Charting a Course to Tennessee's Future

TACIR Publication Policy

Reports approved by vote of the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations are labeled such on their covers with the following banner at the top: Report of the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. All other reports by Commission staff are prepared to inform members of the Commission and the public and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission. They are labeled Staff Report to Members of the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations on their covers. TACIR Fast Facts are short publications prepared by Commission staff to inform members and the public.

On the cover, Prentice Cooper State Forest. Photo provided by Tennessee Photo Services.

Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations 226 Capitol Boulevard Building · Suite 508 · Nashville, Tennessee 37243 Phone: 615.741.3012 · Fax: 615.532.2443 E-mail: [email protected] · Website: www.tn.gov/tacir Charting a Course to Tennessee’s Future

Ethel Detch, M.P.A. Senior Research Consultant Principal Author  Lynnisse Roehrich Patrick, J.D. Executive Director  Teresa Gibson Web Development & Publications Manager

Staff Report to Members of the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations

February 2013 Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Authorization No. 316200; 200 copies, January 2013. This document was promulgated at a cost of $4.98 per copy. Contents

Foreword ...... v Acknowledgments ...... vi Introduction ...... 1 Where Are We? Where Do We Want to Go? ...... 5 The Challenges of People: Enhancing Human Capital ...... 7 The Challenges of Infrastructure: The Systems That Support Us ...... 15 The Challenges of Natural Resources: Using Tennessee’s Assets Wisely ...... 23 The Challenges of Governance: The Entities That Lead Us ...... 27 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 33 Where Do We Go From Here? ...... 43 Appendixes Appendix A Persons Interviewed ...... 45 Appendix B TACIR’s Forum on the Future ...... 47 Appendix C A History of State Planning ...... 48 References ...... 51

Tennessee Photo Services Photo Tennessee

Foreword This report, Charting a Course to Tennessee’s Future, varies a bit from the typical TACIR publication. In addition to informing, it seeks to stir the imagination of our state’s leaders, to lift their eyes to the horizon, to glimpse the Tennessee of tomorrow. We hope it sparks discussion about ways today’s leaders can help the leaders and citizens of the future.

Just as a vision of the future becomes clearer as time advances, so has this report as it developed, growing from a simple idea to a comprehensive state snapshot. The report provides an over- view of many of the state’s challenges, each of which is worthy of its own report. The information provided here, however, is purposefully general and illustrates the interconnections among issues and the need to consider them together.

While work on this report was progressing, Governor Haslam unveiled a set of legislative initiatives designed to move Tennessee forward by making Tennessee the number one location in the Southeast for high quality jobs. To support that goal, the Governor created a “dashboard” with indicators in ﬁ ve key areas:

• Jobs and Economic Development • Education and Workforce Development • Fiscal Strength • Public Safety • Health and Welfare

These areas parallel issues raised by this report.

So how do we move forward? What opportunities can we seize to address Governor Haslam’s key concerns and those raised by this report, and who should our partners be? Several states have established groups of people to talk about the future including Virginia, Utah, Michigan, and Colorado. With varied combinations of private and public partners, all of them focus on the future to guide bett er decision-making in the present.

I’m part of the “Baby Boom” generation. The Census Bureau includes persons born between 1946 and 1964 in this group, a large population bubble created by those who started their families after the end of World War II. As children, we prompted a need for more classrooms as we moved through America’s public school systems. As adults, we ﬁ lled the ranks of the nation’s public universities and its businesses. And we caused our own “baby boomlet” as we had children ourselves. In our golden years, we will cause changes in health care, transportation, and housing to accommodate a larger elderly population. But what then? What’s next? And what should we think about now to help future generations as they assume responsibility for this great country?

We don’t know the answer, but together we can ﬁ gure it out.

Lynnisse Roehrich-Patrick

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE v Acknowledgments Many people contributed to this report. TACIR staff would especially like to thank all who shared their time and insights through interviews, listed in appendix A. In addition, several state and not-for-profi t agencies provided data and staff assistance including the Tennessee Departments of Economic and Community Development, Human Resources, Labor and Work- force Development, Health, Transportation, the Offi ce of the Comptroller of the Treasury, the Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System, the Tennessee State Library and Archives, and the former Offi ce of Children’s Care Coordination. In addition, the University of Tennessee Center for Business and Economic Research, the Southern Regional Education Board, and Connected Tennessee provided data and/or interpretation.

Purpose This is a staﬀ -generated TACIR report exploring ways that Tennessee might bett er prepare for the future. A follow-up to TACIR’s Forum on Tennessee’s Future, it addresses several areas of research in the work program approved by the TACIR Commission in June 2011, including inter-agency coordination, growth policy, transportation, infrastructure, and education.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE vi Charting a Course to Tennessee’s Future Tennessee has many strengths. Its location makes it a natural transportation hub. Its beautiful landscapes and varied topography make it a natural tourist destination. Tennesseans, with their “Volunteer spirit,” have built top- ranked universities and research facilities, have created and fostered industry leading businesses, and enjoy a quality of life that continues to att ract new businesses and residents. And yet we face many challenges:

• Our educational att ainment levels and overall health, though improving, lag behind those of other states. • We have sharp contrasts of wealth and poverty. • Our aging population is putt ing new pressures on services, ranging from health care to transportation, and shrinking our workforce. • Our business and industry have become increasingly intertwined with those of other nations, causing changes in the ways we work. • As in most other states, our roads, bridges, water pipes, and sewer lines are deteriorating at a time when government at all levels is strapped for resources. What does Tennessee’s future hold? Interviews with more than 40 Tennesseans—public oﬃ cials, private sector leaders, and members of academia—revealed surprisingly similar opinions about Tennessee’s strengths, challenges, and opportunities as we move into the future. What we need, however, is a common vision for the future to serve as a foundation to develop and work toward common goals and solve shared problems. Tennessee Photo Services Tennessee

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 1 How can we do • Exploit data—take bett er And who should advantage of the vast array that? of data already collected lead this eff ort? • Collaborate—draw on and maintained by state Governor Bill Haslam the expertise of various agencies. Find out who has taken initial steps to individuals and groups has what and fi gure out coordinate the eff orts of to facilitate meaningful how to use it to support state agencies through discussion of public eff orts to create a bett er his Tennessee Forward problems. future. Develop a clear- initiative. This gives other inghouse for commonly  Engage leadership leaders something to build used data, expand the use groups—build on the on. Members of the General of geographic information strength of existing Assembly and organizations systems to analyze that regional and local of local government offi cials, data, transform data into leadership groups that chambers of commerce and to knowledge, and make it are already focusing on local leadership groups, widely available. the future of their local regional visioning groups and areas. Compile and • Emphasize outcomes— neighborhood alliances—all share information from consider ways to shift have something to contribute. these groups and use thinking toward effi cient What we lack is a vision to their energy. and eff ective results. rally around. The Governor’s Greater awareness of the Offi ce and the legislature are  Tap higher education “big picture” may lead to places to start. Either could institutions—partner streamlined processes and call representatives of these with the state’s public bett er service delivery. organizations together to and private colleges, • Create incentives—use begin the eff ort. Other states universities, and grants, awards, recogni- have done it. The report that technology centers tions, or other incentives follows explores why and to identify trends, to improve coordination how Tennessee should join assess problems among disparate interests them. and solutions, and focused on a shared vision strengthen students’ for Tennessee’s future. understanding of public problems, governmental processes, and “Now, more than ever, Tennessee’s citizens must civic responsibilities. demand that the state’s  Involve not-for-profi t leaders step forth resolutely and confi dently recognize that agencies—encourage the road to the future is for Tennessee’s not-for- us to build. Realistically, we profi ts to collaborate will be limited and shaped more, both among by our own capabilities and themselves and with capacities, but to achieve our government agencies, state motto—the best America has to offer—we must all be to achieve economies of Dr. Richard Chesteen (deceased) willing to participate and scale and extend their Professor of Political Science University of Tennessee Martin contribute.” reach.

2 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Tennessee Photo Services

Imagine a Future where . . . people—should bett er prepare for the coming years to provide needed services, encourage • Tennessee is recognized as a world-class job development, protect the state’s natural place to live, learn, work, and play and cultural resources, and participate in • Diverse people combine their talents the knowledge economy. Developing a and knowledge to help Tennessee common statewide vision could establish compete in the global economy a foundation for both private and public • Tennessee’s education system ranks sector leaders to work toward common goals high relative to other states and solve common problems. And it could • Tennesseans stay help our governments physically and “The future ain’t what it deliver public services more effi ciently and mentally healthy, used to be.” and eff ectively by sett ing • Tennesseans Yogi Berra priorities and targeting maintain and duplication. protect their state’s natural beauty and We know with certainty that our population use its resources wisely. is aging and becoming increasingly urban. No one would likely challenge this image, Our economy intertwines with countries on but what does Tennessee’s future really the other side of the earth. We know that hold? Is anyone actively thinking about the we depend too much on foreign oil. And we future? And working on it? Although no know that all of our governments are fi scally one can predict the future absolutely, we stressed. How will such issues shape our can identify likely trends and scenarios and thoughts and actions? prepare accordingly. This report suggests that Tennessee—its governments and its

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 3 Forum on Tennessee’s Future Tennessee’s Forum on Municipal League Tennessee South, Victoria “We should be moved to action to ensure that our state addresses the issues that will provide a better quality of life for our children and grandchildren. A broad-based planning process would be a good start, but if change is to occur, we must be participants in the process, not mere spectators.” —Nick Dunagan, Chancellor Emeritus, University of Tennessee Martin

This report draws on the thinking of several (see appendix B). That group arrived at a past and present Tennessee leaders (see list of Tennessee’s ten greatest challenges, appendix A). People from state government, encompassing local government, business, higher education, • education, and the not-for-profi t sector shared their thoughts about their state’s future. They • cultural diversity, expressed pride in Tennessee and a convic- • aff ordable health care, tion that it has many strengths—its location, • justice, its beauty, and its people. But many also • business environment, think that Tennessee, as a state, lacks a long- term vision for its future. To compete in the • energy, world’s economy, Tennessee needs to quickly • land use, develop such a vision and begin working • governmental effi ciency, toward it. • fi scal sustainability, and • political environment. This report was started as the nation’s economy took its most drastic downturn Strategies to address such challenges must be since the Great Depression. This fundamental multi-faceted, and they must inspire people change required a recalibration of the initial to reach across lines—county, city, and state work on this project, so staff added input lines, racial lines, and political lines. It is from current offi cials and updated many of imperative that we improve cooperation the earlier interviews. The report also draws between public and private entities and use on the discussions and writings of the Forum scarce resources more eff ectively. Many on Tennessee’s Future, a group of ten public of today’s challenges will continue into and private sector leaders convened by the the future as new challenges continue to Tennessee Advisory Commission on Inter- develop. How we as a government and a governmental Relations (TACIR) in October people choose to confront them, though, will 2008 to discuss the challenges Tennessee faces determine our state’s destiny.

4 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Where Are We? Where Do We Want to Go?

In some ways, Tennessee is a state of stark contrasts—a land of prosperity and poverty, mountains and ﬂ at farmland, inner cities and remote Appalachian hollows. The state is home to some of our nation’s best medical research facilities, yet our population is relatively unhealthy. While some areas of the state are very wealthy, one in four of our children lives in poverty. TWRA Dave Gabbard,

Some of our nation’s ﬁ nest scientists work at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, yet Tennessee’s students lag behind those of other states academically. In The Nation’s Report Card, the US Department of Education indicates that, despite showing marked improvement in science and math performance during the last two decades, 36% of Tennessee’s eighth graders scored below “Basic” on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in each of these subjects in 2011.

