E-mail from the city manager indicates that the Redflex traffic enforcement cameras are installed and being tested. It looks like they will be ready to start issuing warnings some time later this week (the $50 penalties won’t come until after about a month of warnings-only operation). Cameras at the Illinois-Robertsville and Turnpike-Lafayette intersections will monitor both red-light compliance and speed, while the cameras on Robertsville Road near Willowbrook Elementary School and on Oak Ridge Turnpike next to Oak Ridge High School will just monitor speed.
Update on Tuesday, April 28 – Information we received today suggests that they won’t start issuing warnings until the week of May 11th.
Update on Saturday, May 2 – Information sent yesterday indicates that the red-light cameras are now running — for testing and for issuing warnings. (It looks like I was right the first time.)
Oak Ridge, we have some candidates this year — candidates for City Council and school board in the June 2, 2009 city election, and possibly even a local candidate for U.S. Congress in fall 2010.
Before talking about the candidates, I must stop and remember the two long-time public servants who decided not to stand for re-election: Councilman Willie Golden and School Board member and chairman John Smith (no relation). Both have dedicated large amounts of time and effort to city affairs, and they will be missed. Willie Golden commands a great deal of personal respect in the community, stemming from his days of high school athletic glory (when he was the first African-American student to captain an Oak Ridge High School varsity team) and his many years running recreation programs as a member of the city staff, extending into his public service in recent years on the City Council and in the Anderson County court system. I’ll miss the wisdom and caring concern he has shown as a member of Council. I’ve not observed John Smith as closely, but I’ve been continually impressed by his constant dedication and conscientious hard work on behalf of our children and our schools. Both he and Willie deserve our gratitude.
Impressively, there are 10 people running for 4 seats on City Council, including 3 incumbents. I attended last Thursday’s Democracy for East Tennessee candidate event to meet the City Council candidates that I didn’t already know, and to hear what the candidates had to say about themselves and the city. It looks to me like this Council election is shaping up as an exciting exercise in grassroots politics — this is a capable collection of candidates who decided to run for a diverse variety of civic-minded reasons. All seem to have the ability to serve effectively, but they differ in their awareness/knowledge of city affairs and issues, personality, life experience, and philosophies on the city’s future. (More later about my personal impressions.)
For school board, voters also have a choice — there are 5 candidates (including two incumbents) for 3 slots. DFET is tentatively planning a school board candidates’ event for May 5th (timing will overlap with the next City Council Night Out) and the League of Women Voters will hold two forums just before early voting begins in mid-May.
With the focus on the local election, I imagine that many missed the news of the possibility of an Oak Ridger reprsenting us in Congress (instead of someone from the Chattanooga end of the district). Georgiana Vines reported in the News Sentinel that Oak Ridge resident Paula Flowers is among the folks actively exploring the possibility of running for Zach Wamp’s Congressional seat in 2010, now that Wamp has announced that he will not seek re-election. Flowers has experience statewide as the former head of the state Department of Commerce and Insurance, and she impressed a lot of Oak Ridge politics-watchers when she ran for the Oak Ridge Charter Commission last year. I’ve heard speculation about whether she would be running for city office in the future. With that background, I expect there will be a lot of local support for her if she does run for Congress. Go, Paula!
The City’s annual curbside brush pickup starts Monday, April 27, with the Burnham Woods and Scarboro neighborhoods scheduled for that first day. The schedule runs five full weeks, through the end of May. In addition to tree limbs, the crews will collect “yard clippings” and leaves if they are in plastic bags. Full details are on the city website.
I’ve already heard from one citizen with a question about an item on the April 13 City Council agenda (the agenda was posted Friday), so I guess it’s high time to discuss some of the business items. There’s a rezoning, action on the Chamber of Commerce contract, numerous bids and contracts including purchase of new police vehicles, “and much more.” Here are my musings about a few of these items (I’m interested in hearing what other residents think):
Rezoning request (updated April 7th)
The proposed rezoning is for a 1.25-acre lot at the corner of Tulsa Road and Tusculum Drive (there was a rezoning sign on the property, which is next to the entrance to the Burnham Woods subdivision, but I didn’t see the sign on Saturday). Requested rezoning is from R-4-B (multiple family residential) to O-2 (office district), to allow SMB Group (a construction contractor) to build a company office. (The company now has its office in the building at 100 Tulsa Road, at the corner of Tulsa and South Illinois Ave.) In addition to offices, permitted principal uses in the O-2 zone include multi-family dwellings, churches, hotels, day care facilities, and barber/beauty shops.
The Planning Commission recommended the rezoning by a unanimous vote at its March 26th meeting. The impact of the rezoning isn’t entirely clear. The R-4-B zone is supposed to be phased out, and uses in the new R-4 zone (which presumably would replace R-4-B) are pretty much the same as in the O-2 zone. The biggest difference I see are (1) in the R-4 zone buildings can occupy no more than 50% of the property, but the O-2 zone allows them to cover up to 80%, and (2) building plans in the O-2 zone require Planning Commission approval, but only staff review is required in the R-4 zone.
One possible concern is that the lot is mapped as being in the floodplain (of East Fork Poplar Creek and Gamble Valley Creek), but outside the floodway. Oak Ridge’s zoning ordinance does not restrict development in the portion of the floodplain outside the floodway (this is called the “floodway fringe”), as long as the ground floor is at least 1 ft about the calculated height of the 100-year flood. Fill already placed on the lot appears to have raised it above the flood level, so this is no longer a concern. The contamination (by mercury and PCBs released from the Y-12 Plant) in the floodplain of East Fork Poplar Creek also should not be a concern because the project should not disturb soils.
