Thursday’s Planning Commission discussion of ALDI dealt with an almost completely different collection of issues…
Since (as noted in the previous post) this property is already zoned for this use, the planning commission’s focus is on (1) meeting the extensive design criteria in the zoning ordinance and (2) finding ways to ensure that the development is as compatible with the existing neighborhood as is practicable.
Water. Neighborhood residents say that this parcel of land was considered greenbelt at one time, because it is the destination for drainage from a large area of northeast Oak Ridge. That history is no longer relevant, since the land is privately owned and zoned for business. However, nearby residents say there is standing water in the area (and on nearby streets and in their yards) after a heavy rain.
There’s a stream (actually a large ditch, but it’s large) running west-to-east across the site. To develop the new store, the stream would be replaced with a closed culvert. The USGS/TVA topo map shows this as a blue-line stream, but at Thursday’s meeting Steve Byrd said that the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation told him the agency does not classify it as a regulated water body. Thus, there are no legal restrictions on putting it in a culvert. However, culvert size and placement could be problematic. Neighbors say that the culvert under the nearby Sonic property (upstream from this property) is above the level of the ditch that is supposed to flow into it. I’ve seen that in other parts of town — basically, the stream has eroded down below the level of the culvert, so the culvert no longer functions the way it’s supposed to. This probably has something to do with the flooding reported by the neighbors. Byrd correctly pointed out that the ALDI development would not affect the situation upstream from Sonic, but I don’t think the city is justified in ignoring that kind of problem when it is brought to city staff’s attention.
Downstream, water from this site flows to Ernie’s Creek, which has a fairly straightforward course eastward to Melton Hill Lake. I’m not aware of any flooding issues on Ernie’s Creek that this development could worsen, but I could be wrong…
Screening between residences and store. Development plans call for a 20-ft-wide landscaped buffer (that is, a strip planted with trees) to provide a visual barrier between the backyards of homes. Neighbors asked for more evergreens than are shown in the original proposal, to ensure that the screening will be effective year-round. (Excellent point!)
Also, residents are concerned that the store and its parking lot may lead people to trespass in their yards (their yards now back up on an undeveloped wooded area, but that’s the area where ALDI wants to build the store). If I lived there, I would want a fence to ensure separation between the store lot and my backyard. The city landscaping standards call for either a vegetated buffers strip or a fence to screen between adjoining uses, not both. I think a fence is needed for physical security, in addition to the visual screening. I hope the developer will agree to provide a fence, even if city code does not require it.
Size of parking lot. Several people who have looked at the ALDI plans say that the parking lot seems too big. At 93 spaces, it’s about 36% larger than the city would require. Bob Walker, the developer’s engineer, says ALDI wants the extra space, which makes me wonder if they are expecting more customers than they have asked the city to plan for.
Sidewalk access to store. This one is mostly my issue. City ordinance says that if there is a sidewalk along a street adjacent to a new parking lot (for 100 cars or more), then pedestrian “connectivity from the entrance to the sidewalk should be provided.” This parking lot is slightly smaller than the ordinance specifies. However, this is a site abutting a residential neighborhood, and there are sidewalks on both Florida Avenue and Oak Ridge Turnpike. I think that the parking lot design should encourage people to walk to and from the business, by providing a sidewalk from Florida Avenue to the store. Walker was resistant to that idea, saying that ALDI sells in large quantities (like Sam’s Club), so people would not be able to shop there on foot. I’m skeptical of that. The ads for weekly specials on Aldi’s website do indicate that the store carries some large nonfood items (like Sam’s Club) and sells some items, such as frozen meat, in fairly large quantities, but the ads also show standard-sized items, such as single boxes of cereal. If this is going to be placed in a residential neighborhood, the neighbors should expect to be able to walk to it.
