure Horizons”*). Apparently March 31 is the deadline for changing plans. Seniors who carry Medicare Advantage insurance from any company other than these two and might need nonemergency care at MMCOR would be advised to change insurors.
The best advice is “Don’t sign up for a Medicare Advantage plan—if you can avoid it,” since these plans can change providers at the drop of hat.
*Note also that there are other Medicare Advantage plans called “Secure Horizons,” but only plans from United HealthCare of the River Valley in Moline, Illinois, will be accepted at these hospitals.
The frenetic effort to collect signatures from 10% of Oak Ridge’s voters is drawing to an end. As the Oak Ridger reported today, as of Friday the campaign had 2,400 signatures on hand — probably more than enough to force a referendum, which requires about 2,000 validated signatures. On Monday, a total of 3,172 signatures were turned in to City Clerk Jackie Bernard, and still more will be turned in on Tuesday (the deadline).
Not only does the campaign have many more signatures than were needed, but the total is impressively large when compared with the turnout of just 3,977 voters in the 2005 city election (see http://www.ellensmith.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=118). Willie Golden, the candidate with the highest vote total in that election, received 2,819 votes, which is less than the number of voters who signed to call for a referendum.
Many of the people who signed to call for a referendum have made up their minds against the Crestpointe project, but many others want to be able to vote on the issue — and hope to have more information by the time the election is held. I hope we will also know plenty about some alternatives to Crestpointe — better ways to satisfy Oak Ridgers’ thirst for more shopping and the city’s thirst for more tax revenues.
I have been telling people that I know we need more retail in town – to enhance residents’ quality of life and to increase sales tax revenues – but that I believe Oak Ridge can and should do better than accept the problematic Crestpointe proposal.
We can do better. Better options are starting to emerge. 
Long-time local landowner and veteran developer Bob Monday has proposed that the City consider pursuing development of a big-box shopping center (including a Target store) on an undeveloped 43-acre tract just off South Illinois Avenue (behind Dean Stallings Ford and adjacent to the City’s Service Center on Woodbury Lane). He would like the city to assist by providing a new stoplight and a bridge across East Fork Poplar Creek. Those two improvements would cost far less than $10.5 million, and Monday points out that they would also benefit the City by improving access to the City Service Center, which houses the public works dept., electric dept., and school bus garage. Edited on Tuesday, May 13: The Oak Ridger has printed Bob Monday’s offer, but only as a letter to the editor! Surely this was news, wasn’t it? It seems like the paper is interested only in official press releases about the Crestpointe proposal. Similar news item from other businesses are accepted only as letters to the editor.
I expect that we will be hearing about other good options in the coming days and weeks. Oak Ridge can and will do better than the Crestpointe proposal.
There was an air of excitement at Thursday evening’s meeting of the Oak Ridge Heritage and Preservation Association (ORHPA). Professional museum consultants who have been working with the Partnership for K-25 Preservation, the local Oak Ridge Heritage and Preservation Association, and the national Atomic Heritage Foundation unveiled their concepts for making part of the K-25 site into an historic museum and a heritage tourism attraction that tells part of the story of the Manhattan Project. There were even two different brand-new scale models of the museum concept on display.
The group has done marketing studies that give them a pretty good idea where future visitors will come from and what those visitors will want to see and do. (What a concept! I’d feel better about the Crestpointe proposal if I thought that the city was basing its decision-making on that kind of solid market information.) Oak Ridge already has great appeal for heritage tourists, and we could attract more such tourists and keep them longer if we could offer more visitable historic attractions.
The massive U-shaped K-25 building is scheduled for decontamination and demolition over the next couple of years (the schedule is uncertain due to uncertainties in the Department of Energy budget). The concept for K-25 includes keeping the north tower (the base of the U) and converting it to an indoor museum and visitor center. Although it’s a small part of the entire K-25 building, the building is huge. It would have space for several uranium enrichment cascade units, as well as other exhibits. (I can imagine parts of this great space becoming desirable as venues for after-hours business receptions, and possibly even social events). It’s not certain that the building can be preserved, but the Partnership for K-25 Preservation has high hopes…
The perimeter and height of demolished parts of the K-25 building would be marked on the ground and with a series of lighted poles. The “highwalls” formed by the basement walls on the interior of the U would become a pair of 1/2-mile-long murals. The long public space that would be formed was compared to the National Mall in Washington, DC (which is longer), and long plazas at Versailles, the Eiffel Tower, and St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.
The consultants even showed plans for where the visitor entrance would be (off Blair Road, where it will give visitors a great initial view and avoid interference between the museum and future industrial park tenants in other parts of the East Tennessee Technology Park) and where people will park. I can already imagine watching the visitors arrive…
The group plans to get the K-25 overlook spiffed up before the Secret City Festival in June. Heritage trails in the vicinity, covering the Wheat community, Happy Valley, the S-50 site, the African Burial Ground, and other surrounding sights also should be marked and ready to visit soon.
City support is necessary to make this happen — from both citizens and the City Council. According to spokesmen Bill Wilcox and Gordon Fee, measures needed from City government include:
- - making heritage tourism a key strategy for future economic growth (I believe this is an important direction for the city as a whole)
- - getting support from CROET to ensure that the overall ETTP site plan is consistent with this strategy
- - getting Chamber of Commerce support for this future direction
- - aggressively supporting the National Park Service study of sites associated with the Manhattan Project
- - collaboration with the Atomic Heritage Foundation, East Tennessee Historical Society, and other regional and national heritage groups.