Because of such contrasts, developing statewide policy will be daunting. Perhaps, too, because of our state’s history, geography, and topography, people tend to identify themselves as East, Middle, or West Tennesseans, rather than as Tennesseans. People from the state’s opposite ends often appear to feel that they have

litt le in common. Nashville Convention & Visitors Bureau

Other characteristics of our part of the planet may change as well. A recent report by the United States Climate Change Science Program notes that

ecosystems and their services (land and water resources, agriculture, biodiversity) experience a wide range of stresses, including pests and pathogens, invasive species, air pollution, extreme events, wildfi res, and fl oods. Climate change can cause or exacerbate direct stress through high temperatures, reduced water availability, and altered frequency of extreme events and severe storms. . . . Climate change can also modify the frequency and severity of stresses. For example, increased minimum temperatures and warmer springs extend the range and lifetime of many pests that stress trees and crops.1 Tennessee Photo Services Photo Tennessee Some futurists predict that climate change will cause the nation’s “. . . comprehensive and profound justice can- population to shift inward from the coasts as people fl ee storms not be accomplished in the absence of reforms and fl ooding. Because Tennessee has a more temperate climate in other areas including taxation, education, than many other parts of the country, displaced people may come and health care.” here. —Lyle Reid, former Tennessee Supreme Court Justice 1 Backlund, Janetos, Schimel 2008.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 5 Tennessee Photo Services

A recent report by the University of Maryland’s Center for Integrative Environmental Research predicts that Tennessee will experience temperature increases greater than the global average. Although temperature change is more diffi cult to predict, the rise in temperature may prompt changes in annual precipitation. Estimates range from a decrease of 3% to an increase of 15%, averaging a 7% increase, as well as extremes in weather such as droughts and fl ooding. The increased precipitation would likely occur during the winter months rather than the summer growing season. The center predicts that the state’s already strained water and wastewater resources may suff er, as may infrastructure, hunting, agriculture, and people’s health. Heat- related diseases such as asthma may increase.

Climate change also may aﬀ ect a wide range of economic sectors, including agriculture, manufacturing, and tourism. According to Mathias Ruth—the center’s director and principal investigator—“State and local communities would do well to prepare for a cascade of impacts on many of their most basic systems and services.”

Most people interviewed for this report were asked, “What do you think Tennessee’s biggest challenges will be over the next 20 years?” They responded with a wide range of issues, but with surprising commonality. These are summarized in the pages that follow under the broad topics of challenges of people, infrastructure, natural resources, and governance.

6 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR The Challenges of People: Enhancing Human Capital

Education/Competitive Workforce

A well-educated citizenry correlates to higher will be a deciding characteristic of tomorrow’s incomes, more labor force participation, less workforce. Regardless of how the world of poverty, bett er health, and greater civic partici- work evolves, the educational system will pation. Tennessee has struggled to improve its need to bett er align with the demands of busi- educational standing for several decades, and ness and industry. According to education with some success. The state has strengthened commissioner, Kevin Huff man, “More people standards, aligned curricula, and raised gradu- need to understand that what will be needed ation rates. Education Week’s annual national in 20 years is not what is needed now.” report card, Quality Counts, ranked Tennessee 23rd overall in 2011. The state ranks 31st in Over the last few decades, Tennessee has achievement but 46th in education spending. experienced many changes in its economic base. Manufacturing, once a mainstay, has In 2010, Tennessee was awarded $501 million declined each year since 1990. Many of the in federal Race to the Top funds. (Race to the jobs lost have been relatively low-skilled, Top is a Department of Education sponsored low-wage jobs. Employers can more easily competition designed to promote innovation shift these to other countries or eliminate them in K-12 curriculum.) In exchange, Tennessee with investments in improved equipment committ ed to a dramatic set of school reforms and technology. Some of Tennessee’s rural aimed at improving student achievement. counties have relied heavily on manufacturing These include improving young students’ and, thus, have suff ered disproportionately as academic readiness, improving high school that economic sector has declined. graduates’ readiness for colleges and careers, and att aining higher rates of graduates enrolling and succeeding in post-secondary education. In February 2012, the federal government granted Tennessee a waiver from the federal No Child Left Behind law, a major Tennessee Board of Regents driver of school reform since 2001. State offi cials believe that Tennessee’s new state standards are a bett er benchmark for school improvement.2

For Tennessee to compete in the global marketplace, its workforce will need to adapt to change. Workers will need to be more highly skilled and bett er educated. “The economy’s transformation has meant the rise of new products and services, as well as new Just improving skills, however, may not be occupations and businesses. Tennessee’s strategies adequate, as countries such as China and India and policies focused on economic development also produce more educated and highly skilled must be adapted to reﬂ ect the realities of this new economy.” workers—workers who are willing to work for lower wages. Some believe that innovation —Matt Murray Associate Director, University of Tennessee Center for Business and Economic Research 2 Duncan 2012.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 7 “For Tennessee to continue to develop and prosper, we must recognize and address our diversity for what it is—an untapped resource. If we are to make the most of our foreign-born population, we need to welcome and assist them in becoming a valuable part of our society.” —Martha L. Perine Beard, Vice President, Memphis Branch of Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

The Tennessee Department of Labor and Tennessee’s adult education programs are Workforce Development projects an increase less developed than those of other states. A of 173,000 jobs in Tennessee through 2018, 2009 policy audit by the National Center with the greatest gains in the industry for Higher Education Management Systems groups of ambulatory healthcare services, makes this observation about Tennessee’s educational services, and professional and adult education: technical services. These occupations often Higher education policy in Tennessee require postsecondary education and skills has been developed primarily with such as social perceptiveness, time manage- recent high school graduates—not ment, and critical thinking. Although several adults—in major corporations mind. There are headquartered “. . . for tomorrow belongs to the is no cohesive in Tennessee— people who prepare for it today.” body of higher including FedEx, education AutoZone, and African Proverb policy Nissan—employers oriented specifi cally to adults. The indicate that our state lacks the highly skilled net eff ect is a policy environment that administrative personnel needed to work impedes access and success for adult with the high-level management of these students. . . 3 corporations. In 2007, when Governor Phil Bredesen conducted a cross-state tour of Adult education services targeted at students Tennessee to listen to employers, he heard with less than a high school diploma may repeatedly that our state lacks suffi cient also warrant increased focus. Although workers with appropriate skills and an Tennessee has improved its high school appropriate work ethic. graduation rates in recent years, the American Community Survey for 2008-2010 estimates In addition to lagging in elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education, 3 National Center for Higher Education Management Systems 2009.

8 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR that about 553,000 adults ages 18-64 have less The aging of Tennessee’s population will than a high school diploma or its equivalent. make adult education even more crucial. A Although Tennessee receives high marks 2005 Southern Regional Education Board from the federal government for meeting report noted that, by 2020, the percentage of its adult education goals, the state ranks working-age adults with a high school educa- near the bott om in spending per participant. tion would decline by four percentage points While most other states supplement their if US high school completion rates remain federal allocation with state dollars above the constant. required match of 25%, Tennessee provides only the minimum.4 The US Department of Population Changes Education, cited by the Southern Regional Education Board, indicates that from 2005 Like the rest of the United States, Tennes- to 2008, while the number of adults partici- see’s population is becoming older and pating in adult education programs in many more racially and ethnically diverse. The southern states increased, the number of Tennessee Data Center projects that the state’s Tennesseans in all types of adult education population will increase approximately 25% programs decreased (see table 1).5 between 2010 and 2040—from 6,346,105 to 7,936,430. The population aged 85 and older, however, will slightly more than double from about 100,000 to 203,500. At the same time, 4 Pott s 2010, 1, 26-27. 5 Southern Regional Education Board 2010, 7.

Table 1. Enrollment for Adults 25 to 59 in Southern Regional Education Board States, 2005 and 2008

AdultȱBasicȱEducation AdultȱSecondaryȱEducation Englishȱasȱaȱ2ndȱLanguage

PercentȱChange PercentȱChange PercentȱChange 2005 2008 2005ȱtoȱ2008 2005 2008 2005ȱtoȱ2008 2005 2008 2005ȱtoȱ2008 SREBȱStates 233,121 232,828 0 45,432 42,697 Ȭ6 207,011 210,237 2 Alabama 4,904 7,475 52 1,720 1,967 14 1,204 1,568 30 Arkansas 11,193 11,559 3 3,454 2,941 Ȭ15 4,064 4,021 Ȭ1 Delaware 1,297 1,548 19 415 254 Ȭ39 1,215 1,016 Ȭ16 Florida 51,061 49,530 Ȭ3 8,145 6,756 Ȭ17 77,952 86,702 11 Georgia 20,597 20,519 0 3,568 2,176 Ȭ39 17,985 16,512 Ȭ8 Kentucky 12,393 15,304 23 2,717 4,655 71 2,209 3,069 39 Louisiana 6,356 8,657 36 1,169 1,114 Ȭ4 1,074 1,451 35 Maryland 6,378 7,395 16 2,934 2,378 Ȭ19 8,435 10,625 26 Mississippi 7,827 7,974 2 1,143 950 Ȭ17 361 282 Ȭ22 NorthȱCarolina 25,598 33,485 13 6,746 7,830 16 20,476 23,731 16 Oklahoma 6,569 6,436 Ȭ2 1,134 719 Ȭ37 3,112 2,716 Ȭ13 SouthȱCarolina 24,907 21,244 Ȭ15 4,759 4,338 Ȭ9 5,078 4,474 Ȭ12 Tennessee 18,070 14,096 Ȭ22 2,320 1,871 Ȭ19 4,643 3,675 Ȭ21 Texas 21,220 16,444 Ȭ23 1,911 1,307 Ȭ32 47,529 39,158 Ȭ18 Virginia 7,152 7,382 3 2,228 2,361 6 11,504 11,073 Ȭ4 WestȱVirginia 3,599 3,780 5 1,078 1,080 0 170 164 Ȭ4 Source:ȱȱU.S.ȱDepartmentȱofȱEducation.ȱCitedȱinȱAȱSmartȱMoveȱinȱToughȱTimes:ȱHowȱSREBȱStatesȱCanȱStrengthenȱAdultȱLearningȱandȱtheȱWorkȱForce,ȱ©ȱ2010,ȱ SouthernȱRegionalȱEducationȱBoard.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 9 Map 1. Percent Population Change by County: 2000 to 2010

k n Sumner Clay c Sullivan o Stewart Montgomery Robertson Macon Claiborne nco s Pickett Ha Hawkins Campbell John ke Trousdale Scott Obion Fentress Wash- La Henry Jackson Overton Carter Weakley m ger ington Houston Union n n Smith Grai le Hamb Greene Dickson Davidson Wilson Putnam Morgan Anderson Dyer on heatha C Jefferson Unicoi Gibson Humphreys Knox Carroll Bent DeKalb Cumberland Cocke Williamson White n Roane Lauder- Crockett Hickman Rutherford Sevier dale Van Canno Loudon Henderson Perry Warren Buren Blount Haywood Madison Maury Rhea Tipton catur Bedford Bledsoe Lewis Seq De Coffee u igs Chester Marsh Moore at e McMinn Monroe M all Grundy ch ie Percent Change Shelby Fayette Hardeman Wayne Hardin Lawrence Giles McNairy Bradley 30.0 to 44.7 Lincoln Franklin Marion Hamilton Polk 20.0 to 29.9 10.0 to 19.9 0.0 to 9.9 -5.1 to -0.1 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 and 2010 Census Redistricting Data Summary File. Percent Change for State: 11.5% For more information visit www.census.gov.

the percentage of children will decrease. The 57% in 2050.7 The Bureau of Labor Statistics increase in average life span means more projects that the portion of the labor force that healthy years for most adults, but it also has is 55 or older will grow by between 18% and implications for Medicare, Medicaid, and 24% from 2008 to 2018.8 Social Security. Tennessee’s leaders will need to consider how these changes will aff ect In addition to aging, Tennessee’s population demand for services such as health care, is also becoming more urban. Map 1 illus- housing, transportation, and education. trates that, between 2000 and 2010, the counties surrounding urban centers grew, while The aging baby boomer generation will many of the more rural counties stayed the also aff ect Tennessee’s workforce for many same or lost population. Middle Tennessee more years. The University of Tennessee experienced the greatest population gains. Center for Business and Economic Research estimates that by 2020 about one of every six Health Tennesseans will be 65 years of age or older. Even though the recent recession has caused A few years ago, Tennessee had some of the some older workers to delay retirement, they worst health rankings in the country: in will ultimately leave the workforce.6 Scott 2008, the United Health Foundation ranked Reeves, writing in Forbes magazine says, Tennessee 47th in the nation in overall health. “Boomers make up about one-third of the US By 2011, however, Tennessee had risen to 39th. workforce, and there aren’t enough younger Although still in the bott om half of states, the workers to replace them. Labor shortages in improvement may indicate that an increased key industries will force a radical rethinking focus on health issues is having a positive of recruitment, retention, fl exible work eff ect. schedules, and retirement.” According to the US Census Bureau, the percentage of the population in the “working ages” of 18 to 64 is projected to decline from 63% in 2008 to