Loading dock placement. This is more of an issue for planning commission members than for neighbors. Because neighbors of the supermarket (currently Food City) in the Manhattan Place shopping center have complained over the years about noise from dumpsters and from delivery trucks that arrive at all hours of the night, the ALDI designers have worked to shield residents from the loading process by placing the loading dock on the side of the building facing Oak Ridge Turnpike. Some planning commissioners worry about the view motorists will see… I understand that concern, but I think the proposed placement on the “front” of the store probably will work out fine, particularly with the landscaping that the developer is promising…
ALDI (which I discussed in this earlier blog post) was discussed at two city board meetings that I attended this week. (The Oak Ridger has reported on the second of these meetings, Thursday’s Planning Commission work session.) I’ve learned a lot more about the proposal and the issues involved in its siting.
I have learned that the site proposed for the ALDI grocery store is zoned UB-2, which is a business zone that is suitable for this type of business. Thus, Oak Ridge city government bodies have no zoning decisions to make regarding this project. The City Council will, however, be asked to approve vehicle accesses to the site from Oak Ridge Turnpike and Florida Ave. (Note that the City cannot deny access to a highway from a legal lot that fronts on that highway; city government can only weigh in on the location and configuration of that access.) Before that Council action happens, the Planning Commission will be asked to approve a site plan, which includes specifications for things like setbacks from property lines, onsite traffic patterns, parking lot configuration, and landscaping.
Tuesday evening the Traffic Safety Advisory Board (a volunteer city advisory group whose meeting I had not attended previously) reviewed — and tentatively recommended approval for — the traffic access plan for the ALDI project. With a project engineer (Bob Walker of ETE Engineering) who lives in Anderson County and works in an office on the turnpike in east Oak Ridge, several TSAB members who live in northeast Oak Ridge, and a couple of neighborhood residents in attendance, the somewhat rambling discussion at this meeting produced a lot of insights on how people get from one point to another in east Oak Ridge.
The access plan calls for the main store entrance on Florida Avenue, where about 75% (estimated) of the customer traffic would occur and where semi-trailer trucks would enter to make nighttime deliveries. There would be no median cut on Oak Ridge Tpke. in front of the store, but vehicles could make right turns into and out of the parking lot at a new entrance/exit to built there. (Also, trucks would exit there on their way back to Nashville.)
Although the layout for the Sonic drive-in west of the site includes a provision for a frontage road to provide access to this site, city engineer Steve Byrd recommended against using that because the Sonic entrance could not safely accommodate a big traffic increase without a new traffic light, but he says there would not be a large enough influx of new traffic influx to meet TDOT “warrants” for a new traffic light at that location. (Also, it appeared to me — and Steve Byrd agreed — that the frontage road access might not be configured properly to allow a semi-trailer to turn in and out.) Byrd said it would be much safer to send most vehicles to the stoplight at the Florida Ave. intersection, where there is a stoplight, but no protected left turn. Although as a rule I like the idea of frontage roads in lieu of curb cuts, in this instance I must admit that Byrd is giving wise advice…
Nearby residents understandably don’t like the idea of new traffic, especially semi-trailer trucks, on Florida Ave. (I was particularly concerned to hear that the stop line at the intersection might need to be pulled back 10 ft to accommodate turning trucks.) Also, they are concerned that many people traveling to this store from the west would avoid turning left onto Florida Avenue (what Byrd and Walker assumed they would do) by traveling on Tennessee Avenue (or a smaller residential street) to a right turn on Florida Ave. Several TSAB members agreed with this opinion, and also pointed out that it often is difficult to turn left from Oak Ridge Tpke to Florida Ave.
After much discussion, TSAB voted to recommend the proposed access plan as a safe option for providing access to the proposed development, but some members had reservations, mostly related to effects on Florida Avenue.
Having observed the meeting, I will be interested in seeing how this recommendation is presented to City Council; I hope that Council receives a report that describes the board’s reasoning and concerns in addition to the final vote. However, past observations lead me to guess that Council will get filtered information that does not include much detail, if any.
