• I just finished reading the front page of this week’s (farragutpress), and in regard to the (page 1A top story), I was actually a bit miffed and somewhat insulted by the article. I was at that (Farragut Board of Mayor and Aldermen) meeting last week, and while (Town officials in favor of amending the Town’s “ballfield” lighting ordinance) were polite and courteous, and remained calm and collected, (Town official[s] against amending the “ballfield” lighting ordinance) were not.
All you have to do is go to YouTube and look up the BOMA meeting from Dec. 8, and you can see what actually happened. Also … statements that the ordinance was fine the way it was and … comments in the past that the ordinance was being ruined are just not true. There have been definitions added to the ordinance to clarify what a ballfield is. There’s also intent added to protect residents in residential neighborhoods from invasive, incompatible development. This has nothing to do with commercial development, as (opponent[s] of amending the ordinance) tried to imply.
• I thought the Hy-Vee company would be back on the agenda for the (Farragut Municipal) Planning Commission meeting that happened last week. But I hope and pray that the Hy-Vee company, and their big business investment for Farragut, is not giving up on Farragut. I thought Farragut was supposed to be business friendly, but it doesn’t look that way. Some of the officials in the Town look like they’re anti-business.
But if we don’t encourage Hy-Vee to come to Farragut, I know where it will go — it will go to Loudon County. We will loose the sales tax revenue we desperately need to Loudon County. And the next step that will happen will be a homeowners’ (Town) property tax in the next very few years if we don’t get more business friendly. The homeowners will have a (Town) property tax to face, and then the Farragut officials will be the ones to blame. • Last weeks’ story about the Dec. 8 (Board of) Mayor and Aldermen meeting left out a very important point. Despite many commitments to keep lights out of Anchor Park, that was not part of the amended lighting Ordinance. The people of Turkey Creek Road were treated very poorly.
(One Town official) said in the meeting, “There was a workshop where a resolution was made to keep lights out of Anchor Park.” That is meaningless. Resolutions in Tennessee law are symbolic. They are not binding. Only ordinances are binding.
(Other Town official) was correct when he said this amended lighting ordinance was a terrible change. It opens up all Farragut parks to lights. The prior lighting ordinance protected the people living near Farragut parks, and this amended ordinance took away that protection.
This was brought to the Mayor and Aldermen by a citizens group called the, “Farragut Neighborhood Preservation Partnership.” … Their spokesperson … should request that the Mayor and Aldermen amend the new ordinance to codify that Anchor Park will have no lights. That commitment has been made for many months. (Another Town official) who voted for the amended lighting Ordinance should bring this back to correct the ordinance, as he represents the people of Turkey Creek Road. (This official) should not wait for any resident to ask him to do this. A commitment is a commitment.
We ask our readers to follow these Presstalk rules:
• No names used, including public figures;
• Keep calls to a 90-second maximum (call 865-671-8255 24 hours a day, seven days a week); and Keep e-mailed Presstalks to 250 words maximum (firstname.lastname@example.org);
• Libelous and malicious comments will not be published; profanity will be edited out;
• Comments will remain anonymous.
• Business names may or may not be used depending on the issue.