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.
I usually shrug it off when a newspaper quotes me in a way that I think does not effectively represent my statements, but some of the comments attributed to me in an article in today’s paper have only a vague resemblance to what I remember saying to a reporter over the telephone.
The article describes my answer to the question “Oak Ridge could lose workers when cleanup work at the former K-25 site is completed, possibly in 2010. What can the city do to help keep the employment base relatively stable?” as follows:
Candidate Ellen Smith said cleanup work at the K-25 site, which includes building demolitions, fits into plans to reindustrialize the property.
“Clearly we do need to continue the environmental management program,” Smith said.
But there are more serious problems at the Y-12 National Security Complex and Oak Ridge National Laboratory, she said. The sites have not been added to DOE’s cleanup plan, but doing so would help keep cleanup workers employed, reduce contractor costs and limit the potential for future environmental risks, Smith said.
Oak Ridge officials could continue encouraging federal officials to add Y-12 and ORNL facilities to DOE’s environmental management program, she said.
What I remember saying was roughly as follows:
Employment by Bechtel Jacobs and its subcontractors is already declining and is scheduled to continue to decline under current program plans for the Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management (i.e., cleanup) program.
Projects at the K-25 site, particularly decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of facilities, received high priority in the current Environmental Management program because of the priority that was placed on K-25 reindustrialization, but similar D&D needs at the Y-12 and ORNL sites are not currently in the Environmental Management program’s scope. (I note that the article suggests that there has been no cleanup at Y-12 and ORNL, but that’s not true. Substantial progress has been made in addressing contaminated sites at both locations.)
It has been proposed that those Y-12 and ORNL projects should be added to the Environmental Management program’s scope. Funding those projects would help retain local jobs for the specialized contractor workforce that has been supporting the DOE cleanup program. At the same time, these measures would help reduce future environmental risks and would reduce costs (for monitoring, maintenance, and security) that currently must be absorbed in the budgets for ongoing operations of Y-12 and ORNL.
In response to the reporter’s follow-up question on what the City of Oak Ridge could do about this situation, I did say that Oak Ridge officials could continue encouraging federal officials to add Y-12 and ORNL facilities to DOE’s Environmental Management program.
Residents of the South Lansing Road area got some good news* yesterday when the Board of Zoning Appeals denied an application for an exception to allow a for-profit halfway house for recovering substance abusers to continue operating in the neighborhood. This means that the second of two for-profit halfway houses in the area will have to shut down or relocate.
These halfway houses opened up illegally — the operator did not bother to try to get BZA approval before opening. Based on the number of arrests and complaints related to these establishments and their residents, it appears that the halfway-house operator also cut corners when it came to screening and supervising the residents. 
I’m very glad to hear the news that this outfit is being shut down. However, I fear that this particular bad operation may give all halfway houses a bad reputation in the community. That would be unfortunate. Properly operated halfway houses make our community a safer place, because they are an important part of the system that helps substance abusers return to being productive members of the community. This particular neighborhood has hosted a couple of well-operated not-for-profit halfway houses for many years without problems. Let’s hope they can continue that record for many years in the future.
*Also reported by The Oak Ridger on April 19th.
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.
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.
It looks like the long strike at Boeing might be coming to an end, but with the result that about 205 local jobs (180 union jobs and 25 salaried positions) will be lost. This is painful news as the holiday season approaches.