Yesterday’s Oak Ridger carried a front page story headlined Mayor ‘committed’ to $65M retail center. The article reports on an interview in which Mayor David Bradshaw said that he believes in the Crespointe project and is concerned about the City’s need to draft a contractual agreement with the developer that will protect the city’s interests.
However, the first sentence of the article said: “David Bradshaw says he is committed to the Crestpointe retail development — with or without a referendum election.” It seems that some residents read that as saying that the City will provide $10.5 million in funding for the center, with or without a bond issue.
I don’t read the article that way, but I can definitely see how a person might reach that conclusion from the first sentence.
Let’s look at the situation logically: Without the proposed bond issue, the City lacks the resources to give $10.5 million to a developer. David Bradshaw understands that (probably better than most of us). I cannot imagine that he expects City Council to agree to a contract committing that sum of money to this development without knowing where the money is coming from.
I can’t pretend to know exactly what the City Council will do on March 19 if petitioners collect enough signatures by March 13 to force a referendum. However, I predict that a successful petition will cause them to delay action on a formal deal with the developer. They are likely to approve a proposed contract in principle, but they should not authorize an actual financial commitment to the developer until they know that the necessary bonds can be issued.
The article doesn’t actually say what the City would do if petitioners force a referendum, but it does clearly indicate that a successful petition drive would make a difference in the City’s actions:
The mayor said city officials and GBT executives are discussing the petition drive’s potential impact on the proposed shopping center.
GBT executives say they are facing an April deadline to close a deal with SuperTarget.
But a referendum election, if called for, would probably not be held until June 5, the same day as the Oak Ridge municipal election. The election would allow citizens to vote on whether Oak Ridge should borrow up to $6 million to help finance the 60-acre Crestpointe project.
Bradshaw said city officials will honor the outcome of the petition drive calling for the election. Organizers need to collect about 2,000 signatures from registered Oak Ridge voters before March 13 in order to put the issue on a ballot.
“If they have 2,000 signatures, we’re going to respect that,†Bradshaw said.
I believe that when the mayor spoke of “commitment” he meant that he believes strongly in the proposal, not that he is determined to do this project even if there’s no way to pay for it.
Oak Ridge is in the midst of the 20-day drive to collect enough petition signatures to force a referendum on the proposed bond issue for the Crestpointe shopping center.
As a general rule, I don’t think that voters should be able to insist on voting on individual financial decisions by elected officials. (At the February 19th Council meeting, I urged Council to delay a vote on the bond resolution, in hopes that we could avoid a referendum. I actually hoped that with another month’s time, four of them might decide to oppose the project, or there would be an alternative proposal available for them to consider.) I do, however, believe in systems of “checks and balances” in government, and the Tennessee law that allows for voters to petition for a referendum on a bond issue provides one important “check” on the decisions made by elected officials. The law doesn’t make it easy to call for a referendum (it’s not easy to gather the signatures of 10% of a community’s registered voters in just 20 days), which assures that this mechanism will be used only in extraordinary situations — when voters feel that their elected officials are making a serious mistake.
I consider the Crestpointe proposal to be a sufficiently extraordinary situation that I have been carrying petitions around town, and otherwise supporting the petition campaign. I expect that petitioners will be successful in gathering at least 2000 valid signatures, so the voters will get to decide this issue in June.
In the course of petitioning, I have started to take special notice of the number of registered voters who don’t live here any more — and have not voted here since some time in the 1990s. These include folks who moved out of the area, as well as Oak Ridge kids who registered here when they were 18, but have long since established new residences in other parts of the country. I believe it used to be that Tennessee purged the records of people who had not voted recently, but current law requires that election commissions keep a voter on the list until they receive written confirmation that the voter has died, moved out of the area, wants to be removed from the voter list, has been convicted of an “infamous crime,” or has changed their name (other than by marriage) and failed to inform the election commission. The law does include a provision allowing the election commission to investigate by sending “confirmation notices”, but it’s pretty cumbersome: “If the voter fails to respond to a confirmation notice, and if the voter fails to otherwise update the voter’s registration over a period of two consecutive regular November elections following the date the notice was first sent.” (Since November elections happen only in even-numbered years, this process takes a bare minimum of two years.)
I’m very glad to know that people aren’t losing their right to vote without good reason. However, it occurs to me that those extra names on the voter list inflates the total number of voters. In a normal election, that reduces the reported voter turnout percentage, but otherwise it makes little difference. When applied to a petition that must be signed by 10% of voters, however, it inflates the number of required signatures – raising the bar even higher than lawmakers intended. Harrumph!
Furthermore, I can’t help but recall that failure to remove people from voter lists in a timely manner sometimes leads to situations in which corrupt politicians “vote the graveyard.” I hope our local election commissions are working to avert electoral fraud by mailing out “confirmation notices” to those folks who I believe to be phantom voters. (Additionally, future petitioners will be grateful.)
Kudos to City of Oak Ridge staff for the recent inauguration of expanded online publicity of city business.
The city website now includes a comprehensive calendar of meetings (including City Council, its committees, and appointed boards) at http://www.cortn.org/calendar/CurrentMonth.htm. Meanwhile, Council work session agendas have joined Council meeting agendas, minutes, and videos at http://www.cortn.org/agendapackets/agendaindex.php
I know that city clerk Jackie Bernard has been working for some time to make this happen, and I’m pleased that she and her staff have succeeded.
|
|
|
|
