Would you favor Metro Government in Blount County?

Wed

Feb 27 2008

12:16:pm

By: Tennessee Democrat shortURL

Topics:

Government

Metro Government

Submitted by Concerned citizen on Fri, 02/29/2008 - 09:59.

Concerned Citizen
I have mixed views on the consolidation of all government functions, but I am in favor of consolidating the city schools with the county system, and consolidating the police, fire departments, and EMS services from them into one central department.
I believe that this would create a more equal standard of eduction for all the children and cut repeated taxes for all of these departments.

I believe that ....

Submitted by commissionerwalker on Fri, 02/29/2008 - 10:42.

this would create a more equal standard of eduction for all the children and cut repeated taxes for all of these departments.

I would tend to disagree to some extent on the taxes. It would require some increase on the county portion of property tax possbily, assuming it would require near the same number of people to service the areas covered. You may realize some savings in the area of upper management. This amount would probably be less than the combined City and County rate.

I believe my vote is "no" for now.

Submitted by mrsbrad04 on Thu, 02/28/2008 - 21:52.

Am I for a change in Government? Yes. However, I'm afraid that the term "Metro" in this area will be misinterpreted as the larger one consumes the smaller ones. I for one, prefer keeping several things separate, especially under some of the current circumstances. I suppose my question to those that support the Metro movement is what is the motivation? What do we wish to accomplish by doing this? And, who is it that's pushing for a Metro Government? Are they the current County Elected Officials, because they want a larger Kingdom? That's kind of scarey, don't you think? I think there needs to be a lot of checks and balances in place before something like this were to occur. Imagine the elected officials of this county having control over every part of it, both Maryville and Alcoa. To me that sounds like a nightmare!

This is not an easy decision

Submitted by Andy on Thu, 02/28/2008 - 00:13.

There are lots of pros and cons.

And TN Democrat, don't forget who we're dealing with here:

Under a metro government we would be able to have a better handle growth, planning, spending, and county services just to name a few.

Just because "we would be able to have a better handle..." doesn't mean we would. It wouldn't serve every decision maker's purpose to have better planning and handled growth, for example.

"I think it would be a good idea."
-Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization

To Commissioner Walker and Others

Submitted by Tennessee Democrat on Wed, 02/27/2008 - 18:24.

Commissioner Walker:

A "No" vote does not make you un-progressive. I just wanted to get a reaction from the active members of this site.

I do believe that this is an avenue that the people of Blount County need to look at. As we all know, the sales tax dollar is what drives the county; and it is very obvious that the "twin cities" of Blount are attempting to gather up as much of the revenue as possible. Can you blame them?

Under a metro government we would be able to have a better handle growth, planning, spending, and county services just to name a few.

We may not have two Wal-Marts, 5 of each bank in each city, etc. etc. etc. if we were under a metro style government.

Metro government does have there pros and cons; but by limiting the number of "chiefs" in the county would make way for more progressive movements in the Blount cities and the County as a whole.

I could go on about this. But I would urge you to research the possibilities.

I have....

Submitted by commissionerwalker on Wed, 02/27/2008 - 18:37.

But I would urge you to research the possibilities.

I have and will continue, it all relates back to $$$. Not necessarilay on the government side, but on the individual side (employee)whether they be Law Enforcement, Education or Highway.

Everyone assumes it would cost because you would have to bring the County pay structure upto what the Cities pay structure is, however the Cities are not charge with providing these services, the County is.

Thanks through for the explanation.

Courious...

Submitted by commissionerwalker on Wed, 02/27/2008 - 16:42.

I am curious...does a "No" vote go against being progressive? Not necessarily that your for metro government, but to simply be against it without researching the possibilities?

I voted "maybe" exactly

Submitted by yellowdog on Wed, 02/27/2008 - 18:22.

I voted "maybe" exactly because I need to know more. The devil is in the details, as they say.

But ending the need for each govt. to have its own Wal-Mart has a nice ring to it.

I don't know

Submitted by mello on Wed, 02/27/2008 - 17:54.

I do however think a good many of those NO votes are because folks think that to combine the two governments would also combine the city and county schools. Eh?

Or perhaps it means paving the county end to end.

Or could it mean we would only have one law enforcement agency? YIKES!

I am a solid I do not know because I don't have enough info on these kinds of questions.

Metro Government

Submitted by BeyondLeft on Wed, 02/27/2008 - 13:21.

I'd like to see a Blount County Government that caters to big Corporate Interests, scours at any Social Help programs, privatizes ALL of the Schools & Road Construction, preaches fear of Foreigners, and has over 80% of the County's area covered in concrete and asphalt.

viva Evo Morales

I favor a government that works

Submitted by Dumping Ground on Wed, 02/27/2008 - 12:32.

Ask me again in 2010. The hope would be voters will finnish what they started in 2006.

I would give my right eye to get the leadership of the county out of power, but I'm not willing to give up the possibilty of having our government work the way it should.