I was surprised to hear that the ALDI company estimates that the new grocery store would have a total of only 400 vehicle trips per day (meaning just 200 customers a day), especially considering that they plan a 93-space parking lot, when Oak Ridge’s zoning code requires only 68 spaces for a store of the size they plan. It seems likely that the daily customer volume, and thus traffic impacts, would be larger than is currently being projected. That observation and the discussion at the TSAB meeting leave me thinking that the city does not yet have a good handle on how this new store could affect Florida Avenue. Also, after studying the site plan, I think the city could ask that semi-trailers enter and exit the property from Oak Ridge Turnpike (right turn in and right turn out), instead of using Florida Ave.
[To be continued -- this post is long enough already]
An important local issue that was largely overlooked in the brouhaha over Crestpointe is the controversy over the future of the Woodland neighborhood.
After City Council rejected (appropriately, I think) a proposal for rezoning to allow construction of a 5-story Holiday Inn Express hotel on a pair of residential lots between Potomac Circle and South Illinois Avenue, city planning staff initiated the “South Illinois Corridor Study” (included in the May 21 City Council agenda package) to determine appropriate land uses and development constraints in the event of future proposals for commercial development near South Illinois. The study report contains much good information and makes many excellent points. (For example, “traditional neighborhood development” is identified as an appropriate zoning classification for part of the area. I think that’s sensible, as Woodland is a traditional neighborhood in most senses of that word, but the zoning change would likely destabilize the area.) Woodland residents are understandably nervous about its main thrust, which is an expectation that commercial development will nibble away at the edge of this residential neighborhood. Long-time resident Mary Henderson encapsulated these concerns in a May 17 letter to the editor. The report has not led to actual rezoning (as residents fear), but it could do so.
Now that the Corridor Study is approved, the hotel proposal is back, in revised form. A preliminary concept was unveiled at a Planning Commission work session on Thursday.
The proposal would require several city approvals. Developers expect to bring it back for Planning Commission approval in August. Both Planning Commission and City Council would have to approve a zoning change (from residential to a business or office zone with a planned-unit development plan included in the rezoning). Also, Council would need to approve a change in the city land use plan and a new highway access for the property. The decisions are likely to be difficult.
The 3-story hotel design would have almost as many rooms (68) as the 5-story design proposed earlier, so it would have a larger footprint on the lot. The building would be set close to the lot line adjoining one of the neighboring houses, and the house on the other side of the site would be very close to the parking lot. Some good news is that the building would be no taller than the nearby TNBank building (it could be a little lower depending on roof design). The fact that the lot slopes down from Potomac Circle (South Illinois is about 8 ft lower than Potomac) would further reduce impact on Woodland. Also, the development planners have worked hard to design landscaping to screen the site from neighboring homes and from Potomac Circle. (There would be no vehicle access on Potomac Circle.)
Although it would be physically possible to provide vehicle access by a frontage road connection to the TNBank parking lot, the prospective developer says that TNBank has rejected that possibility, so the developer is proposing a new highway access from South Illinois Ave, directly across from Outback Steakhouse. That access plan is less than ideal — left turns into and out of businesses have often been difficult along that stretch of South Illinois, and new business accesses will only make it more difficult to turn safely there. However, the city cannot deny access to a street from a legal lot. It wasn’t yet clear how sidewalk access would be handled — sidewalk access is important in that area.
Spot zoning is undesirable, but this developer is working hard to accommodate the needs of neighbors, and the development might turn out to be compatible with the existing neighborhood. However, I do not want to have yet another access to South Illinois, and I have concerns about the way this hotel could overwhelm the small houses adjacent to it. These concerns won’t be resolved until we see a more detailed plan. (Stay tuned…)
An article in today’s newspaper reports that a company called ALDI, Inc. wants to build a grocery store on Oak Ridge Turnpike.
