Steve Lampkins, A Comprehensive Comparison of the Growth-Management Programs of Oregon and Florida, and the Possible Implications for Tennessee’s Growth-Management Programs
Faculty Chair: Dr. John Tucker
The state of Tennessee adopted The Comprehensive Growth plan in 1997 in an effort to coordinate and control growth. The state legislative assembly recognized that coordinated and controlled growth is essential to maintain the quality of life that Tennessee residents expect. The creation of growth-management legislation is a significant step in the right direction; the adoption of a bottom-up management method has seriously compromised the effectiveness of the growth-management program in the state. The state has failed to allocate the necessary funding and has not established an effective incentive program to facilitate compliance with a bottom-up growth-management method. The state has also placed an undue burden on local governments and communities in the development of local comprehensive growth plans and failed to adequately resource these agencies to ensure compliance with the statutory goals of the program. The growth-management statute fails to provide for a state agency with growth plan review authority and provides no statutory obligation to ensure that local comprehensive plans consider state or regional interests. Future evolution of growth-management legislation and subsequent growth program development in Tennessee should give serious consideration to the growth-management programs of Oregon and Florida. Oregon and Florida have developed evolving growth-management programs that provide for a state oversight agency, funding, and an administrative appeals process. The establishment of a state growth-management agency, an administrative appeals panel, and the allocation of funds by the state would help to create an effective and efficient mechanism for controlling growth in Tennessee.