The IDA, Additional Industry, Concerned Property Owners, and Questions of Zoning

By LYDIA BERGLAR
News Editor

As a result of the October 16 meeting of the Industrial Development Authority, the Sentinel interviewed Shan and Joni Anderson and Tracy Blevins together, Evan Stone (executive director of the IDA) and Robin Rogers (IDA attorney) together, James Cantrell (IDA chairman) via phone, and Ted Rumley (county executive) regarding the concerns that Anderson and other citizens brought before the IDA.

See the October 25th issue of the Sentinel for a recap of the meeting, and refer to Anderson’s speech at the November Dade County Board of Commissioners meeting for further background.

The IDA sent a response letter to Anderson (as printed in last week’s Sentinel). When asked what he thought about the letter, Anderson said, “In the letter, they didn’t respond to the eight yes or no questions. Unless they answer those eight questions, there’s no proof that they’ve done any of them. I asked in the meeting if they had a current study that shows that we need industry. They don’t have a current study.”

Anderson explained that he had asked these questions in conversations leading up to the meeting but had not heard answers.

The Sentinel asked Cantrell, “The response letter didn’t address all of Shan’s particular questions. Is the IDA planning on responding to those comments?”

Cantrell explained that the IDA had decided not to respond during the meeting to prevent an overly long meeting.

He furthered, “Mr. Back, our recording secretary, wrote everything down. Most of Shan’s questions were a yes or no answer…Some of the studies we may should’ve done, but we didn’t. 70 to 80 percent of what he’s asking, we’ve done. The few things we did not do I don’t think would hinder us moving forward.”

In response to one of Anderson’s questions, he noted that William Back (IDA secretary) had thoroughly walked the property, saying, “We told Shan that Mr. Back did a presentation to the board before we ever bought the property.” Anderson noted that Back is not a current voting board member, and he had asked if any current members walked the property.

Cantrell continued, “There’s industry all up Highway 11, from Handyman Salvage to automotive shops. There are commercial businesses even on past there. We’re really trying to stay in what is considered a commercial thoroughfare. We didn’t do a soil sample or perc test because we felt like there would be sewer up there so we wouldn’t even need to do that.”

The Sentinel asked, “Was the IDA aware of the power line easement at the time of purchase?”

Cantrell responded, “Yes. That easement can be moved. We’ve already had contact with Georgia Power. That’s not an issue.”

As some background about the IDA, Cantrell noted that the IDA members are appointed by the county commission, saying, “We technically work under [the county’s] guidance. They don’t come to our meetings and tell us don’t do this and do that, but I try to make sure that Evan, as the executive director, keeps Ted informed and involved so he and the whole county commission knows step-by-step what we’re doing prior to doing it.”

Rumley added, “They are an authority. They can own land and buy land. Just like the water authority, if we feel like there needs to be an audit, we can pull in anytime because we are the governing authority. We have a right to pull a board member off if they miss three meetings in a row, but the only other way is if they’re indicted or commit a crime.”

The Sentinel asked Stone and Rogers, “Do we have to have an IDA or is it something individual counties are wanting?”

Stone replied, “IDAs are to give counties an opportunity to attract industrial development. The IDA has a lot of authority based on tax abatement. They’re the only authority in the county that can abate taxes for industrial growth under certain parameters.”

The Sentinel further asked, “Are IDA’s for the good of the individual counties, or was the state saying we need to grow industry?”

Stone replied, “I think the IDA’s main job is to navigate and bring industrial growth to the county to enhance the quality of life. 2,600 people who live outside of the county are employed in Dade, while 4,000 people who live in Dade County leave the county to work.”

The Sentinel asked why this is a problem, which Stone did not directly answer. He said, “Some people look at it as, ‘I like it here.’ I think better paying jobs and the quality of type of jobs we can offer, I know that this board looks at that every time we meet. When we get a request for information, (I get those all the time), I’ll bring everything I get to the board, but the board may say, ‘We’re not interested in 200 jobs at minimum wage.’”

Of this topic, Cantrell said, “We want to give every Dade Countian an opportunity to work in the county if that’s what they wanted to do. A company is looking at Dade County up at 299. [Industry builds] a tax base which means better roads, better water, better for everybody.”

Rumley furthered, “It would be us not doing our job if we didn’t give them the choice [to work in the county or drive outside the county].”

However, Blevins said, “If we didn’t want to live in this community, we could go live in Chattanooga. That’s why this is a small town, and our industry should be contained to an industrial park so we can enjoy the beauty of Dade County. When I was growing up, my parents drove to Chattanooga to work. A lot of people commute, and they get to come back to this beautiful place.”