7 US Bureau of Census 2008. 6 Murray 2011. 8 US Bureau of Labor Statistics 2009.

10 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Tennessee Photo Services

“The cost of medical care could soon throw Tennessee’s healthcare system into a ﬁ nancial crisis. If the state does not establish some preventive measures for catastrophic illness, then all of us could end up with ﬁ nancial problems that far outweigh the current economic crisis. Those of us who are employed, who have good health insurance, who eat right, who exercise and regularly visit a physician have little concern about this crisis because we feel that we are not directly affected.” —Ruth E. Johnson, Associate Vice-President for Advancement, Meharry Medical College

In spite of these improvements, though, the Former Health Commissioner Susan Cooper health of Tennessee’s citizens continues to put it this way: be a challenge. The 2011 Tennessee Women’s What we need to understand is Health Report Card, compiled by the Vander- that all these things are related. bilt Institute for Medicine and Public Health, Plans writt en in isolation do not gives Tennessee Fs in several health catego- work. For people to get exercise, ries including heart disease, stroke, sexually they need safe places to walk transmitt ed infections, and low birth weight and play. Health is not just an and infant mortality—particularly among outcome, but also a driver. Health, African Americans. Vanderbilt’s 2012 Men’s education, and jobs creation are Report Card gives Tennessee Fs for cancer, intimately linked. . . . As we move liver disease, motor vehicle fatalities, suicides forward, we must utilize a “health and homicides. Scores for heart disease, in all policies” approach at the however, had improved. The United Health local, state, and federal levels of Foundation’s America’s Health Rankings 2011 government. Health, transporta- places Tennessee among the worst 10 states tion, urban planning, education, for obesity, diabetes, violent crime, infant and agriculture policies should tie mortality, and cancer deaths. Perhaps more together to create healthy envi- than any condition, health is aﬀ ected by ronments. The healthful choice choices made in many seemingly unrelated becomes the easy or default choice. spheres. For example, many of our towns We have spent years investing and cities—with their suburban stores, lack in healthcare; now is the time to of sidewalks, and lack of public transporta- invest in health and prevention. tion—make it practically impossible to walk. Returns on our investments in And walking, we know, is one of the most health will take time, however, convenient forms of exercise. and we cannot delay. Doing nothing is not an option.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 11 Several reports consistently rank Tennessee as disease, stroke, diabetes, and degenerative one of the most obese states, citing epidemic osteoarthritis. proportions of heart disease, childhood obesity, and childhood type II diabetes. For The southern states, including Tennessee, 2012, the Trust for America’s Health ranks have the highest rates of diabetes of all the Tennessee 4th in the nation for adult obesity states. Map 2, prepared by the Centers for and 6th for childhood obesity. Obesity rates Disease Control and Prevention, illustrates are especially high among Blacks and Latinos. the severity of diabetes among adults aged 20 years or greater. Tennessee’s high rate of obesity incurs a high cost. Although state specifi c estimates are Fortunately, these troubling statistics not available, a 2009 study by Eric A. Finkel- prompted the creation of the Tennessee stein for the Centers for Disease Control Obesity Taskforce, a broad-based, statewide and Prevention found that, nationally, the coalition representing state agencies, scien- direct and indirect cost of obesity reaches tists, city planners, transportation experts, $147 billion annually. Medical costs paid by parents, and nutritionists—people from a third-parties on behalf of obese people aver- diverse set of disciplines who otherwise aged $1,429 more than for people of normal would rarely talk to each other. The weight. The signifi cant fi scal costs of obesity Taskforce produced “Eat Well, Play More stem from its close association with several Tennessee: the Tennessee Statewide Nutri- serious chronic diseases and numerous health tion and Physical Activity Plan.” Although conditions, including certain cancers, heart the ultimate eff ects of this eff ort are not

Map 2. County-level Estimates of Diagnosed Diabetes among Adults aged 20 years: United States 2009

Age-adjusted percent

0 - 6.3 6.4 - 7.5 7.6 - 8.8 8.9 - 10.5 > 10.6

Source: Center for Disease Control, www.cdc.gov/diabetes.

12 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Tennessee Photo Services

yet clear, this group’s work illustrates the underweight; for black babies the number common vision that can develop when people reached nearly 14%. In addition to requiring consciously focus on the future and what it expensive neonatal medical interventions, could look like. If eff orts to reduce obesity such babies are disproportionately prone to succeed, related health care costs might be developmental delays and lifelong health reduced. problems. These conditions increase medical expenses. The National Conference of State High rates of infant mortality and other poor Legislatures estimates that preterm births birth outcomes are also too prevalent in cost society at least $26 billion per year. Tennessee. In 2011, America’s Health Rankings Medicaid programs pay for 40% of preterm rated Tennessee 45th worst of the 50 states births. The former Tennessee Offi ce of for deaths per 1000 live births, and 41st for Children’s Care Coordination estimated that low birth weights.9 The Tennessee Women’s Tennessee spends $610 million annually on Health Report Card notes that the death rate health care costs associated with poor birth for black infants is more than twice that of outcomes. These conditions also increase white infants. That report gives Tennessee an special education spending because children F for the percentage of women who smoked born prematurely or with low birth weight during pregnancy, a preventable, cultural are more likely than their peers to have mild habit that unnecessarily aff ects the unborn. learning disabilities, att ention disorders, and Pregnant white women in Tennessee, in developmental impairments. particular, are nearly twice as likely to smoke as their counterparts nationally.10

In addition to Tennessee babies who die before their ﬁ rst birthday, a great number of low birth weight babies survive, but with health challenges. The Tennessee Depart- ment of Health indicates that 9 of every 100 Tennessee babies born in 2009 were

9 United Health Foundation 2011. 10 Vanderbilt Institute for Medicine and Public Health, et al. 2011.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 13 Tennessee Photo Services

In short, Tennessee has opportunities to improve its health. Many of the costly health problems that plague our population are rooted in poor eating habits, lack of exercise, and dangerous personal choices such as smoking, substance abuse, and refusing to wear seatbelts. Changing these behaviors could lessen healthcare costs and improve economic productivity. On June 10, 2011, Governor Bill Haslam announced the formation of a task force charged with improving Tennesseans’ health. He cited the high cost of unhealthy personal choices. The governor hopes to increase the amount of money available for other functions of state government, such as education, by decreasing the amount spent on health.11 If Tennessee is to enhance its human capital, it needs to continue to improve the overall education and health of its citizens.

11 Hirst 2011.

14 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR The Challenges of Infrastructure: The Systems that Support Us

Like most states, Tennessee expanded its transportation, energy, and water systems when federal money was plentiful. In the years since, however, much of that infrastructure has deteriorated and needs repair or replacement. The infrastructure that supports broadband and information technology is newer but will need to be expanded and maintained in years to come. The Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR) is charged with developing and maintaining a public infrastructure needs inventory. The June 2012 report estimates that Tennessee needs $38 billion in public infrastructure improvements for the period Tennessee Photo Services 2010 through 2015. Of this, transportation and utilities needs comprise $19.1 billion. in 2002 to $18.8 billion in 2010. Brookings asserts that the US transportation network is Transportation obsolete, no longer refl ecting today’s travel Infrastructure patt erns or embracing technological advance- ments. Brookings also cites growing concern about a “perfect storm” of environmental and To meet transportation infrastructure energy sustainability and transportation’s challenges, Tennesseans will need to think role. The report calls for the federal govern- beyond their borders—and beyond tradi- ment to develop an overarching national tional reliance on cars and highways. States, transportation vision. including Tennessee, are heavily dependent on the federal government for transportation The condition of our nation’s transportation funding, and our nation’s economy demands infrastructure is further aggravated by the that goods, and sometimes people, travel long lessening reliability of gas taxes. As vehicle distances. fuel effi ciency increases and hybrid and electric cars become more popular, the revenue According to the Brookings Institution’s A derived from federal and state gas taxes Bridge to Somewhere, transportation is now declines. John Schroer, who became Tennes- the second largest expense for American see’s Commissioner of Transportation in households, consuming on average 20 cents 2011, notes that the only way to maintain our of every dollar. The report concludes that the transportation infrastructure is with money condition of US roads, bridges, and rail is derived from what has become “an archaic declining, especially in urban areas. Tennes- system based on gallons of gas burned.” see’s transportation requirements, as reported in TACIR’s infrastructure needs inventory, Although states are considering highway tax refl ect this trend. The estimated cost to meet systems based on miles driven rather than these needs nearly doubled, from $9.6 billion gallons of fuel consumed, making the switch

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 15 Tennessee Photo Services Photo Tennessee will not be simple. These systems are not in • Maximize Safety and Security place, and citizens seem somewhat resistant • Build Partnerships for Livable Commu- to devices that would measure their miles nities traveled.12 • Promote Stewardship of the Environ- ment In 2003, the Comptroller’s Offi ce of Research found that a “lack of integrated planning • Emphasize Financial Responsibility prevents Tennessee from fulfi lling the federal The plan’s preamble says, “The plan places law’s intent that overall transportation the highest priority on the preservation planning lead to an integrated, intermodal of existing infrastructure, transportation transportation system that facilitates the services, and public safety. It also calls for effi cient movement of people and goods, investing more in all transportation modes while minimizing transportation-related fuel and developing a long-term sustainable 13 consumption and air pollution.” Partially funding structure for transportation in as a result of that report, the Tennessee Tennessee.” Department of Transportation undertook a broad-based planning process, resulting A recent report by the non-profi t organiza- in a comprehensive long-range plan, called tion Smart Growth America ranks states’ PLANGo. The plan has three parts: a 25-year transportation policies to encourage road Vision Plan, a 10-year Strategic Investments and street projects that support all users and Program, and a 3-year Project Evaluation increase likelihood that citizens will walk System. It sets forth seven principles: and use public transportation. Tennessee ranks 27th overall and received points for • Preserve and Manage the Existing complete streets initiatives—eff orts that Transportation System require planners and engineers to incorporate • Move a Growing, Diverse and Active sidewalks, bike lanes, wheelchair ramps Population and bus pull-off s as appropriate. Tennessee • Support the State’s Economy scored zeroes, however, for categories such as safe routes to schools and quality growth

12 Nichols and Holeywell 2011. 13 Spradley 2003, 21.

16 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR policies.14 (On January 20, 2012, Governor In addition, states will need to improve Haslam announced that 10 Tennessee cities multi-modal transportation within their would receive Safe Routes to School grants, borders—the interconnectedness of various which may improve this ranking.) Another types of transportation—including water, report fi nds that, because of urban sprawl, high-speed rail, air, and roads. Changes Nashville has the longest commute times of outside the boundaries of the United States the 51 most urban cities in America; Memphis will also aff ect transportation in Tennessee. ranks 6th.15 Improving such conditions will For example, expansion of the Panama Canal require greater cooperation among disparate will cause more ships to come to the eastern functions such as education, transportation, US, bringing more traffi c to the Mississippi and housing. River and the Port of Memphis.

