Eminent Domain Abuse Alleged By Tennessee Valley Authority
Apropos Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's proposition that a Gulf Coast Restoration Authority be formed, there's quite an interesting little trove of docs along these lines. And I think that's what the snail darter controversy was partly all about.
Copyright 2005 Knoxville News-Sentinel Co.
Knoxville News-Sentinel (Tennessee)
January 23, 2005 Sunday
Five-star Edition
SECTION: PERSPECTIVE; Pg. G2
LENGTH: 742 words
HEADLINE: Selling TVA lands not in keeping with public trust
BODY:
The public trust is not to be trifled with.
We're talking about the sale of public lands that have been acquired by eminent domain, specifically the Tennessee Valley Authority's recent foray into selling or trading public lands to developers.
At TVA's board meeting Tuesday, conservationists protested a proposed land swap at Nickajack Reservoir in Marion County near Chattanooga. A developer is asking TVA to swap 701 acres of Nickajack land for two pieces of land he owns in Marion County totaling 832 acres. The developer plans to build condominiums, expensive lakefront homes and a golf course.
Conservationists said they want TVA to stop allowing private development of its land and said board members should continue managing TVA in a historical preservation role. At the board meeting Tuesday, they had more ammunition than the Nickajack project.
A land swap already has been completed at Rarity Pointe on Tellico Lake. The TVA board agreed to a deal, and development is under way. Conservationists also mentioned a proposal by Meigs and Rhea counties to develop some 1,500 acres around Watts Bar Reservoir. The TVA board may make a decision in May on that case.
"We're opposed to the board policy of selling public land that you own for private development with the public being evicted," said William Minser of Blount County, a member of the policy board of the Tennessee Wildlife Federation.
"TVA has acquired more than 1 million acres through eminent domain and adverse condemnation, with 293,000 acres remaining for public use around the lakes," he continued. "The citizens of Tennessee have stated through the General Assembly these wildlife lands are important, and they have stated in many ways that they want to keep it for public use. Yet your agency is pursuing a policy to market and sell public TVA land."
American Indians also spoke at the meeting, saying that allowing the Nickajack land to be developed would increase the destruction of land with Indian cultural sites.
Although the Nickajack proposal was discussed at Tuesday's board meeting, board members said in a press conference no decision has been made.
TVA Director Bill Baxter responded, "There is no policy to sell off the land. The policy is to preserve land. We respond to communities when proposals are made."
However, in a piece written for the News Sentinel's Perspective section Sept. 21, 2003, the executive director of the Tennessee Conservation League wrote, "By any measure, public comments regarding the sale of these public lands are overwhelmingly in opposition."
Michael Butler was writing specifically about the Rarity Pointe project. "The National Environmental Policy Act requires TVA to gather public comment," he wrote. "Unfortunately, it does not require TVA to listen to the public comments."
Baxter defended the practice of selling select pieces of TVA land in The Chattanooga Times Free Press in December. "This is a very attractive region of the country for many baby boomers entering their retirement years. Obviously these types of developments, if done in an environmentally and economically sensitive manner, can bring a lot of new jobs and investment to these communities," he told the newspaper.
We disagree, and so, apparently, does Craven Crowell, a former TVA chairman who five years ago halted efforts to sell land on the Nickajack and Tellico reservoirs.
"The easiest thing to do on the TVA board is to give this land up for private developers who are eager to get every inch of lakefront property they can get," Crowell said in December. "It's always a difficult balance between development and preservation. But I guess I always thought that, since TVA sometimes uses its power of eminent domain to acquire the land, we should err on the side of protection over development."
We think that's a sound policy, especially since such a large segment of the public agrees.
Eminent domain is a powerful tool of the government, and it has the ability to do much that is beneficial in the creation of facilities for the public good. But eminent domain also is a covenant.
When land is taken from an individual for the public good, the government has an obligation to preserve the integrity of that bargain. Selling that land later -- especially for luxury developments that benefit primarily the wealthy -- is a violation not only of the individual covenant but also of the public trust.