The Sentinel asked Anderson if he would ever want to serve on the IDA. He said, “I would consider it, but the problem is that I believe in transparency and communication. I would make every effort to make sure all impacted individuals are consulted. Then, if I’m looking at something I’m not sure about, I’m going to find somebody who is. There’s nothing that restricts the IDA from reaching out and asking for expertise.”

The Andersons and Blevins noted that while they knew that the IDA existed prior to the July purchase of the Price Farm, they had not closely followed IDA dealings. Anderson said, “I envisioned them working in the current park, not integrating industry with residential neighborhoods.”

Regarding the IDA’s executive sessions, Anderson said, “Their justification is that if they go tell the commissioners in public, somebody will run and buy that piece of property for a higher price. The IDA can only purchase at fair market value. I understand that, but what they could do is put earnest money on the property, go to the commission, make it transparent what they’re doing, do all these studies, and then come back and say it’s a viable option or not. If they back away from it, the only thing they’re out is that earnest money.”

Stone said, “The word ‘secrecy’ has come up, but anything the IDA does is voted on in public after coming out of executive session.”

Rogers added, “There are limited items we can discuss in executive session, typically dealing with acquisition of land or infrastructure, and one of my jobs is to make sure we don’t go outside of that.”

Cantrell noted that the property had been for sale for six or seven years, and the IDA attempted to purchase it several years ago, but the price was too high at the time.

Along these lines, Rumley said, “The reason I feel good about that property is because it came close to having four mega chicken houses on it. The chicken houses do not go through the IDA. They keep it silent until it happens, and because it falls under agriculture, there’s nothing anybody could’ve done. They’re exempt from our code of ordinances. Now that the IDA has gotten this property, they can control it. Before, it was out of our hands and anybody else’s hands. I’d feel good about it if I lived by the property.”

Stone added, “Especially when it comes to agriculture, it wouldn’t even go to the special use permit board. If a private individual wanted to sell for agricultural use, there’s nothing anybody could do. That could be chicken houses, all kinds of different things. Up until about a couple years ago, nobody would have known, but the commission did put the special use permit board in.”

Anderson told the Sentinel that when he asked Stone and Rumley about the special use permit board, “neither fully understood the ordinances for it. Evan’s response was inaccurate to the ordinances of the SUPB.”

The Sentinel noted to the Andersons and Blevins that the lack of zoning in Dade County means anyone could have purchased the property to do with what they wanted.

Anderson replied, “You’re right. That’s always a possibility anywhere in the county because there’s no zoning. But in this situation, the county is doing something with a lack of due diligence that is knowingly going to impact already established adjacent homeowners. To me, that’s a whole different scenario.”

He added, “Zoning can be done in such a way that isn’t [micromanaging], and you can break it up into areas of the county. To do it right, you would need to go to the citizens and ask, ‘What can we do to protect you and your property?’”

The Sentinel asked Stone and later Cantrell if the IDA’s plans or perspectives have shifted since hearing from citizens. Stone said, “The IDA members are very aware of the concerns and very willing to look at these covenants to help as much as they could while still doing their jobs as board members.”

Cantrell said, “We’re going forward with the project. It’s going to be commercial property. We are going to make sure when we do covenants to protect any homes from noises and those kinds of things. We’ll do what we can to ensure we keep that at a minimum.”

Blevins told the Sentinel, “We need more than the ability to comment on covenants. One of us at least needs to be sitting with them because this directly affects our land, our taxes. Until we know what type of industry is even being considered, it’s hard to tailor covenants.”

The Sentinel repeated this desire to Stone and Rogers and asked if the board would consider having property owners with them when forming covenants. Stone replied, “Shan had reached out to us, and the board was open with the fact that if he has anything he would like [to see in the covenants], write them down and send them. This is the first time this board has written covenants because the ones in the industrial park were written years ago. They’re looking at that outline.”

Anderson said, “They’ve told us they can set covenants. I asked what those covenants are. They said they want my input. They sent me the rough draft of covenants, a copy of old covenants for the current industrial park which is no relation to integrating industry into residential areas. Case studies on stuff like this are hard to find, but I happened to come across one in Chicago. They’re a bigger city, they’ve got more income. They made a big boy purchase and backed it up with big boy covenants. Dade County is making big boy purchases with big boy ideas, but they don’t have the funds to put in big boy covenants.”

Anderson was prepared to share his ideas about covenants at the October meeting, but Cantrell cut him off after about 30 minutes and asked him to leave his notes with the IDA. Anderson said that he doesn’t want to raise problems without offering a solution. To the Sentinel, he explained four ways industry could impact adjacent properties: site, smell, sound, effect on property, and traffic patterns. He also explained the need for buffer zones to especially mitigate the impact of sound.

He cited research which shows that sound “decreases by six decibels each time the distance from the source doubles. Therefore, under normal conditions, you will probably be able to hear 80 decibels (the level at which ear protection is required per OSHA) up to 100 feet away. The hum of a refrigerator is an average of 40 decibels, so for me to be in my yard and not be disrupted by the industrial park, I don’t want to hear more than the hum of a refrigerator.”