ALDI does not currently have any locations in the Knoxville metro area, but the ALDI company website and the Wikipedia article on ALDI have a lot of information about this business.
It appears to be different from anything currently in the Oak Ridge market. It calls itself a discount grocery store and has smallish stores (a 17,000-square-foot store is proposed for Oak Ridge) with limited hours. It seems that many of us thought “sounds like United Grocery Outlet” when we read about the proposal, but the two companies’ business formulas appear to be very different. UGO occupies existing storefronts and describes itself as a “closeout grocery merchant … [that] specialize[s] in handling inventory imbalances, closeouts, packaging changes, close dated product, factory seconds, and trial run products.” On the other hand, ALDI appears to prefer purpose-built stores (see image) 
and specializes in selling quality private-label groceries.
ALDI is a European company with some European-style approaches to “no-frills” supermarket operation — you need to deposit a quarter in a slot in order to get a shopping cart (the money is returned when the cart is returned) and they charge for grocery bags. They also carry some European gourmet-type items in their stores, although there’s less high-end merchandise than in the Trader Joe’s chain (not found in Tennessee), which apparently belongs to the same family that established ALDI.
Although I’d like a Trader Joe’s better (I’ve enjoyed shopping at Trader Joe’s in other cities), ALDI seems to be a business that would fill a vacant niche for Oak Ridge. It would particularly benefit those east-side residents who mourn the loss of the east-side Food City, including many folks who could walk to this new store.
However, the proposed site is undeveloped land (most of it already zoned commercial) that backs up to a residential neighborhood where people are concerned about inadequate screening of the noise and light from the nearby drive-in restaurant. Loading docks and grocery supply trucks would not be a welcome addition to the neighborhood…
Oak Ridge’s greenways network benefits from a small, but incredibly dedicated, group of volunteers. One of these is Tom Dunigan, who has unveiled a spiffy Google Maps-based interactive online guide to the Oak Ridge Greenways trails. (Check out the map! Click on a red pin to open a popup window with a link to a trail description, detailed map, or other information.)
I’m looking forward to seeing more pins appear on that map when the final phase of the Melton Lake Greenway opens up, linking the Melton Lake Park lakefront with the Haw Ridge Park mountain bike trail system. A few months ago I walked the trail route with city staff and Greenways Oak Ridge volunteers — the walk under the Edgemoor bridge and through the Haw Ridge area probably will become the best part of the Melton Lake greenway.
The votes are in (full returns are on the Election Commission website) and I’m elected to City Council. The news media have, of course, reported the story (see The Oak Ridger and the News Sentinel) and I’m tickled to see that some fellow bloggers have offered their enthusiastic congratulations (see The Crone Speaks), positive thoughts on my election and their hopes for the future (see Atomictumor), or at least best wishes on the difficult job ahead (see Manland). Citizens Oak Ridge, Democracy for East Tennessee, and even the statewide Democracy for Tennessee also have reported enthusiastically on the election results. Unfortunately, my digestive tract started acting up the morning after the election and was “not right” for much of the time since, so I spent some time and energy on feeling sick that I otherwise might have spent posting here.
The three new City Council members (Tom Hayes, Charlie Hensley, and myself) will be sworn in Tuesday afternoon at 4 pm, so until then I guess we’re still civilians.