Gerald Nicely, Tennessee’s former transportation commissioner, rated Tennessee’s Information Technology transportation infrastructure as somewhat Infrastructure bett er than other states but says we need Some offi cials suggest that information tech- to think more strategically. He noted that nology is Tennessee’s best hope for the future, long-term funding has become a serious issue particularly in its rural areas. Meeting the and that building four-lane highways in some technology and data needs of businesses and parts of Tennessee is simply unrealistic.16 He governments will continue to be a challenge. believes that Tennessee needs to link land-use Connected Tennessee, a non-profi t agency planning and transportation and bett er utilize focused on improving Internet connectivity our waterways. TDOT’s 25-Year Long-Range across the state, indicates that 79% of Transportation Plan identifi ed a funding gap Tennessee residents reported having a home of $16 billion between forecasted revenue and computer in 2011. Rates of ownership were the cost to implement the plan, an amount the highest, however, in urban and suburban that has likely increased since that estimate areas and lowest in rural areas. Rates of was developed. ownership also varied by income and were highest in the 18-44 age group and lowest Meeting future transportation needs will among those 65 or older. require some shifts in emphasis. The increased number of people aged 85 and Using 2010 Census household data, older, for example, may necessitate more Connected Tennessee indicates that 95.2% of public transportation options. Greater intra- Tennesseans now have access to fi xed broad- state, interstate, and international cooperation band service, although approximately 55,000 may also be needed. The Enterprise Center households cannot access fi xed broadband Inc. of Chatt anooga, for example, is working service at speeds now considered necessary to bring high speed ground transportation for many Internet applications (see map 3). linking Atlanta, Chatt anooga, and Nashville. Sixty-four percent of Tennessee’s residents

14 Bhatt , Peppard, Pott s 2010, 14-15. reported having a broadband connection at 15 Cortright 2010, 7. home in 2011, up from 43% in 2007. Nearly 16 For many years Tennessee pursued a plan to connect one-third of Tennessee households, however, all county-seats to interstate highways with four-lane highways. TDOT oﬃ cials indicate that approximately 60 choose not to subscribe to broadband service of these were completed. Because of limited funding, an in their homes, although it is available. additional 14 remain under review. See Tennessee Code Annotated § 54-5-102. County-level data also reﬂ ect wide variations

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 17 Map 3. Average Residential Download Speed in Tennessee, 2012

CLAY PICKETT HANCOCK SULLIVAN ROBERTSON MACON JOHNSON STEWART MONTGOMERY CLAIBORNE SUMNER HAWKINS SCOTT CAMPBELL LAKE OBION TROUSDALE FENTRESS HENRY JACKSON CARTER WEAKLEY OVERTON WASHINGTON HOUSTON UNION GRAINGER CHEATHAM SMITH HAMBLEN GREENE DAVIDSON DICKSON WILSON PUTNAM MORGAN ANDERSON UNICOI DYER BENTON JEFFERSON GIBSON HUMPHREYS KNOX CARROLL DEKALB CUMBERLAND COCKE WHITE WILLIAMSON RUTHERFORD LAUDERDALE CROCKETT ROANE HICKMAN CANNON SEVIER LOUDON HENDERSON WARREN VAN BUREN BLOUNT MADISON PERRY HAYWOOD DECATUR MAURY TIPTON BLEDSOE RHEA LEWIS BEDFORD MEIGS MARSHALL COFFEE CHESTER MCMINN MONROE GRUNDY SEQUATCHIE MOORE SHELBY FAYETTE HARDEMAN WAYNE LAWRENCE MCNAIRY HARDIN GILES FRANKLIN HAMILTON BRADLEY LINCOLN MARION POLK

Symbology Tier 11 (Greater than 1 Gbps)* Tier 5 (3 Mbps to < 6 Mbps) Tier 10 (100 Mbps to < 1 Gbps)* Tier 4 (1.5 Mbps to < 3 Mbps) Tier 9 (50 Mbps to < 100 Mbps)* Tier 3 (768 Kbps to < 1.5 Mbps) Tier 8 (25 Mbps to < 50 Mbps)* Less than 768 Kbps Tier 7 (10 Mbps to < 25 Mbps) Insufficient Data Tier 6 (6 Mbps to < 10 Mbps) *Speed not represented on the map. Source: Connected Tennessee, used by permission.

in infrastructure and adoption across the in the growth period after World War II and state. now approach the end of their useful life. In addition, some areas have seen rapid expan- TACIR’s public infrastructure needs inven- sion to keep pace with population growth, tory reports that telecommunications needs and the water systems’ capacities simply dropped from $24.3 million in 2009 to $16.4 are not big enough. Many of Tennessee’s million in 2010. Tennessee’s broadband cities and utility districts have not actively infrastructure and related services beneﬁ ted addressed the maintenance of these systems.17 greatly from the American Recovery and TACIR’s 2012 Public Infrastructure Needs Reinvestment Act. Connected Tennessee, in Inventory estimates the total amount of its May 2012 Progress Report, indicates that needed water and wastewater projects in all Tennessee public and private entities received counties at $4.4 billion. about $235 million in broadband grants and loans. University of Maryland researchers believe that climate change will worsen water Expansion of broadband and Internet access quality. According to their 2008 report, will continue to be vital for economic devel- Economic Impacts of Climate Change on opment as well as for student success. The Tennessee, need for such targeted investment in Tennes- policymakers see’s technology infrastructure will likely should investi- continue to support global communication gate the degree and commerce. to which changes in Water and Sewer water quality will increase Infrastructure water treat- First Tennessee Development District Many of Tennessee’s water and sewer lines, as well as its treatment plants, were installed 17 Terry 2008, 1.

18 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR TVA SMART Solar-assisted Electric Vehicle Charging Station

ment and management costs and what steps Energy Infrastructure can be taken to integrate possible scenarios into planning and budgeting. Tennesseans’ thirst for energy to power vehicles, heat and cool homes, and run an According to the 2009 American Housing ever-increasing number of electronic devices, Survey for the United States, about 21% of seems insatiable. Although the average households lack access to a public sewer person probably takes energy for granted, system.18 Specifi c data on septic tank use Tennessee has a widespread infrastructure in Tennessee is not available; however, the to support that demand. Giant pipelines Comptroller’s Division of Property Assess- fl ow underground to deliver petroleum and ments maintains property characteristic data natural gas products. A dense network of for 88 of Tennessee’s 95 counties. As of July power plants and lines transmit electricity 2011, of the 1,748,118 buildings in those 88 statewide. More recently, solar “farms” and counties, 880,063 (50%) had septic tanks. wind turbines have become more common. Because that database excludes the four most Vehicles powered by nontraditional fuels urban counties, the statewide percentage such as natural gas, propane, biofuels, and is likely lower. Even so, this information hydrogen signal changes to come in the infra- indicates a large potential need for sewer structure that supplies our cars and trucks. infrastructure. Ultimately, providing sewer What kinds of energy will future Tennesseans systems for everyone clearly is not cost- use, and where will we get it? eff ective, but the widespread use of septic tanks may adversely aff ect water quality. Electricity As Tennessee’s population increases and Nearly half of Tennessee’s electricity is becomes more urban, the underlying waste- produced by coal-fi red power plants; nuclear, water infrastructure will need improvements. natural gas, hydroelectric, and renewable power sources provide the remainder. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that, despite rapid growth in electricity generation from natural gas and 18 US Department of Housing and Urban Development and non-hydropower renewable energy sources, US Census Bureau 2011, Table 1.4.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 19 TVA, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Watts TVA, “The public and business sectors understand the magnitude of the energy problem much better today than they did before. They understand that long-term energy planning for the state of Tennessee is not a one- solution problem. Effective energy planning is a pie made up of many pieces.” —William B. Sansom, President & CEO, The H.T. Hackney Company

coal will continue to play a larger role in need to provide electricity more cleanly and electricity generation. EIA projects few new effi ciently will not diminish. coal-fi red power plants, however, and coal’s share of the total generation mix will fall Petroleum slightly from 45% to 43%. Under Tennessee’s surface lies a network of pipelines that transport both crude and The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) refi ned petroleum products. Tennessee’s recently agreed to shut down 18 of its oldest three grand divisions (East, Middle, and West power-producing units and add emission Tennessee) are fed from various sources. controls to others to comply with federal Middle Tennessee primarily relies on a single clean air standards. To compensate for the pipeline, the Colonial Pipeline. This pipeline removal of these units, TVA is expanding runs from southeastern Texas through its nuclear facilities. Nuclear plants are southern Louisiana and Mississippi, central bett er for air quality, but may have negative Alabama and on through Georgia and South environmental impact because of problems Carolina to the Mid-Atlantic States, branching associated with the disposal of nuclear waste. into Tennessee from Georgia. The Colonial Pipeline also supplies East Tennessee, along So how will the electrical infrastructure of the with a spur of the Plantation Pipeline (see future diff er from the infrastructure of the map 4). Because these are the only sources present? Researchers at the Massachusett s for refi ned fuel products to Middle and East Institute of Technology believe that the Tennessee, the eastern two-thirds of the national power grid will be supplemented by state are somewhat vulnerable to disruption systems that provide electricity locally, even because of the distance from other sources. to individual buildings. More electricity will be generated from renewable sources, and Memphis is supplied by the Valero Refi nery, storage capabilities will improve. And the giving West Tennessee a more local source than the other grand divisions. According

20 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Map 4. Pipelines Supplying the Eastern United States-2011 gasoline per day, down from 3 million per day a few weeks earlier.19

Tennessee’s former energy policy director, Ryan Gooch, indicated that the situation was further complicated because it occurred during the transition from summer to winter gasoline, and providers had sold down their invento- ries. Supplies operated at 5% to 15% capacity for several days. During those few weeks Source: Heat USA of high gasoline prices and long lines at the pump, people to its website, crude oil is supplied to the were forced to focus on their fuel dependence refi nery through the Capline Pipeline and and consider alternative forms of transporta- also can be supplied by barge. Its products tion and fuel conservation. Tennesseans got a are then distributed by truck, barge, and a glimpse of life with gasoline shortages—diffi - pipeline that delivers directly to the Memphis culty gett ing to school and to jobs, diffi culty airport. The rest of Tennessee also receives obtaining goods, and skyrocketing prices at refi ned fuels by barge and truck. According the pump. The shortage highlighted a lack to the executive director of the Tennessee of alternative energy technologies, as well Petroleum Council, the state’s present pipe- as dependence on a single source of fuel for line system is working at maximum capacity transportation. In addition, Tennessee may and cannot handle much more demand. be more dependent on fossil fuels than other states because, as noted earlier, commuting In September of 2008, successive hurri- distances are longer here and mass transit is canes Gustav and Ike severely diminished less prevalent. southeastern US petroleum supplies. As Hurricane Gustav approached the Gulf Coast, 32 of the region’s 33 refi neries shut Natural Gas down operations. After Gustav had passed, EIA categorizes Tennessee as a state that operable refi neries began to get back online, is at least 85% dependent on interstate a process that takes seven to ten days. Just pipelines for its natural gas supply. The US as they were recovering, however, Hurricane Department of Transportation Pipeline and Ike made landfall in Texas and pounded the Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Houston area, causing refi neries that were indicates that Tennessee has 4,901 miles of nearing full capacity after the fi rst storm to interstate natural gas pipelines connected to shut down again. A week after Hurricane 36,998 miles of gas distribution pipelines that Ike, Gulf Coast output was about 50% lower deliver gas to homes and businesses. than normal: as of September 19, 2008, Gulf refi neries produced 1.8 million barrels of 19 Heat USA 2008.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 21 Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Most natural gas consumed in the United North America is investing $1.4 billion to States is produced here or in Canada. Natural retool its Smyrna manufacturing plant to gas can be found deep below the surface produce zero-emissions vehicles and state- of many states—in contrast to oil, which is of-the-art lithium-ion batt ery packs to power concentrated in a few regions of the country them. John Huotari, writing for the Oak or must be imported. The EIA notes strong Ridger, notes that through the eff orts of TVA, growth in shale gas production, as well as the Electric Power Research Institute, and increased use of natural gas in electric power Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee is generation. Shale gas production in the one of fi ve states participating in a large-scale US grew at an average annual rate of 48% installation of solar-assisted electric vehicle between 2006 and 2010, largely because of charging infrastructure and the deployment horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. of up to 5,000 Nissan batt ery electric vehicles. EIA’s 2011 Annual Energy Outlook projects that shale gas production will make up 47% Tennessee has also been experimenting with of total US production by 2035, up from 16% biofuels. The state is home to one of the in 2009. In addition, despite being a mainstay nation’s fi rst cellulosic ethanol demonstra- in the heating and cooling of buildings, tion plants—and the only one dedicated natural gas in its liquid form is gaining new to converting both agricultural residue att ention as a potential transportation fuel and bioenergy crops to fuel ethanol. The source. 74,000-square-foot facility in Vonore has the capacity to produce 250,000 gallons of ethanol Emerging Energy Infrastructure annually from corncobs and switchgrass and is a partnership of DuPont Danisco Cellulosic In recent years state offi cials have sought Ethanol and the University of Tennessee/ new businesses engaged in emerging energy Genera Energy. technologies. According to the Department of Economic and Community Development’s Tennessee’s vehicles of the future will run on Offi ce of Energy Policy’s website, Tennessee energy sources that are diff erent from those is home to “a diverse portfolio of companies we have known for the past century. These in in the solar, wind, biofuels, and electric turn will prompt a need for a diff erent kind vehicle sectors, including Hemlock Semicon- of energy infrastructure. ductor Corp., Wacker Chemie, Nissan North America, SIAG-Aerysin, Alstom Power and DuPont Danisco Cellulosic Ethanol.” Nissan

22 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR The Challenges of Natural Resources: Using Tennessee’s Assets Wisely