Public lands should not be for sale, and neither should the public trust.
Copyright 2005 Knoxville News-Sentinel Co.
Knoxville News-Sentinel (Tennessee)
January 23, 2005 Sunday
Five-star Edition
SECTION: PERSPECTIVE; Pg. G2
LENGTH: 742 words
HEADLINE: Selling TVA lands not in keeping with public trust
BODY:
The public trust is not to be trifled with.
We're talking about the sale of public lands that have been acquired by eminent domain, specifically the Tennessee Valley Authority's recent foray into selling or trading public lands to developers.
At TVA's board meeting Tuesday, conservationists protested a proposed land swap at Nickajack Reservoir in Marion County near Chattanooga. A developer is asking TVA to swap 701 acres of Nickajack land for two pieces of land he owns in Marion County totaling 832 acres. The developer plans to build condominiums, expensive lakefront homes and a golf course.
Conservationists said they want TVA to stop allowing private development of its land and said board members should continue managing TVA in a historical preservation role. At the board meeting Tuesday, they had more ammunition than the Nickajack project.
A land swap already has been completed at Rarity Pointe on Tellico Lake. The TVA board agreed to a deal, and development is under way. Conservationists also mentioned a proposal by Meigs and Rhea counties to develop some 1,500 acres around Watts Bar Reservoir. The TVA board may make a decision in May on that case.
"We're opposed to the board policy of selling public land that you own for private development with the public being evicted," said William Minser of Blount County, a member of the policy board of the Tennessee Wildlife Federation.
"TVA has acquired more than 1 million acres through eminent domain and adverse condemnation, with 293,000 acres remaining for public use around the lakes," he continued. "The citizens of Tennessee have stated through the General Assembly these wildlife lands are important, and they have stated in many ways that they want to keep it for public use. Yet your agency is pursuing a policy to market and sell public TVA land."
American Indians also spoke at the meeting, saying that allowing the Nickajack land to be developed would increase the destruction of land with Indian cultural sites.
Although the Nickajack proposal was discussed at Tuesday's board meeting, board members said in a press conference no decision has been made.
TVA Director Bill Baxter responded, "There is no policy to sell off the land. The policy is to preserve land. We respond to communities when proposals are made."
However, in a piece written for the News Sentinel's Perspective section Sept. 21, 2003, the executive director of the Tennessee Conservation League wrote, "By any measure, public comments regarding the sale of these public lands are overwhelmingly in opposition."
Michael Butler was writing specifically about the Rarity Pointe project. "The National Environmental Policy Act requires TVA to gather public comment," he wrote. "Unfortunately, it does not require TVA to listen to the public comments."
Baxter defended the practice of selling select pieces of TVA land in The Chattanooga Times Free Press in December. "This is a very attractive region of the country for many baby boomers entering their retirement years. Obviously these types of developments, if done in an environmentally and economically sensitive manner, can bring a lot of new jobs and investment to these communities," he told the newspaper.
We disagree, and so, apparently, does Craven Crowell, a former TVA chairman who five years ago halted efforts to sell land on the Nickajack and Tellico reservoirs.
"The easiest thing to do on the TVA board is to give this land up for private developers who are eager to get every inch of lakefront property they can get," Crowell said in December. "It's always a difficult balance between development and preservation. But I guess I always thought that, since TVA sometimes uses its power of eminent domain to acquire the land, we should err on the side of protection over development."
We think that's a sound policy, especially since such a large segment of the public agrees.
Eminent domain is a powerful tool of the government, and it has the ability to do much that is beneficial in the creation of facilities for the public good. But eminent domain also is a covenant.
When land is taken from an individual for the public good, the government has an obligation to preserve the integrity of that bargain. Selling that land later -- especially for luxury developments that benefit primarily the wealthy -- is a violation not only of the individual covenant but also of the public trust.
Public lands should not be for sale, and neither should the public trust.