There’s still time, then, for some reflections on the election before buckling down to the challenges of the new job…
There’s no denying that it’s exciting to have won the election, and also to have prevailed in the referendum on Crestpointe, but easily the best part of this election campaign was the people. It’s humbling to reflect on the idea that 3,177 people voted for me (I must not forget that this was just 49.5% — less than half — of the 6,414 Oak Ridgers who voted in this election), but even more humbling to remember that many of those people helped with the campaign — by donating money, hosting “meet the candidate(s)” events, telling their friends about me, mailing postcards, walking door to door, processing voter data, phoning voters to help “get out the vote,” displaying yard signs (or vehicle signs or bumperstickers), talking with voters at precincts on election day, or helping with the campaign open house or election night party. “Grassroots” politics is about meeting individual people and connecting with them one-on-one. I’ve met some fascinating people here in Oak Ridge and made some new friends whom I hope to keep as friends for a lifetime (meaning I had better work hard to do the right thing as a Council member!). It was very special to be able to celebrate “victory” on election night with so many of the people whose hard work helped elect me and helped the “no” side prevail in the referendum. It feels good to know that we all played a part in lifting city election turnout to well above 30%. Now we will need to work together as a community (including City Council, other public officials, and concerned citizens of every viewpoint) to find and implement solutions to city problems that will get broad public support. (It’s not going to be easy.)
Some of the most important people associated with this election were the other candidates. (We spent a lot of time together over the 6 weeks leading up to election day….) I’m looking forward to becoming better acquainted with Tom Hayes (whose #1 tally of 3,644 votes — 56.8% of the voters — provides testimony to the respect he has earned in 41 years as a teacher, coach, and principal) and Charlie Hensley (with whom I know I share many values and priorities, although we disagreed on some key issues in this election campaign).
It’s probably unfortunate for the city that only 3 could be elected, because there was a lot more talent in the candidate pool. The 4th-place finisher, the gentlemanly Ray Evans, always impresses me with his intelligence and insight, which he displayed throughout this election season. I know we’ll continue to see those qualities expressed in his participation in local civic affairs and real estate development projects. It’s remarkable that Fred Childress (who had lived in Oak Ridge less than a year) ended up just 93 votes behind Ray (a long-time resident and former City Council member) in the vote tally. Like me, Fred picked up some votes from people who were mainly interested in expressing their opposition to public funding for Crestpointe. However, it’s clear from the results that this was not solely a single-issue election, and I believe that Fred’s showing demonstrates that he had made a powerful positive impression on many of us with his knowledge of economic and policy issues and his forthright commitment to “transparency” and “reason.” I hope that both the City and I will continue our new acquaintance with Fred, to everyone’s benefit. I believe that Jerry Marrow, who did not campaign vigorously (he did not even have yard signs), contributed importantly to the outcome of the election by being on the ballot and helping to give “no Crestpointe” single-issue voters an opportunity to support a full slate of three candidates for Council (he won support from more than one out of six voters). In public forums I enjoyed hearing Jerry make effective use of metaphors and imagery to illustrate his points, particularly about the need for action to bring in more basic industrial jobs. I expect we will see more of him as a public speaker and civic volunteer — and if he decides to run again, I predict that he will use yard signs. I was surprised by the low vote total for Ella Hawkins DuBose. I guess that because she remained neutral on Crestpointe until the final days of the election process, she failed to get votes from single-issue voters on either side of the issue. However, her care for both people and community, together with her awareness of public issues and solutions nationally and around the country, showed through in public forums and conversations. I know she has a powerful combination of talents to share with us all, now and in the future.
It’s almost over… The polls open in less than 2 hours. (Voting hours are 9 a.m. to 7 p.m.) About 3000 people have already voted early.
This election is getting more attention than usual for an Oak Ridge City election. The Crestpointe referendum was the top story on the front page of yesterday’s News Sentinel: “Bond issue verdict looms — Oak Ridge voters to decide if the city should help fund controversial development“.
Predictably, both local papers have endorsed Evans, Hayes, and Hensley, saying that they are pro-business (and pro-Crestpointe) and that Oak Ridge needs a pro-business City Council. Unfortunately, in this context “pro-business” typically seems to mean unquestioning support for tax breaks, subsidies, zoning changes, etc., that are purported to be for the purpose of economic development. On the contrary, I am not opposed to business or economic development, but I believe that over the long term business benefits from a level playing field, stable rules (including stable zoning), and being in a community that pays attention to the needs of its residents and existing businesses.