Tomorrow’s Tennesseans will need adequate As Tennessee’s population continues to supplies of clean water and air, good land, grow, people will consume more and more and clean, aff ordable energy. Supporting resources while adding more pollutants to transportation, industry, and food produc- their water and air. A recent TACIR research tion will bring new challenges. For some brief highlights problematic land-use trends resources, such as water, we have depended and issues such as sprawl, land fragmenta- largely on our own supplies. For others, tion, loss of farmland, location of industrial such as fossil fuels, we have some availability megasites, and local land use confl icts. New but must import large quantities. We need construction is widely considered positive to reduce our dependence on these outside for the economy, but continued building sources. The way we choose to use each type and sprawl have been linked to storm of resource will aff ect its availability, quality, water run-off and decreases in available and eff ect on the environment. potable water. As noted previously, longer commuting distances to work centers, as well Tennessee is blessed with a rich and varied as more traffi c congestion, lead to increased natural environment, but competing fuel consumption and air pollution. Each economic endeavors can aff ect that environ- type of resource is discussed below; all are ment, leading to contaminants in air, water, inextricably intertwined. and soil that can ultimately harm health. In addition, Tennessee att racts many visitors because of its beautiful land, waterways, and Water historic sites, all of which can easily suff er Access to clean, plentiful water for commer- from activities associated with economic cial, residential, and recreational use is vital activity, such as construction, mining, and to Tennessee’s future. Tennessee has abun- excess cultivation. Tennessee Photo Services

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 23 Gary Layda, Metropolitan Government of Nashville

dant water resources—more than 60,000 miles east, is experiencing water shortages from of rivers and streams and over 570,000 acres the pressures of growth, as well as from in lakes and reservoirs nourish its people droughts. She notes that land use is a and beautify its landscape. Yet water is not complicating factor, particularly aff ecting plentiful everywhere, nor available at all rural water needs and rural sprawl, which times. Some of Tennessee’s cities and towns has been encouraged by the availability experience periodic shortages of drinking of on-site wastewater treatment systems water, especially during times of drought. that reduce the need for individual septic Others are prone to fl ooding in times of systems. English writes, “In-situ package excess. As of November 2010, the Depart- treatment plants enable pockets of residential ment of Environment and Conservation had density in areas that are sparsely populated, posted 62 streams, rivers, and reservoirs as leading to scatt ered development that does public health threats. not necessarily have ready access to public services (schools; police and fi re protection; As Tennessee’s population grows, the state’s paved, well-graded roads; etc.) or adequate water resources will face unprecedented water supplies. Because these areas typically demands from competing interests. Mary have limited land-use controls and planning English of the University of Tennessee’s resources, these scatt ered developments often Institute for Secure and Sustainable Environ- are able to proceed with litt le oversight.” ment in April 2010 wrote that, “Tennessee is well positioned to begin statewide water Tennessee’s water supplies will experience resources planning. With its water with- ever-increasing pressures in the coming drawal registration program, its regulation years. Because local offi cials often fail to of inter-basin transfers, and its strengths in consider the eff ects of development on water water quality monitoring and regulation supply, particularly in years when water is (particularly its Aquatic Resource Alteration plentiful, long-range thinking about Tennes- Permit program), Tennessee has some of see’s water resources now might help ensure the essential underpinnings for integrated, the availability of suffi cient clean water in the statewide water resources planning.” years to come.

Dr. English points out, however, that Tennessee, like other states in the South-

24 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Land are harmful for people to breathe. In 1970, Congress passed the Clean Air Act. That legis- The ways that people use land ultimately lation and its subsequent revisions prompted a aff ect agriculture, commerce, air and water signifi cant reduction of contaminants released quality, and scenic beauty. Statewide land- into the air, from both industrial sites and cars. use data show a slow but steady increase in The Clean Air Act requires the Environmental developed land, corresponding to Tennessee’s Protection Agency to set standards for six growing population. As land is developed, it common pollutants: ground-level ozone, reduces the amount available for growing food particulate matt er, carbon monoxide, nitrogen and diminishes vegetation that helps fi lter air dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and lead. and water and prevent erosion. The National Resources Conservation Service indicates Compared with a few decades ago, Tennes- that, in 1982, 6.6% of Tennessee’s land had see’s air is signifi cantly cleaner. Because of been developed. By 2007, the percentage of increased federal att ention to air quality, our developed land had grown to 12.2%. This industries have made signifi cant progress in represents an 85% increase in developed reducing harmful emissions. Cars have been acres, coinciding with a decrease in cropland. modifi ed to reduce air contaminants and some From 1982 to 2007, 25% of cropland acres in local governments have implemented emis- Tennessee were converted to other uses. For sions testing programs. Tennessee, however, that same period, is still heavily Tennessee ranked “We do not inherit the earth from dependent on th 7 nationwide our ancestors; we borrow it from fossil fuels for for loss of agri- our children.” energy, and cultural land. producing energy In addition to Native American Proverb from fossil fuels general loss of tends to release cropland, the increased use of remaining more contaminants into the air than energy cropland to supply energy may aff ect the produced from other sources. In 2012, the EPA availability of food for people and livestock. listed eight Tennessee counties for nonatt ainment of EPA standards, most for particulate As the state’s population grows, Tennessee matt er or ozone. In its State of the Air reports, will continue to lose open land to purposes the American Lung Association gives Fs to such as homebuilding, surface mining, road several Tennessee counties for ozone pollution. construction, and industrial development. Policy makers will need to balance the As Tennessee moves into the future, policy demand for more land with the need to grow makers will need to consider air quality as food, prevent fl ooding, and provide green they make other decisions. Recent increased spaces. att ention paid to natural gas as a fuel source, for example, has been prompted in part by its Air low carbon dioxide emissions. Obviously, air is vital to all life. The advent of industry and the proliferation of automo- Fossil Fuels biles in the US brought increased emissions In 2010, the US Energy Information Admin- of pollutants into the air, many of which istration ranked Tennessee 19th among states

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 25 Bredesen convened an energy task force that met several times. The task force’s goal was to develop a state energy plan that included

• opportunities for state government to lead by example; • prospective policies, legislation, regulations and/or incentives to encourage Hawkins County School Solar Project public and private sector energy conservation;

in total energy consumption per person. • possible public-private partnerships and Because of widespread use of electricity, rather collaborations to encourage research and than natural gas or oil for heating, Tennessee development of clean-energy technolo- ranks 13th in electricity consumption and 14th gies; and in coal consumption. More than one-half of • strategies for expanding the use of Tennessee households use electricity as their alternative fuels and renewable energy primary source of energy for home heating. In sources.21 addition, Tennessee’s hot summers contribute The task force’s eff orts culminated in the to high consumption of electricity for cooling. Tennessee Clean Energy Future Act, Public Nearly half of the state’s electricity is still Chapter 529, Acts of 2009. The law promotes produced by coal-fi red power plants; nuclear, energy cost-saving measures in state build- natural gas, and hydroelectric sources provide ings, the purchase of energy-effi cient state the remainder.20 The burning of coal aff ects motor vehicles, an emerging industry tax Tennessee’s air, while its extraction aff ects the credit for industries promoting clean energy state’s water and landscape. technology, and increased emphasis on residential weatherization. Maintaining adequate fuel supplies for auto- mobiles and trucks also presents challenges for The ways in which Tennessee pursues the United States generally and for Tennessee continued development and mineral and gas specifi cally. Our country’s dependence on extraction—and other potential intrusions on foreign fuel sources makes us vulnerable to the natural landscape—will certainly aff ect political decisions and unrest in oil-producing our quality of life, which in turn aff ects our countries. In early 2011, fuel prices spiked economic viability. As tourist development because of events in the Middle East. Even commissioner Susan Whitaker noted, “Many so, proposed eff orts to increase access to US people come to Tennessee because it is a fuel sources have sparked opposition from beautiful state. If it becomes ugly, they won’t environmental advocates. come. We must have both economic development and environmental protection.” Gett ing Tennessee cannot address its energy policy the most eff ective and effi cient use of Tennes- without the involvement of many other see’s resources, while minimizing damage, players, including the federal government will continue to challenge our state’s leaders. and other states. Nevertheless, Tennessee has made lessening dependence on fossil fuel a priority. In May 2008, former Governor Phil 21 Executive Summary can be found at htt p://raabassociates. 20 US Energy Information Administration 2009, 1-2. org/main/projects.asp?proj=68&state=Current.

26 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR The Challenges of Governance: The Entities That Lead Us Local Government President of the Tennessee County Mayors Association, believes that local governments Challenges will increasingly be forced to work together just to provide basic services. Tennesseans cherish the concept of local governance. The state has 95 counties, 347 The global economy has aff ected both municipalities, and myriad other local and local businesses and local leadership. The multi-government entities such as utility Southern Growth Policies Board notes in districts, special school districts, and develop- Seeing the Future: Leadership and Social Capital ment districts. Some people interviewed that traditional sources of community leader- believe Tennessee has too many small govern- ship are changing. The local bank president ments and that some need to consolidate or at and newspaper publisher are often no longer least fi nd ways to work together bett er. autonomous but affi liates of large conglomer- ates. Global philanthropies are more likely to In the recession’s aftermath, many local have a greater infl uence on local policies, and governments are experiencing unprecedented technology has changed the way that people fi scal challenges. Although sales tax collec- communicate, work, and play. In addition, tions are rising once again, many of Tennes- many key issues, such as transportation plan- see’s counties are collecting less than they ning, economic development, and environ- did four to fi ve years ago. Local property tax mental protection require action beyond any bases will also be subject to declines as reap- town’s boundaries. praisals begin to refl ect declining property values. Providing basic government services Two offi cials interviewed for this report such as animal shelters and trash collection cited examples in which utility districts were has become increasingly challenging. Peggy clashing, either with each other or with neigh- Bevels, Lincoln County Mayor and former boring cities. In one community, two utility Giles County Courthouse, Tennessee Historical Commission

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 27 districts were building government funds, from higher education to water treatment plants programs for the aging. adjacent to each other rather than merging Tennessee has long prided itself on being their eff orts. In a “low-tax” state. In 2009, the non-profi t another, a city offi cial Tax Foundation ranked Tennessee 47th in said that annexation the nation in state and local tax burden; of areas served by Tennessee was lowest in the Southeast. In utility districts can be 2010, the US Bureau of Economic Analysis diffi cult when utility ranked Tennessee 37th in income per capita, district water lines are however, indicating that its ability to pay too small to meet city taxes is higher than its actual tax burden. fi re protection require- Although many individuals and businesses ments. fi nd low taxes desirable, the lack of resultant Tennessee Photo Services public funds means that Tennessee constantly Until July 2011, local land-use planning had struggles to maintain public services and continued state focus and support through infrastructure—much less actively improve the Department of Economic and Community them—for its growing population. Conse- Development’s Division of Local Planning. quently, other states that have income taxes Even so, one interviewee, noting that the may have an advantage for recruiting new state’s policies in this area were developed business. In an interview with the Tennessee in the 1970s and 1980s, said that they were County News, Deputy Governor Claude geared toward urban sprawl, not quality Ramsey says, “One of the great things about growth. In the spring of 2011, Governor Bill Tennessee is that we don’t have an income Haslam announced that he would abolish the tax. But we found that other states will use Division of Local Planning and shift resources their state income tax as a source to give to new regional economic development initia- money back to a new industry or an existing tives. Technical assistance for local communi- industry that is doing expansion.” ties may be partially absorbed elsewhere, but eliminating shared state-level planning Several people interviewed noted that the expertise may also diminish local govern- increasing demand for public services, ments’ ability to promote quality growth. coupled with the decreasing ability to raise public revenue, will be a long-term state State Government Challenges challenge. Tennesseans seem to want a high quality of life but a low tax rate. The state’s Finding the Funds—In 2013, Tennessee high dependence on sales tax for revenue fi nds itself beginning to recover from the will continue to challenge state government. Great Recession, but the impacts of that Although some believe that Tennessee’s tax economic downturn will be felt well into the structure att racts business and industry, future. Moreover, Governor Bill Haslam has others think it stymies our ability to develop noted that many government programs are economically by reducing potential incentives simply unsustainable. He has particularly and limiting our ability to improve education cited health care cost increases and their for youth and adults. consequent eff ect on everything else that the

28 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Table 2. State Government Retirement Trends—June 2000 through 2011

Full-time Executive Full-time Legislative/Judicial All Full-time Employees Retirements Retirements Retirements Fiscal Year Total Number Percent Total Number Percent Total Number Percent

2000 38,307 959 2.50% 2,569 41 1.60% 40,876 1,000 2.45% 2001 39,363 865 2.20% 3,487 35 1.00% 42,850 900 2.10% 2002 40,169 966 2.40% 3,431 27 0.79% 43,600 993 2.28% 2003 40,804 1,033 2.53% 3,456 34 0.98% 44,260 1,067 2.41% 2004 41,153 1,026 2.49% 3,502 43 1.23% 44,655 1,069 2.39% 2005 42,250 987 2.34% 3,658 49 1.34% 45,908 1,036 2.26% 2006 43,473 1,025 2.36% 3,707 55 1.48% 47,180 1,080 2.29% 2007 43,347 959 2.21% 3,756 97 2.58% 47,103 1,056 2.24% 2008* 43,826 2,588 5.91% 3,881 65 1.67% 47,707 2,653 5.56% 2009 41,038 969 2.36% 3,867 76 1.97% 44,905 1,045 2.33% 2010 40,784 1,143 2.80% 3,824 71 1.86% 44,608 1,214 2.72% 2011 38,827 1,096 2.82% 3,782 109 2.88% 42,609 1,205 2.83% *Note:In2008ExecutiveBranchemployeeswereofferedabuyͲoutincentivethatLegislative/Judicialemployeeswerenot.The2008figure includes1,576retirementsthatresultedfromthatincentive. Source:TennesseeDepartmentofHumanResourcesInformationSystemsSection.