We’ll learn more about the rezoning proposal at the City Council agenda review work session on Monday, April 6 (6:30 pm in the City Services Center on Woodbury Lane, behind K-Mart), and there’ll be a public hearing at the April 13th City Council meeting (7 pm in the municipal building courtroom).
Chamber of Commerce contract
The City of Oak Ridge has a contract with the Oak Ridge Chamber of Commerce under which the Chamber (including the affiliated Oak Ridge Economic Partnership) provides economic development services to the City. The current contract is worth over $250,000 annually, including a $20,000 addition that the Council approved by a 5-2 vote in January of this year (Tom Hayes and I were the two who opposed this) to help fund an additional staff member to support the Chamber’s “Live Where You Work” residential recruitment program. The current contract expires June 30, 2009. It could be renewed for an additional year, but the Chamber wants to negotiate a new 3-year contract to begin July 1. City Manager Jim O’Connor is asking for Council authorization to negotiate with the Chamber to determine which option is in the City’s best interest.
Although it’s unlikely that meaningful changes will be made between now and July 1st, I hope to re-open meaningful dialog on the purpose and scope of the City’s relationship with the Chamber. Many residents question the City’s whole relationship with the Chamber of Commerce, asking whether it’s in the public interest to subsidize a chamber of commerce, which is fundamentally operated for the benefit of its membership. The cost of the contract and its benefit to the city are also perennial concerns. The rationale for the contractual relationship with the Chamber has to do with a concern that open-government laws would conflict with the need for confidentiality in business recruitment, as well as a perception that city government is inherently not very good at economic development. I think there is merit in this rationale, but it does appear to me that the City is essentially subsidizing the chamber without having a clear picture of what the public is getting for its money.
Much effort went into creating quantitative performance metrics for the current contract. It’s clear to me that it’s a lot of work for the Chamber to calculate and report those metrics (it turns out that the statistics they are asked to report are not readily available or easily determined), but it’s not clear that the metrics serve the intended purpose of ensuring that the City’s objectives are being met. I think the metrics need to be revisited.
I’d also like to see emphasis placed on helping local businesses (both new start-ups and long-existing companies) succeed, whether or not they are Chamber members. It’s an unfortunate fact of life that many small businesses fail, but if local government resources are being spent on supporting business development, we should be helping existing small businesses (folks who have already invested in this city) avoid the types of mistakes that often lead to doom. Also, we should be helping local retail businesses promote themselves through measures like improved signage, special events, and “shop Oak Ridge” campaigns.
The “Live Where You Work” campaign is a great initiative (and long overdue), but I would have preferred to see it included in the current contract (which was supposed to include residential recruitment), instead of being added on as if it were an extra activity. I am waiting to hear whether the Chamber and City Manager want to enlarge the contract on a permanent basis, or if the $20,000 is a one-time thing (as Council was told back in January).
New police vehicles
Council is being asked to approve bid awards to spend $186,000 to buy six new Ford Crown Victorias (equipped for police use) and two Chevy Tahoes.
The Crown Victorias would replace some existing police cars (including some that have already broken down). Replacement of these cars is included in the City budget. I’m unclear on the purpose of the Chevy Tahoes, but the documentation indicates that the police would like to buy a third Tahoe if the city gets a federal grant. The bid prices for all of the vehicles are exceptionally low, so the City would get a good deal on the purchases.
It’s clear that our police vehicles need to be replaced on a regular basis, and that these bids are a pretty good deal, but I question the business-as-usual approach of continuing to buy new gas-guzzling Crown Victorias and SUVs. Two new directions that we should be exploring are (1) greater fuel efficiency and (2) take-home vehicles.
Fuel-efficient wheels for police. After experiencing last year’s high gas prices, and in face of the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, many police forces around the country and the world are testing more fuel-efficient cars for police use. This includes our local Anderson County Sheriff’s Department, which is trying out Dodge Chargers for patrol use. The Charger is a muscle car like the Crown Victoria, but it is rated as more fuel-efficient. Some other jurisdictions are testing smaller vehicles and hybrids for police use, including Chevy Impalas in Mobile, Alabama, the Pontiac Vibe in Cahokia, Illinois, and Toyota Camry hybrids in Salt Lake City, and even the Toyota Prius in Marion County, Florida. I know that police officers like their Crown Victoria, but if other vehicles meet the performance requirements of police work without using as much fuel, they can both save money and help reduce our impact on global climate and air quality.
Take-home vehicles. In a meeting some time back, I was surprised to hear Police Chief David Beams say that it would be possible to stretch the service life of some police cruisers by assigning them to police officers as take-home vehicles. Take-home vehicles would last longer because they would be used for only one shift (instead of being used around the clock). There’s plenty of support for this idea. In addition to saving on vehicle replacement costs, this could increase the police force’s ability to respond to unusual incidents, as officers called in from home could respond quickly. Only officers who live in Oak Ridge city limits should be eligible to take vehicles home, they should be used only to travel to and from work, and a police officer in a vehicle would have to be required to respond to any incidents he or she observes while in the vehicle. For those who qualified, a take-home car could become an added fringe benefit — this would even provide a tangible incentive for our men and women in blue to live inside the city. A take-home program wouldn’t eliminate the need to replace six cars this year, but it might be worth trying out on a small scale to see if it’s truly beneficial.