After the polls close (about 7:30 pm), my supporters and Citizens Oak Ridge will gather for an election night party at 135 Greystone Drive. Everyone is welcome — I hope we will have much to celebrate!
Pre-election financial disclosure reports were due Thursday, and the local newspaper has reported cash receipts (including loans) for each candidate and referendum campaign. Because loans are treated as “receipts” and neither in-kind contributions (donations of goods or services; sometimes these donations are large) nor expenditures are included in the article, the numbers in the article could be misleading, but they still attract attention.
Much of the attention this year is focused on the disclosure by Future of Oak Ridge (F.O.R.) which styles itself as a “grassroots group.” People had been asking me if I knew who was funding that group’s campaign in support of general-obligation bond funding for the Crestpointe shopping center development (I didn’t).
The Oak Ridger reported that F.O.R. had received contributions totaling $27,285, including $10,000 from an entity (Franklin Land Associates) that apparently is affiliated with GBT Realty, the prospective developer of Crestpointe. That donation — from an entity with a financial interest in the referendum results — is substantially smaller than the $159,026 that Crown American Properties gave to the “vote yes” side in the 2002 bond referendum, and which was disclosed on July 29, 2002, shortly before the election. (This would not happen in a candidate’s campaign. Tennessee corporations are prohibited from contributing to candidates, and candidates in local elections may not receive contributions over $1000, but there are few restrictions on donations to referendum committees.)
A scanned image of FOR’s full financial disclosure is circulating on the Internet. Commendably (and noteworthy for the extra work it created for the campaign treasurer), F.O.R. reported all contributions received, including those of $100 or less, which are not required to be reported.
While some of F.O.R.’s contributors are genuine “grassroots” local citizens, the F.O.R. report shows that the majority of the group’s funds came from other business sources that do not seem very “grassrootsy.” In addition to Franklin Land Associates (affiliated with GBT), major contributors include:
Oak Ridge Chamber of Commerce — $2000
Bristol Park (Franklin, TN-based developers of the new apartments on Emory Valley Rd next to SAIC) — $2000
Len Hart (local real estate developer) — $1000
Scientific Technical Resources (one of the business interests of Nathaniel Revis, who is the apparent owner of the land where Crestpointe would be built) — $1000
Akins Crisp Public Strategies (Knoxville public relations firm) — $1000
Broadberry Development Company, LLC, Maryville (an affiliate of Rarity Properties, apparently established to develop Rarity Ridge in Oak Ridge) — $1000
Wackenhut Services, Inc. (federal government contractor that provides guards and other security services at local DOE facilities) — $1000
Rogers Group, Inc. (local supplier of quarried rock, asphalt, etc.) — $1000
Those contributions of $1000 and above accounted for fully $20,000 of F.O.R.’s $27,285 in total receipts.
============================
ADDED on June 4:
Some political jurisdictions don’t look so kindly on the idea of businesses with vested interests bankrolling political campaigns. A recent article in the New York Times reports that New York City is considering a proposal to set special contribution limits for people with city business, including contractors, lobbyists, and developers. That type of limitation would have interesting repercussions here, where some candidates and referendum campaigns are heavily backed by a roster of people who are perceived to have a financial interest (far beyond that of “taxpayer”) in the actions of local government.
Over on the Oak Ridger online forums, there’s been some discussion of the City’s apparent intention to get part of the proposed funding for the Crestpointe (”Target”) shopping center from money collected for the high school rebuild project. (As I explained in an earlier post here, in discussion with Mr. Steve Jenkins of the city staff, I ascertained that the $8 million is in fact the nest egg established in the City’s debt service fund as part of the financing plan for the high-school rebuild project. As I now think I understand it, instead of continuing to invest this money in financial instruments, the City proposes to use it for the Crestpointe project, confident in the expectation that future property taxes from the shopping center will replenish the principal amount and that future sales taxes from the shopping center will replace the interest that the money would otherwise earn, all in time to make payments on the bonds for the school project.)