Workforce—Some people interviewed Even as the state government workforce has for this report are worried about the state been reduced, more people are expected government workforce. State managers born to retire. Figure 1 illustrates the increasing during the post-war baby boom are retiring number of state employees who are, or will now. In addition to an overall intentional be, eligible to retire in the coming years. By downsizing of the state’s workforce, this 2015, about 14,281 state employees will be trend is chipping away at the state govern- eligible to retire. Assuming the 2011 level of ment’s institutional knowledge base. Some 42,609 total employees, this is about 33% of of these changes also reﬂ ect shifts toward and the state’s workforce. away from privatization of state government.

Figure 1. State Employees’ Eligibility for Retirement Table 2 illustrates the expansion and contrac- 2007 through 2015 18,000 tion of the state government workforce 1,064 since 2000. In that year, state government 16,000 1,147 14,000 1,020 1,144 had 40,876 full-time employees. By 2008, 924 12,000 948 that number had grown to a high of 47,707. 818 10,000 785 Eligible executive branch employees were 685 8,000 oﬀ ered a buy-out incentive that contributed 14,281 6,000 12,541 10,394 10,976 10,992 to a decline in the total to 44,905 in 2009. 8,747 9,017 4,000 7,487 7,068 By June of 2011, the number dropped to 2,000 42,609—a decline of nearly 11% in just 3 0 years. A three-year freeze on state employee 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Service Age 55 with 25 yrs of service

salary increases further exacerbated the Note: “Service” refers to members who are 60 years old and vested or members who have 30 years of service, regardless of age. These members are eligible for full benefits. Employees who situation. These changes will help the state are at least 55 years old with 25 years of service are eligible with a reduced benefit. See government spend less for personnel and http://treasury.tn.gov/tcrs/RetireEligibility.html. beneﬁ ts but may aﬀ ect its ability to provide Source: Tennessee State Treasurer, Retirement Division. needed public services.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 29 The state’s inability to off er competitive ability to get those who should use the data salaries for some professionals may also make to do so.” it diffi cult to hire people with needed expertise. The former commissioner of transporta- Addressing the Contrasts tion, for example, spoke of the diffi culty his administration had hiring a multi-modal A generation ago employment opportunities transportation expert. available to Tennesseans, regardless of where they lived, were likely more similar than Government Information Technology—State today. Manufacturing and farming jobs were and local governments also face a need to more plentiful. Education was less vital to continually improve their computer and data earning a living wage. But in 2013, Tennessee capabilities. Several state offi cials bemoaned has fewer farms, and manufacturing jobs the state government’s information tech- have declined (see fi gure 2). nology and data inadequacies, citing anti- quated systems and a lack of compatibility The contrasts between Tennessee’s rural among the computer systems of their various counties and their urban and suburban departments. One former commissioner counterparts have grown wider. Yet even wished he had real-time data upon which though our cities are the traditional engines to make decisions. Another wished for an of economic activity, they too have pockets of integrated geographic information system concentrated poverty. Disparities in wealth that showed everything his department was manifest themselves both within and across responsible for. counties in diff erences in schools, the ability to att ract business, and the ability to invest in Some of Tennessee’s local governments also communities. lack needed technology—and some resist using technology altogether. According to In the past two decades, many of the counties Mike Ramage, former Executive Director of around Tennessee’s largest cities have grown Connected Tennessee, several cities don’t and developed into economic centers them- have websites. Some local offi cials still will not use e-mail. Figure 2. Manufacturing Employment in Tennessee, 1990-2015

Perhaps the March 2008 Governing magazine Report Card summed it up best: “When all is said and done, a state’s skill with information is found at the intersection of three distinct operations: the willingness to share data, the capacity to generate good information, and the

30 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Tennessee Photo Services

selves, more prosperous generally than either Although Tennessee’s rural areas provide the urban or the rural areas on their borders. some of our state’s most scenic landscapes How will this aff ect the state’s economic and richest agricultural resources, they are development? Will the suburban communi- confounded by geographic isolation, poor tax ties become hubs for the nearby rural areas? bases, poorly funded schools, undereducated Will they complement or detract from the people, lack of technological resources, and urban counties? lack of adequate transportation. Each year, the Department of Economic and Commu- In 2010, Tennessee’s median household nity Development identifi es “economically income was $41,461 but ranged from a high distressed counties.” As of July 1, 2011, 27 of of $82,273 in Williamson County to a low Tennessee’s 95 counties fi t the criteria for that of $24,891 in Hancock County. Arguably, designation—high average unemployment, Williamson County’s income levels are so low per capita market income, and high high as to make it an outlier, but the diff er- poverty rates (see map 5). ence between Hancock and the second highest county, Wilson, is still signifi cant. Of those 27 counties, 19 had been designated (Wilson County had a median household “economically distressed” for each of the four income of $56,270.)22 previous years as well, indicating chronic

22 US Department of Agriculture 2011.

Map 5. Economically Distressed Counties-2011

Robertson Pickett Hancock Sullivan Macon Clay Johnson Stewart Claiborne Hawkins Montgomery Sumner Campbell Lake Obion Fentress Scott Henry Trousdale Jackson Overton Washington Carter Weakley Houston Union Grainger Hamblen Cheatham Smith Davidson Greene Dyer Benton Dickson Wilson Putnam Morgan Anderson Unicoi Jefferson Gibson Carroll Humphreys Knox DeKalb Cumberland Cocke Williamson White Crockett Roane Lauderdale Hickman Rutherford Cannon Sevier Loudon Warren Van Buren Madison Henderson Perry Blount Haywood Maury Bledsoe Rhea Tipton Decatur Lewis Marshall Bedford Coffee Meigs Chester McMinn Monroe Grundy Sequatchie Other Counties Hardeman Moore Shelby Fayette Hardin Wayne Lawrence McNairy Giles Hamilton Bradley Distressed Counties Lincoln Franklin Marion Polk

Source: Tennessee Department of Economic & Community Development

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 31 Tennessee Photo Services Photo Tennessee conditions of poverty.23 Traditional farming, The suburban counties have been experi- as well as manufacturing, has declined in the encing challenges of rapid growth. Although rural areas, while the costs of providing basic their economic activity is the envy of less government services and educating children prosperous counties, they too face such have become prohibitively expensive. challenges as a constant need for school construction and pressure to expand public To survive in the future, Tennessee’s rural, infrastructure and services. Their growing urban, and suburban places will all need to population continues to put more and more ﬁ nd new strengths. Our rural areas have traﬃ c on arterial highways, as well as the natural amenities that could be att ractive as Interstates along which they tend to develop. people consider quality of life when choosing jobs and places to live. And the development In short, future Tennesseans will need to of technology may make rural living more balance the strengths and challenges of their feasible. But if rural towns are to survive, localities with the strengths and challenges of they need jobs and they have to become the state as a whole. places where young and educated people want to live.

The state’s urban areas will face challenges as well. The cities are experiencing population increases as people move away from the rural counties. Larger concentrations of people increase the demand for government services, such as drinking water and wastewater treatment, solid waste disposal, transportation, and police and ﬁ re protection.

23 Counties listed as “Economically Distressed” for four or more years include Campbell, Claiborne, Clay, Cocke, Fentress, Gibson, Grundy, Hancock, Hardeman, Haywood, Johnson, Lake, Lauderdale, Lawrence, Lewis, Perry, Pickett , Scott , and Wayne counties.

32 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Conclusions and Recommendations Tennessee, as a state, lacks to 1995, Tennessee had statutorily established long-term vision. entities to encourage coordinated thinking about the state’s future to varying degrees. Although specialized pockets of focused (A history can be found in appendix C.) thinking about the future can be found within some state agencies, regional organizations, The Tennessee Planning Commission, estab- and volunteer multi-county groups, conver- lished in 1935 at the urging of the Tennessee sations with many state leaders confi rmed Valley Authority, included the Governor and that there is no broad, representative group eight citizens representing the state’s three charged with thinking broadly about the grand divisions and both political parties. state’s future. Consequently, state agen- The commission’s earliest work emphasized cies sometimes work at cross-purposes, as physical planning. Its staff prepared state do local governments—not to mention the and regional plans, collected data, conducted private and not-for-profi t sectors. research, edited reports and publications for the governor, and assisted communities Approximately half of the people interviewed with local planning. The enabling legislation, for this report thought that education was Public Chapter 43, Acts of 1935, states Tennessee’s biggest challenge. They cited . . . that the state plan shall be made its eff ect on the state’s ability to provide a with the general purpose of guiding skilled workforce and promote economic and accomplishing a coordinated, development. They also cited the eff ect of adjusted, effi cient and economic an educated citizenry on health and civic development of the state, which will, engagement. Consequently, it behooves in accordance with present and future everyone to focus on improving educational needs and resources, best promote outcomes for all children. the health, safety, morals, order, Similarly, if state leaders were to determine convenience, prosperity and welfare of that improved health of our citizens should the people of the State of Tennessee, as be a broad state goal, then transportation well as effi ciency and economy in the offi cials and local governments may think process of development; including, more about building and design guidelines amongst other things, such distribu- that accommodate pedestrians and bicycles. tion of population and of the uses of Building designers might make stairwells land within the state for urbanization, more inviting. Employers might consider trade, industry, habitation, recreation, ways to help employees get more exercise on agriculture, forestry and other uses as the job. In addition, to reduce commute times will tend to create conditions favor- and fuel consumption, local land use plan- able to transportation, health, safety, ners and state transportation planners could prosperity, and civic, recreational, work more closely together to place schools, educational and cultural opportuni- businesses, and residences in closer proximity ties, tend to reduce the wastes of to existing roads and to each other. physical, fi nancial or human resources which result from either excessive Although Tennessee presently lacks an congestion or excessive scatt ering established planning and visioning process, of population and tend toward an that has not always been the case. From 1935 effi cient and economic conservation,

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 33 Town of Jonesborough Town production and distribution of food, Greater interaction and water and minerals and of sanitary coordination are needed and other facilities. within and among levels of Early staff undertook surveys and studies government, as well as with of water resources, land use problems, the private and non-profi t and recreation facilities. One report led to sectors. the formation of the Tennessee State Park System.24 Many of the offi cials interviewed recognized the “functional silos” in which they operate In the ensuing decades, the state’s planning and said they would welcome more coopera- and research functions experienced cycles tion across agency lines. Several cited state of decentralization and centralization and challenges that aff ect more than one agency, varying degrees of direct gubernatorial or even level of government. control. In general, Democratic governors tended to centralize such functions, while Increased cooperation between state and Republicans tended to decentralize planning local governments could also improve service functions into the various departments. delivery. Former transportation commis- Governors of both parties sometimes sioner Gerald Nicely cited a situation in convened broad-based task forces, however, which his department planned a whole road to focus on specifi c state problems such as project, only to discover that a local govern- education, corrections, or obesity. Most ment had approved construction of a medical recently, Governor Haslam has convened task center in the middle of it. One city offi cial forces on health and wellness, methamphet- cited homelessness as an unfunded mandate amine prevention, and school vouchers. imposed by the state on local governments. He noted that state departments, such as Mental Health and Correction, discharge residents into cities without providing adequate support, creating a burden for the local governments. He wishes the state agencies would work with the local governments 24 Wagner, Jr., 2-5. to improve the situation.

