The broken promises (or dreams?) of Rarity

Rarity Properties came to Oak Ridge promising wonderful new residential developments that would be built in an environmentally sustainable manner, first at Rarity Ridge on the Clinch River at the far western perimeter of the city (west of K-25) and later at Rarity Oaks (west of the Oak Ridge Country Club). Those promises (or should I say dreams?) are  not being kept. It’s no secret that I questioned their claims of sustainability and objected to various other aspects of their proposals (all this before I was on City Council), but once they were approved I have had to hope for their success. With that background, it gives me no pleasure to see the company’s financial troubles with its development near Chattanooga — and now serious environmental troubles here in Oak Ridge.

The Tennessee Clean Water Network (TCWN) has sent a formal complaint to the state of Tennessee against Oak Ridge Land Company (an LLC related to Rarity Properties) for its development of Rarity Ridge, documenting chronic failure — over several years — to comply with legal requirements intended to prevent soil erosion and sediment runoff. TCWN’s photos show failures and absence of silt fences and other controls and large amounts of mud washing onto roads and drainageways — and ultimately into the Clinch River.  Not only is this harmful to the natural environment, but it is damaging the road infrastructure that is supposed to be dedicated to the city — and may already belong to the city. According to TCWN’s letter, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) issued a consent order in May 2005 about these that was supposed to resolve violations like these, but the violations are continuing four years later.

Rarity also is under another enforcement order from TDEC, issued in 2007, that initially carried total financial damages and penalties of up to more than $180,000 (but was reduced on appeal to $108,000, of which all but $33,000 will be waived if Rarity complies with the requirements of the Order)*. for clean water violations at Rarity Oaks — where plenty of earth has been moved and roads are in place, but no homes have been built yet (as far as I know). The Rarity Oaks consent order cites violations including altering waters of the state by starting to build a bridge without a permit to do so, excavating a spring-fed stream, and discharging sediment (a pollutant under the law) into East Fork Poplar Creek and its Pinhook Branch tributary.
*edited on September 1, 2009

I hope that Rarity has the financial resources to repair at least some of the damage it has done to the local environment and that the company will make good on its promises to create quality residential communities.  I also very much hope that the city and the citizens won’t get stuck with a mess at either of these sites. And I hope that my fellow city leaders will be a little less trusting the next time a smart businessman shows up and promises a dream of a deal…

Added on September 1, 2009: It wouldn’t be so bad if Rarity was the only local developer violating environmental rules, but that’s not the case. As Tuesday’s Oak Ridger pointed out, at least one of the development projects north of Edgemoor Road was also fined a much smaller amount in 2008 ($4,000 immediately and $27,000 to be paid if the situation was not remediated by certain deadlines) by TDEC for clean water violations. The newspaper article and the state order posted on the TDEC website identify different developers as the responsible party, so there’s no value in my naming names –  I’m just feeling ashamed that some of these violations have happened while I have been in a leadership role in the city government that OKed these developments.

Referendum on guns in city parks?

Thursday’s Oak Ridge Observer reported that Alex Moseley  is circulating a petition to force a referendum on the matter of whether handgun carry permit holders should be allowed to carry guns in Oak Ridge city parks.  The strange thing about this news is that there is no provision in the city charter — and apparently not in state law, either — for citizens to petition for a referendum to override the City Council resolution to “opt out” of the state law that would otherwise allow permit holders to carry guns in parks.

State law does allow citizens to petition for referendums over general obligation bond issues (that law was the basis for the Crestpointe referendum in 2007 and the referendum on the mall project several years before that) , but nothing allows for a referendum over any other type of City Council action (otherwise, we’d probably have  referendums in Oak Ridge almost every month).  Furthermore, the city attorney tells me that the General Assembly didn’t put any  provision for a referendum in the state law that allows guns in parks.

The charter does have a provision allowing for recall petitions against City Council members, and it was rumored that handgun advocates were going to try to recall those of us who voted to keep guns out of our parks. However, the newspaper article clearly indicates that Moseley isn’t pursuing a recall campaign. The article goes into great detail on the requirements that Moseley’s pettition would need to meet (2,610 signatures in 60 days) and how he expects to use the Memphis Commercial Appeal’s database to identify the local handgun permit holders who are assumed to support the proposed referendum. Also, there’s an editorial suggesting that the referendum will teach City Council that we should follow “the will of the people”.  What’s missing is any  indication of the supposed legal basis for this petition drive and referendum.

It’s hard to believe that Moseley, who was the Republican nominee for the Tennessee House of Representatives last year, is unaware of the law.

Oh, and as long as assertions are being made about the “will of the people” regarding this measure, it should be noted that the great majority (well over 60%) of the many people who contacted me about the opt-out resolution  favored opting out (that is they opposed allowing guns in our city parks).

I suppose  maybe we can  chalk this story up to  confusion caused by the long hot days of August…

Alexander Inn on YouTube

This video of the Alexander Inn makes me sad…