How do development plans include local residents?
by Attica Scott
"Fairness as well as logic requires that special consideration be given to people who have been locked out of the economic mainstream."
—Andrew Young, 1996
Let me start off by stating that I haven't kept up much with the Worsham Watkins International plan for downtown redevelopment. Part of the reason is that none of the community-based organizations with which I am involved received one of those by-invitation-only letters from the Public Building Authority to attend one of the five community meetings held this summer. Only about 100 people total attended these meetings, and each organization could only designate one representative from its membership. Even people in the same organization often have differing viewpoints, and you don't get those differences of opinion when only one person from your group can attend a meeting.
The African Americans I've talked to haven't bothered to attend any of the public meetings because they, like a lot of folks, are tired of meetings where their opinion is solicited, but it seems as if nothing is done with the input that they provide. Some folks also don't see the connections from this plan to their neighborhoods. Although Ron Watkins of WWI did a great job with Gettysvue, that country club mentality has got to go when it comes to redeveloping downtown Knoxville.
Downtown development disconnect is not only about not including people of color, but failing to show a real connection to the surrounding neighborhoods. This is very clearly a class issue—who can afford membership in the "country club" and who can't. I'm wondering how this plan truly ties to East and South Knoxville and Mechanicsville. I have been talking to a dear friend who lives south about the future relationship-building that is going to occur between these areas: East Knoxville and Mechanicsville are feeling left out because African-Americans haven't been represented in the process, and many in South Knoxville are feeling disenfranchised because of classism.
I am also concerned about the plan possibly using nearly all of our Empowerment Zone facility bonds without having a true connection to EZ neighborhoods. Redevelopment is important to me, but I don't understand why we can't use a lot less than $125 million (of $130 million the EZ designation makes available) on this one plan alone and leave a lot more for small businesses in the zone.
A similar issue was discussed in a recent article in The New Yorker (Aug. 7, p. 31) in which writer James Surowiacki writes that hotel socialism is the order of the day. Surowiacki postulates that tourism and entertainment have become central economic pursuits—but surely there are better uses for public money (education was one of his ideas) than building luxury hotels for private developers. He cites the 1996 Olympic Games in which corporate money went toward public entertainment instead of public money ending up in the pockets of builders and hoteliers.
Even if ultimately the downtown development plan does use all but $5 million of the EZ revenue bonds, where does the accountability lie in making sure that Zone residents hired aren't employed solely as cooks, janitors, and hotel reservationists? These kinds of jobs aren't about real empowerment and don't even pay a living wage.
In thinking about the country club mentality, I also hope that African Americans and other businesses and contractors of color will benefit from this plan. With this possibly being the biggest project in Knoxville history, it is time for the City of Knoxville to put its money where its mouth is and live up to its stated commitment of seeking out minority contractors. To make sure that this happens, we've got to attend any meeting that we hear about—even if we aren't invited. That's our money and we have a right to voice our opinions and to be involved.
Comments? Feel free to email me at [email protected].
September 7, 2000 * Vol. 10, No. 36
© 2000 Metro Pulse
| 