34 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Tennessee Photo Services

The Governmental Accountability Act of we make progress erratically—focusing on 2002,25 also requires state departments and education this term, economic development agencies to strategically plan. Although this the next, crime next. Because we lack any causes the various agencies to analyze their larger context in which to place these eff orts, own areas of responsibility to some extent, we fail to sustain suffi cient progress on no one coordinates eff orts across agency multiple fronts while we are focusing on just lines or requires coordination among levels a few . . . .” Governors and their cabinets of government. As a result, important issues must necessarily respond to the state’s such as the multiple eff ects of aging on health immediate problems and disasters, causing care, transportation, and housing may not be longer-term issues to fall by the wayside. addressed. And unlike states with successful performance measurement systems, the goals The book, Government and Politics in Tennessee, expressed in these plans do not drive the identifi es another challenge of gubernatorial budget. transitions:

“Too often key positions in the Focusing on Tennessee’s governor’s offi ce are awarded to top future will require continuity campaign staff , sometimes ignoring of thought and leadership. the fact that the jobs require entirely diff erent skills. . . . Such an att itude Tennessee’s governor plays an important on more than one occasion has led to role in initiating programs and determining the abandonment of good programs for funding priorities. The governor also sets the no other reason than the program was tone for the various state agencies. But the identifi ed with a previous administra- governor’s infl uence necessarily is limited to tion.” one or two terms, a maximum of eight years. (Lyons, Scheb, Stair, p.111.) Addressing some of the state’s big problems may require a much longer timeframe. The The General Assembly’s ability to establish a Commission on Practical Government, an ad long-range state vision is even more limited. hoc entity created in 1995, stated that, “Today State senators are elected to four-year terms while the House members serve just two. 25 Public Chapter 875, Acts of 2002, codifi ed as Tennessee In addition, because they represent their Code Annotated § 9-4-5601 et seq.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 35 Murfreesboro Greenway

particular districts, they may fi nd it more Greater Nashville Regional Council and diffi cult to consider the wellbeing of the state Vanderbilt University’s Institute for Public as a whole. To meet its challenges, Tennessee Policy Studies. Although Cumberland needs to fi nd ways to work on long-term Region Tomorrow’s focus does not encom- initiatives that transcend changes in adminis- pass all policy areas, the organization has trations and intrastate rivalries. established a vision for growth of the Middle Tennessee Region and developed quality Successful local and regional growth guiding principles. For example, it makes a comprehensive “Quality Growth eff orts may provide ideas for Toolbox” available to local government a state visioning process. offi cials and in May 2009, rolled out “The Although Tennessee abolished its earlier Power of Ten,” an ongoing eff ort to promote entities charged with preparing for the future, regional collaboration in Middle Tennessee. some of the state’s local and regional agencies may provide ideas for the state as a whole. Cumberland Region Tomorrow has identifi ed Though they may emphasize diff erent issues, six regional issues: all represent eff orts by more than one entity • Transportation/Transit to come together for common purpose and • Land Use/Quality Growth and Sustain- benefi t. able Development • Infrastructure Regional and Local Entities • Open Space Conservation Tennessee has several regional planning and visioning eff orts that appear to be working. • Air and Water Quantity and Quality Cumberland Region Tomorrow, for example, • Economic Competitiveness is “a private, non-profi t, citizen-based In 2011, Cumberland Region Tomorrow led regional organization working with public a successful eff ort to develop the Tennessee and private partners, dedicated to planning Regions’ Sustainable Communities Round- for the future livability and economic vitality table, a network of regional organizations, of our ten-county region.” According to its state agencies, and philanthropic organiza- website, the organization was spawned by tions from across Tennessee. The round- a one-day forum in 1999 sponsored by the

36 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR table’s purpose is to provide a statewide In 2011, PlanET, a fi ve-county East Tennessee forum for resource sharing, communication, eff ort, began soliciting ideas from citizens and collaboration. about challenges facing their region and possible solutions. The group hopes to The Clarksville-Montgomery County adopt a regional vision and implementation Economic Development Council is another strategies that can be used by individual agency involved in regional planning. jurisdictions.26 According to its website, it is “a private, non- profi t economic development umbrella orga- Innovation Valley Inc. is a regional economic nization that provides staffi ng, management, development initiative in the Knoxville-Oak and a unifi ed direction for the Clarksville Ridge area. According to its website, it Area Chamber of Commerce, the Industrial focuses on science, technology, and business Development Board of Montgomery County, in a 25-mile corridor. The Innovation Valley and the Clarksville-Montgomery County Strategic Blueprint is a fi ve-year plan to Convention and Visitors Bureau.” Its create economic success for the region with eff orts are supported through the Aspire a specifi c focus on education and workforce Foundation, a privately funded economic development, as well as on technology and and community development initiative for entrepreneurship. Clarksville and Montgomery County, but its members include city and county offi cials, a The Blueprint focuses on six strategic university president, and representatives of program areas: the local business community. • Education and workforce development Another regional eff ort, “Nine Counties. One • Technology and entrepreneurship Vision.,” was a citizen-driven eff ort of nine • Global marketing East Tennessee Counties to develop a regional • Business retention and expansion vision. Beginning in 2000, the organization • Public policy developed recommendations for such diverse 27 issues as downtowns, social services, trans- • Resources for living portation, education, and the environment. West Tennessee has not been without its own According to its website, planning and visioning eff orts. Memphis Fast Forward28 was convened by the Mayor The comprehensive scope of the Nine of Shelby County, the Mayor of the City Counties. One Vision. agenda and of Memphis, and Memphis Tomorrow, an its regional thrust resulted from association of chief executive offi cers of participants embracing the idea that Memphis’ largest enterprises. According to all parts of the region are important its website, the organization is focused on to the well-being of the whole. Vision jobs, a bett er-educated workforce, a safer participants were able to set aside local community, a healthier citizenry, and more issues and focus on regional solutions. effi cient government in Memphis and Shelby By design, the organization abolished itself County. after fi ve years but left a roadmap for other 26 For more information see htt p://www.planeastt n.org. entities to follow. 27 For more information see htt p://www.innovationvalleyinc. org. 28 For more information see htt p://memphisfastforward. com/.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 37 Memphis Streetscape

Leadership Groups Cabinet Councils and Other In addition to regional organizations, Interdepartmental Groups several Tennessee cities and counties have Several former state offi cials cited the Gover- established local “leadership groups.” nor’s Jobs Cabinet, established by former These groups bring together local leaders Tennessee governor Phil Bredesen (2003- to encourage collaborative thinking and 2011) in Executive Order 6 as an example of understanding about their communities. a successful cross-governmental working Although they have a state association, the model. The Council had 12 members, Association of Community Leadership, including representatives of the Departments apparently no one has ever att empted to pull of Economic and Community Development, together their recommendations. WestStar, Labor and Workforce Development, Revenue, based at the University of Tennessee and Tourism. The departmental representa- at Martin, seeks to foster collaborative tives worked and travelled together to recruit thinking among community leaders from business to Tennessee. The participating West Tennessee. According to its website, commissioners lauded the cooperation WestStar’s mission is “to identify, encourage among their departments and the ability and equip community-minded people who to provide a united voice to prospective want to become more involved, want to help industry. West Tennessee become a bett er place, and are willing to accept assertive and dynamic The Governor’s Energy Task Force was leadership roles.”29 A similar non-profi t another interdepartmental eff ort cited by organization, Leadership Middle Tennessee, some as a successful cooperative visioning serves a 10-county area in the central part eff ort. The task force met eight times during of the state. These groups of local leaders 2008 and emerged with several energy recom- participate in brainstorming sessions about mendations that resulted in Public Chapter their communities and might contribute to an 529, Acts of 2009, the Tennessee Clean Energy overall state visioning process.30 Futures Act.

The administration of Tennessee governor 29 For more information see htt p://www.utm.edu/departments/weststar/. Donald Sundquist (1995-2003) provides 30 For more information see Leadership Middle Tennessee, another example of an interagency working htt p://leadmt.org/about.html.

38 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Tennessee Photo Services Photo Tennessee group that crossed traditional “silos” and Other states’ planning and emerged with a vision for education that visioning processes could focused Tennessee’s eff orts for several succeeding years. A member of the gover- provide models for Tennessee. nor’s staff facilitated several meetings of A number of other states provide possible the group, which included staff of the models, including one of Tennessee’s neigh- Department of Education, the State Board bors. Some are strictly governmental; others of Education, TACIR, and the Comptroller’s are private or a combination of public and Offi ce. They emerged with three priorities: private representation. All, however, have pre-kindergarten, reading initiatives, and articulated a common vision that can be used teacher training and mentoring. by policymakers in all levels and sectors. Four of these are highlighted below: Tennessee governor Lamar Alexander (1979- 1987) created a Safe Growth Cabinet which Council on Virginia’s Future32 ran for 4 years. The interdepartmental group addressed many emerging environmental Virginia’s General Assembly created the issues including clean water, hazardous Council on Virginia’s Future in 2003. waste management, and protection of natural According to the council’s website its purpose and cultural areas.31 is to • provide a long-term focus on high- Current Tennessee governor Bill Haslam has priority issues, indicated plans for four cabinet councils. • create an environment for improved policy and budget decision-making, • increase government accountability and transparency, • improve government performance, and

32 For more information see htt p://www.future.Virginia. 31 Smith 1986. gov/.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 39 Figure 3. Roadmap for Virginia’s Future

“The Council provides a forum where legislative, executive branch, and citizen leaders can come together for work that transcends election cycles, partisanship, limited organizational boundaries, and short-term thinking.”

Source: Council on Virginia’s Future website.

• engage citizens in dialogue about Michigan People and Land34 Virginia’s future.33 People and Land (PAL) was a Michigan The council has 8 legislative members and 10 organization focused on growth and change non-legislative members, and the governor that operated from 2000 to 2010. Funded by serves as the chair. It supports the develop- the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, PAL brought ment and implementation of a “roadmap” for together various interests—chambers of Virginia’s future, a process for establishing a commerce, environmental groups, suburbs, state vision (see fi gure 3). The council then realtors, farmers, and the NAACP. Through measures and reports the state’s progress research, strategic planning and smart toward long-term goals. The council policies, the leadership of PAL determined regularly reviews the roadmap process and that Michigan must focus on six key sectors updates it as needed. Virginia was recently in order to become a successful participant recognized by the Pew Center on the States in the global economy. The organization’s for its use of the council’s “Virginia Performs” website lists “Six Pillars of Prosperity,” an data system, which enables offi cials to agenda to reinvent Michigan as a global “systematically tackle the state’s budget crisis economic player: and increase agency productivity.” Pillar 1: Att ractive Cities and The council’s director is employed by the Neighborhoods University of Virginia. She believes that From major cities to small towns, we the academic affi liation helps maintain an need vibrant neighborhoods where appearance of impartiality, though it is people want to live and raise families. Virginia’s business community that has been the driving force behind the council from its inception.

