Back around 2007, 17 years ago, the county school board voted to have an professional, unbiased assessment done on school needs. When the $54,000.00 assessment came back, the recommendation was for just one new school, Greenback. The rest of the assessment just called for add on's to certain existing schools. The assessment also did not recommend a new Loudon Middle School.

As the process rocked on for several years, as they always do, the BOE came with a final plan that included a new school in Greenback and a new Loudon Middle School.

When it went public, some of the same people, maybe different names, mostly from Tellico Village, came out of the woodwork to protest and demand the commission not fund the new Greenback school and whaled on that the professional, unbiased assessment did not include a new middle school nor could they afford a 20 cent property tax increase. 
 

The opposition, again mostly from Tellico Village, attended meetings, held signs and even went so far as to ask for an attorney general opinion they hoped would legally stop the new Greenback school. I can not tell you how eerily similar the arguments were then as they are now.  
 

My point is, the 2007 professional, unbiased assessment, said emphatically that a new school was needed in Greenback. And even though a professional, unbiased assessment made it clear the new Greenback school was needed, the opposition could have cared less what the professional, unbiased assessment said and protested right on.
 

Also remember, the professional, unbiased assessment said there was no need for a new middle school in Loudon. Think where Loudon would be now if the new middle school hadn't been built in 2013.
 

I can assure you, if a professional, unbiased assessment was done and came back that doesn't fit the narrative of the opposition, they will not accept it now anymore than they did in 2011.

Complaint: The numbers just don't add up.

During the director's presentation, he used many different points of data to show the growth of the county and schools. But the one that seemed to give the opposition the most heartburn was the development map I have published and updated on my website for several years now. Commissioner Quillen took great exception to the numbers on the map that show that just inside Lenoir city, more than 5,000 new residential units have been approved by rezone or plat. She did have some updated information that showed one parcel had changed form rezoned to platted and would change the over all number by maybe a thousand. For us anti over growth people, that's good news. But what's not included on the map are at least five other developments on Beals Chapel, North Shore and Hwy. 11 that are already in various stages of development from completed to platted with nearly 300 residential units. The map also did not include the 90 town homes under construction in Tennessee National and the 74 units approved on River Road in Loudon. Nor did the map include a hundred other residential building permits issued in the county this year alone.

Quillen sited one development in the city plated for 164 lots but said they had only pulled twenty something building permits suggesting that the entire 164 wouldn't be built. In that development, all roads and curbs, water, gas and sewer lines are in place. There's around 40 houses under construction or completed. So I guess the developer is just going to stop there and not build the other 120 plus units? Commissioner Quillen also mentioned the 276 apartments approved in front of Food City. Even though nearly every aspect of the apartment complex has been approved by the city down to the size of the parking spaces, she maintains you can't really count those because the developer hasn't bought the property. Fingers crossed hoping maybe it won't happen. 

Speaking to Commissioner Quillen, after the meeting, it was obvious her philosophy on estimating growth would be similar to that of Lenoir City councilman Eddie Simpson. Just because a property has been zoned or platted for high density doesn't mean that a development will ever happen. That's one way to look at it. But on the other hand, because a property has been zoned or platted for high density, planners better assume at some point, the development will happen. Standing around, again with fingers crossed, that residential growth just isn't going to happen is a pretty poor way to plan.

Complaint: The county doesn't need a high school on the upper end.

That may be correct right now or maybe not for 2, 3 or 5 years. The proposed middle/high school isn't a plan to just resolve crowding problems for two or three years. The proposed middle/high school is a plan to address student growth for twenty or thirty years. Do the anti's really believe there will not be a need another high school, ever? Why would anyone expect the school board to plan short time while they have the opportunity to address the problem long term?

Complaint: We can't afford a property tax increase.

Against my better judgment, I tuned into some of the local social media last week. I read one post, by a villager, speaking with great authority that if this property tax increase passes, the taxes would go up $1,200.00 on a $500,000.00 home. I saw another post that said after he did the math on the proposed property tax increase, his property taxes would go up to $5,000.00 per year. If I didn't know the truth and was willing to just believe what I read on the internet, that would scare me too. Problem is, neither statement is even close to correct.

The village guy missed by about a thousand dollars. If the property tax increase were to pass, the increase on $500,000.00 house would be $312.00 per year. The village poster did come back and admitted his math was wrong but didn't bother to explain just how wrong but blamed his error on the confusion caused by county commission.

The fellow who's property taxes were going to go to $5,000.00 per year, missed by thousands of dollars. His current property tax bill would go from $1,600.00 to $1,836.00, an increase of $263.00.

Be very careful what you read on the internet or just taking someone's word without checking it out.

Complaint: Van Shaver is pushing the building program.

I heard that one the other day. Fact of the matter, I'm not pushing anything. I haven't asked any commissioner to support or oppose the plan nor has any commissioner asked me to support or oppose the plan except Commissioner Quillen who told me one day that "we need to stop this" the proposed building plan. My only crime in the eyes of the internet trolls here is that I haven't opposed the plan and have stayed neutral  thus far.  

What I have done is try to report every aspect of the proposal from the beginning to today. I've reported on the proposal, what it would cost, the needed property tax increase if it's to be funded. In fact, it's safe to say, I've done more reporting on the whole affair than anyone. But I'm still accused of trying to sneak it in. Three years I've been reporting and I'm sneaking it in. Come on.

One of the best ones I've heard for the reasons I'm "pushing" so hard is so I can be a deacon at the church and my son be the preacher. I kid you not, this is what the social media trolls say among other things. It has been said I was going to get a big kickback if it passes. Don't even know how that would work. You see, people will say anything.

I hope this might help folks to better understand some of the nonsense  going on behind the scenes and to again, be careful the information you read on social media. There's a lot of misinformation on a lot of things out there.