The Chicago case study addressed this issue with expensive sound barrier walls. The cheaper option of buffer zones would limit the usable property. Additionally, these decisions all depend on what industry comes to the property. The IDA representatives all reported that they do not know at this time what industry will come to the property.

Anderson discussed property effects, noting that blasting the rock-laden land will affect the foundations of nearby homes. He said, “If they’re blasting behind Tracy’s house, they would have to do the study to show where they could blast without affecting her foundation which would limit how close they could do their blasting.”

He mentioned alternatives to blasting, but he believes that rock breaking and splitting would affect water flow. Anderson said, “Water travels subsurface around this area. I don’t know how it would affect the property.”

Finally, he noted that even high-quality covenants will not necessarily last forever. Periodically, the IDA must renew those covenants, and if the authority sells the property, the companies have free reign.

To this, Rogers said, “The trick is always to get covenants to last as long as possible. The IDA could retain some ownership in the property, but I don’t think we’re inclined to do that.”

Stone added, “After all of the abatements, that land will eventually go to the manufacturer.”

The Sentinel clarified, “Eventually, the companies could at some point do whatever they wanted when they’re not under covenants?”

Rogers replied, “They could, if we’re not able to keep them under covenants one way or another. There are various ways to do that.”

Stone added, “Currently, in the industrial park, the City of Trenton has zoning. Once all the covenants are off, it still would fall under the restrictions of zoning. Outside of the city would be up to the citizens of the county if they wanted to have land use restrictions.”

While pointing to the county’s book of ordinances sitting on his desk, Rumley said, “That book of ordinances right there, that’s one reason we’ve kept zoning out all these years because there are some pretty good restrictions right there on what can and can’t happen in the county. It clearly states that we don’t want a dump, chemical waste, or anything like that. Those are some of the critical things we came up with years ago that we really don’t want in our county. We used to have some things in there about agriculture and timber, but we found out that they’re exempt.”

Rumley also noted, “The sewer line will probably eventually go all the way to the Tennessee state line from Trenton. If that happens, there would have to be zoning or the northern part of the county would become totally Chattanooga. The only thing that’s kept it from happening now is sewer. You can’t let that happen without some type of restrictions, especially on that main corridor, or Chattanooga will come in and gobble us up.”

Another frustration from Anderson is the IDA’s meeting time of 10:30 a.m. because many citizens cannot attend during the workday. Stone and Rogers explained that the IDA works with businesses that normally operate during the daytime. These businesses must sometimes attend IDA meetings.

Pulling from a question Melissa Faircloth asked the IDA this summer, the Sentinel asked Stone and Rogers, “When is enough industry enough? Does the IDA have an idea of when enough is enough? What do you look at to determine that?”

Stone answered, “That’s determined by the individual boards that go on and off a six-year rotation. This particular board, we’re only looking at things that come to us that are definitely an improvement to quality of life, better paying jobs, and clean industry.”

He explained that the IDA purchased the Price land because what is left in the current industrial park is in the floodplain. He said, “Years ago, the IDA and the county commission saw the need to expand industrial growth in the county. They placed on the ballot for the 2019 SPLOST $1.2 million to buy additional land and infrastructure. The voters approved it.”

Stone noted that growth is also limited by infrastructure such as sewer. For example, that is why Sand Mountain has not been overrun with manufacturing. He added, “I think the land issue is going to control the growth. I’ve had to turn down businesses that wanted 100 acres because the IDA didn’t have 100 acres.”

The Sentinel also discussed the question of “enough” with Cantrell, asking, “Is there any sort of marker or number of jobs or average pay that the IDA looks at to know that we have enough industry?”

Cantrell answered, “At this time, there is not. One of the goals of the IDA is to acquire 100 additional acres. We have about 40 now. We want to stay at 100 acres because you never know when a different entity would want to come here that would be beneficial to the county.”

Rumley, however, answered the same question, saying, “There will be a line drawn one day. There’ll be a point where you need to level off and back up and really look at it. We have a low unemployment rate. We’ve been lower even through the pandemic and before because we do live where people have a choice: They’ve got jobs in Chattanooga plus what we’ve got here.”

Rumley voiced his trust in the board members and their talents and experience. He said, “They’ve got a job to do.”

As for Anderson, he believes the IDA should invest in existing industry in the county, ensuring quality jobs and working environments, rather than bringing in new industry.

Cantrell concluded, “I really care about the county. I’ve been here about 13 or 14 years. We moved here to retire. I currently own about 55 acres in Trenton and Dade County.”

Anderson concluded, “If you ask everybody who’s moved to Dade County in the last five years what brought them here, ain’t none of them going to say industry.”