Pseudonymous forum participant “CrackerNation,” who sometimes represents him/herself as a knowledgable city insider (and who also posts comments here under the alias “Cracker”), has suggested that this is perfectly OK: “Who cares which tax fed money into reserve funds if they are replaced before the money is needed for other purposes?”
It’s not OK. As I pointed out over there, in 2004 Oak Ridgers voted
“…to increase the local option sales tax rate in those portions of the City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, that lie in Anderson County, Tennessee, from 2.25 percent to 2.75 percent; provided, however, the revenue from such increase shall be appropriated and expended for the purpose of funding and paying for construction, renovation, purchase of capital equipment, and/or retirement of school construction debt service for the Oak Ridge High School…”
Nowhere in that ballot question did it say that the revenue from the tax increase could “be appropriated and expended for some other purpose that city leaders think will probably increase overall city revenue enough to fund and pay for construction, renovation, etc., at such time as the bills come due.”
I believe that if the City Council decides to use this money for the Crestpointe project or another commercial development, the action could be challenged in court — and that legal challenge would have a high probability of success. Furthermore, I am sure that many citizens who voted for that 2004 referendum would conclude that the City had violated the public trust. The tax approved for the high school should not become a slush fund for City officials, and the City’s governing body should not take deliberate actions that subject the City to serious litigation risk.
There are valid reasons for limitations and controls on the expenditure of public money. Without restrictions on investment of public funds, the logical next stop in CrackerNation’s reason would be to say that Oak Ridge citizens should not care if city staff withdraw money from the city treasury and take it to Las Vegas to “invest” at the roulette table, as long as they expect to replace it before the money is needed for other purposes. Subsidizing a private development with money dedicated to a school project is a large step down that dangerous path — let’s not take that step.
============================
UPDATE on Monday, June 4:
One of our local news outlets (the News Sentinel) has finally picked up the story of the city’s intention to get some of the funding for Crestpointe from money dedicated to the high school rebuild project. Hurray for Bob Fowler! (Hindsight indicates that COR should have gone to Bob Fowler with the story earlier, instead of concentrating on trying to convince The Oak Ridger to run the story.)
It is clear from staff statements in the article that the mysterious “reserve fund” that they would use for Crestpointe is (at least in part) money from the tax increase that voters agreed to accept with the proviso that it be used only for rebuilding the high school. Here are some quotations from the article:
“I am positive you can loan this (debt reserve) money to yourself and pay it back, and that’s what we’re talking about here,” Deputy City Manager Steve Jenkins said.
“Even assuming they’re right, it just changes the mode of financing,” City Attorney Ken Krushenski said. “It’s not a deal-killer.”
City bond counsel Mark Mamantov said the city’s sales tax increase for schools “has been supplanted” by a county sales tax increase approved in a later referendum.
It is interesting that Jenkins said “you can loan money to yourself and pay it back.” Anyone who has ever borrowed money knows that it needs to be paid back with interest. When one city fund borrows from another, the money should be paid back with interest. However, Jenkins has claimed in earlier discussions that this is not really a loan (and therefore need not be paid back with interest).
Krushenski correctly says “it’s not a deal-killer” (presumably meaning that if the bond issue referendum passes, the city could go back to its original plan of borrowing the full $6 million and using it for this project). However, the city continues to promote the idea of a full payback from property tax alone over just 15 years, which depends on (among other questionable premises) the false notion (promulgated by city staff) that the city can borrow $8 million from itself interest-free.
Regarding Mamantov’s comment, back in 2004 it was expected that the county would supersede sooner or later (for example, see my earlier comments at http://www.ellensmith.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12), with the result that annual income to the school debt service fund would drop off after the first few years. Unfortunately, the county superseded sooner instead of later… I don’t recall anyone telling the citizenry in 2004 that after the county superseded the tax, the city’s use of the money would no longer be restricted to its dedicated purpose.