33 See also Code of Virginia §2.2-2683 et seq. 34 For more information see www.peopleandland.org.

40 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Pillar 2: Highly Competitive Schools Envision Utah35 and Lifelong Learning Opportunities Since 1997, Envision Utah has served as Education creates the skilled workers a neutral facilitator to bring together that we need to compete in a global state’s leaders to help shape a state vision. marketplace. According to its website, Envision Utah Pillar 3: Knowledge-Based brings together residents, elected offi cials, Technologies and Michigan’s Future developers, conservationists, business Job growth in Michigan will come leaders, and other interested parties to make from new and creative businesses. informed decisions about how Utah should grow. Utah’s governor serves as its honorary Pillar 4: Thriving Agriculture to co-chair, and the organization’s governing Grow Michigan’s Economy board and executive committ ee have both Michigan’s second-largest industry public and private sector members. The can provide food, fuel, and innova- group also strives to get input from the tion while preserving beautiful rural public and then develop scenarios for Utah’s landscapes. future. It receives funding from both public and private sources. In the January 2012 issue Pillar 5: Natural Resources for of Governing magazine, managing editor Recreation and Job Creation Elizabeth Daigneau, touted the organization: Michigan is blessed with natural What makes Envision Utah a pioneer, resources that enrich our quality of according to a US Department of life and enhance our economy. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) case study, is that it estab- Pillar 6: Inclusive and Entrepre- lishes “broad buy-in and signifi cant neurial Culture public engagement.” Envision does Innovation, new ideas, new people, this by conducting signifi cant research new businesses: this is the currency of into what the region will look like in the new economy. 40 or 50 years, presenting that data to citizens, surveying their satisfaction PAL encouraged regional partnerships with that data and using what has through Regional Prosperity Initiative typically been dissatisfaction with Grants—competitive grants awarded to enti- future scenarios to get stakeholders ties demonstrating multi-sector and multi- to put aside politics and focus on real jurisdictional collaboration at the regional solutions. level. The PAL Leadership Council selected nine regional eff orts to receive these grants. myregion.org The parent organization has now ended, but several of these regional initiatives continue. Although a regional rather than statewide In addition, parts of the vision developed by organization, the Orlando, Florida-based PAL have been adopted by the state govern- myregion.org also provides a model for ment. cooperative visioning.36 The organization has created a collective vision to help Central

35 For more information see htt p://envisionutah.org/index. html. 36 For more information see htt p://myregion.org.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 41 Florida compete in the global economy and citizens about state and local government. improve the quality of life for its people. Specifi cally, the panel recommended Led by a group of public, private, and civic that an independent, nonpartisan, leaders, its four key themes are non-governmental organization • conservation, be established to conduct ongoing • countryside, research and provide regular updates to the public on matt ers related • centers, and to Colorado’s fi scal health, other • corridors. signifi cant trends aff ecting the state’s Here is what myregion.org’s website says: economy and on proposed initiatives and major legislation relating to Quite simply, myregion.org is a tool. taxation and public spending. It’s a tool that Central Florida will use to break down the barriers that divide us. We will take everything we know about our region, bring it here, mix it all together and watch what happens. We will learn what it takes to turn Central Florida into one region with one goal: to be the best and most prosperous community in the world.

Center for Colorado’s Economic Future37 The Center for Colorado’s Economic Future is another group working on creative visioning. The center was founded in 2007 based on a key recommendation of its predecessor group, the Colorado Economic Futures Panel. The initial panel was created by the Univer- sity of Denver, and worked from fall 2004 to January 2006. Its mission was to examine the ﬁ scal health of Colorado’s state and local governments and their ability to sustain fundamental public investments appropriate to Colorado’s long-term economic vitality.

Recommendations of the Colorado Economic Futures Panel addressed speciﬁ c constitu- tional proposals, as well as the need to bett er inform voters about ballot proposals and

37 For more information see htt p://www.du.edu/economicfuture/.

42 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Where Do We Go From Here?

Like Virginia, Utah, Michigan, and Colorado, Engage Leadership Groups Tennessee might benefi t from a statewide If the state establishes some sort of visioning vision and long-term goals. Although body, that entity should draw on the strength research and policy functions are often of the various regional and local leadership the fi rst to be eliminated in times of fi scal groups already in place across the state. austerity, most of the people interviewed for These programs help local citizens and this report affi rmed that Tennessee needs to offi cials focus on the future of their particular improve its ability to prepare for the future. areas. No one, however, presently compiles Developing and promulgating such a vision information from these groups to both help could help the state and local governments share information and tap the energy they reach bett er solutions and use limited generate for the greater good. resources more eff ectively.

The governor and the legislature may wish to Tap Higher Education Institutions consider establishing a consortium of people State policymakers need to consider ways charged with focusing on Tennessee’s long- to bett er partner with the state’s public and term future. Such a group should represent private colleges, universities, and technology both public and private interests. Although centers so as to provide comprehensive state- the entity obviously needs each governor’s wide assessments of benefi ts and costs, as participation and blessing, Tennessee’s well as innovative economic, environmental, experience would suggest that a long-term and social solutions to public problems. The perspective must transcend any one gover- state’s colleges and universities also have the nor’s term in offi ce. The structure of the State expertise needed to identify future demo- Board of Education, established in Tennessee graphic trends. Greater interaction between Code Annotated § 49-1-301, is an example governments and higher education could also of such a board. Its members are appointed to nine-year terms by the governor, subject to confi rmation by the Senate and House of Representatives.

Putt ing matt ers of structure aside, what actions could help Tennessee’s leaders from the public, non-proﬁ t, and private sectors focus more on Tennessee’s future?

Collaborate Tennessee needs to be able to draw on the expertise of various groups and people to facilitate meaningful discussion of various public problems.

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 43 University of Tennessee at Knoxville, Tennessee Photo Services Photo Tennessee at Knoxville, Tennessee University of give students an improved understanding of Use Incentives public problems and solutions. State and local policymakers could use Involve Not-for-Profi t Agencies grants, awards, and recognitions to encourage bett er overall planning and visioning. State policymakers may wish to consider One person suggested, for example, that ways to encourage Tennessee’s not-for-profi t the governor’s “Three-Star Community” organizations to work together more. The program, awarded by the Department of state has many such agencies that overlap in Economic and Community Development to their service constituencies and might be able cities for implementing community develop- to achieve economies of scale with greater ment best practices, could encourage good coordination. environmental practices as well. Perhaps one of the “stars” could be green. One state Exploit State Data offi cial suggested that the state might use existing grants to encourage local govern- State departments collect and maintain a vast ments to embrace quality growth practices. array of data. It would be helpful to deter- Such thinking across existing “silos” could mine what they are and how access, use, and improve results as well as improve effi cient storage might be improved. A state clear- use of resources. inghouse for commonly used data might be benefi cial. In addition, continued improve- Whatever means and methods are chosen, ments in the use of geographic information developing a common vision will help people systems could provide policymakers with make more thoughtful decisions, whether enhanced information. they work in the public, private, or not-for- profi t sectors. The signs of the future can Emphasize Outcomes be found in the present. We must search for them to fi nd the best path forward. State and local policymakers should increase their emphasis on outcomes and performance. Along those lines, they may want to consider incentives for state agencies and local governments to focus on long-term solutions and increased collaboration among local governments.

44 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Appendix A Persons Interviewed David Goetz , Commissioner Department of Finance and Administration (Note: Interviews for this project overlapped the (Bredesen Administration) administrations of Governors Phil Bredesen and William Haslam. Listings for state commissioners Ryan Gooch, Energy Policy Director interviewed indicate which governor they served.) Division of Community Development Department of Economic and Community Peggy G. Bevels, County Mayor Development Lincoln County and President, Tennessee Association of County Mayors William Gregoricus, Senior Policy Analyst Advisor Terry Bobrowski, Director Offi ce of the Governor East Tennessee Development District and (Bredesen Administration) Secretary/Treasurer, Tennessee Development District Association William Hagerty, Commissioner Department of Economic and Community William Bradley, Director Development Division of Budget (Haslam Administration) Department of Finance and Administration James Hall, CEO Charles Brown, Budget Administration Hall Associates Coordinator (former Director, State Planning Offi ce) Department of Finance and Administration (former Planning Analyst, State Planning Offi ce) Michael Hann, Executive Director Commission on Aging and Disability Sujit CanagaRetna, Senior Fiscal Analyst Southern Legislative Conference Eric Harkness, Planning and Research Coordinator Council of State Governments Division of Health Planning Department of Finance and Administration Michael Childress, Executive Director Kentucky Long-Term Policy Research Center Douglas Henry, State Senator Davidson County Susan Cooper, Commissioner Department of Health Kevin Huff man, Commissioner (Bredesen and Haslam Administrations until Department of Education 9/2011) (Haslam Administration) Tilden Curry, Dean Bridget Jones, Executive Director College of Business Cumberland Region Tomorrow Tennessee State University Drew Kim, Partner (former Director, State Planning Offi ce) P3 Consulting Paul Davis, Director (former Director, Governor’s Offi ce of State Division of Water Pollution Control Planning and Policy—Bredesen Administration) Department of Environment and Conservation Matt hew Kisber, Commissioner James Fyke, Commissioner Department of Economic and Community Department of Environment and Conservation Development (Bredesen Administration) (Bredesen Administration) Jane Kusiak, Executive Director Council on Virginia’s Future

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 45 Lewis Lavine, President Jeff Ockerman, Director Center for Non-Profi t Management Division of Health Planning (former Chief of Staff , Governor Lamar Alexander Department of Finance and Administration and Director, State Planning Offi ce) Jayme Place, Policy Analyst Dr. William Lyons, Senior Director Offi ce of the Governor Policy and Communications (Haslam Administration) City of Knoxville Mike Ramage, Executive Director Robert Martineau, Commissioner Connected Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Tim Roach, Director of Local Planning (Haslam Administration) Department of Economic and Community Harlan Mathews, Att orney at Law Development (former US Senator, State Treasurer, and Director, John Schroer, Commissioner State Planning Offi ce) Department of Transportation A. Keith McDonald, Mayor (Haslam Administration) City of Bartlett Chuck Shoopman, Assistant Vice President John Morgan, Chancellor Institute for Public Service Tennessee Board of Regents University of Tennessee (former Comptroller of the Treasury and Deputy Patrick Smith, Director Governor—Bredesen Administration) Governor’s Offi ce of State Policy and Planning Dexter Muller, Sr. Vice President (Bredesen Administration) Community Development Dan Speer, Mayor Memphis Chamber of Commerce City of Pulaski and Executive Director, Giles Dr. Matt hew Murray, Deputy Director County Economic Commission Center for Business and Economic Research Quincy Styke, Deputy Director University of Tennessee Air Pollution Control Division James Neeley, Commissioner Department of Environment and Conservation Department of Labor and Workforce Development Dr. Bruce Tonn, Professor (Bredesen Administration) Department of Political Science and Program Gerald Nicely, Commissioner Leader, Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Department of Transportation Environment (Bredesen Administration) University of Tennessee Mark Norris, State Senator Susan Whitaker, Commissioner Shelby County Department of Tourist Development Chair, TACIR (Bredesen and Haslam Administrations) Stephen Norris, Deputy Commissioner Carol White, Executive Director Division of Intellectual Disabilities Services Shared Services Solutions Department of Finance and Administration Department of Finance and Administration (former Director, State Planning Offi ce; (former Director, State Planning Offi ce) Commissioner, Department of Correction; and Commissioner, Employment Security)

46 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR Appendix B TACIR’s Forum on the Future, October 2008 Tennessee’s Ten Greatest Challenges

• bring Tennesseans together to plan for a future that both refl ects and makes the most of the rich- ness and diversity of our state, its people and its places; • provide all students equal access to adequate education and evaluation so that they may succeed in their professional, personal, civic, and community lives; • manage an increasingly diverse society—tapping its productive and creative potential while minimizing its negative eff ects; • ensure access to aff ordable health care for all Tennesseans, reduce costs, eliminate health care disparities, and foster healthy lifestyles; • reform the administration of justice, including the prison system, so that it is more aff ordable and eff ective; • create a business environment that is both conducive to economic growth and development and consistent with our cultural and environmental values—to make our state the preferred choice for business that Tennesseans want; • use energy wisely and effi ciently, leveraging the research assets of our universities and industry to develop new, clean, and renewable sources that will support, improve and sustain our economy and quality of life; • use land and other natural resources wisely, consistent with environmental and quality of life standards and with economic development goals, to promote and sustain a sense of community and a relationship to the great outdoors; • improve the delivery and effi ciency of government services at the state and local levels and provide for their long-term fi scal sustainability; and • foster a political environment and process that will support the broad public debate and accommodate the longer view necessary to design a bett er future for our state.

Martha L. Perine Beard Richard Chesteen Nick Dunagan Ruth E. Johnson Boyce C. Magli

John G. Morgan Matthew N. Murray Lyle Reid William B. Sansom Greer Tidwell, Jr.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 47 Appendix C A History of State Planning will tend to create conditions favor- in Tennessee 1935-1995 able to transportation, health, safety, prosperity, and civic, recreational, To varying degrees, Tennessee had entities educational and cultural opportuni- designed to encourage coordinated thinking ties, tend to reduce the wastes of about the state’s future from 1935 to 1995. physical, fi nancial or human resources Public Chapter 43, Acts of 1935, created the which result from either excessive Tennessee Planning Commission. The state congestion or excessive scatt ering formed the commission at the Tennessee of population and tend toward an Valley Authority’s urging, which was effi cient and economic conservation, expanding electrical service throughout the production and distribution of food, state. The authority helped fund the commis- water and minerals and of sanitary sion, as did the National Planning Board, and other facilities. which had been charged with producing a comprehensive plan for the nation. The Early staff undertook surveys and studies initial commission consisted of the governor of water resources, land use problems, and eight citizens appointed by the governor. and recreation facilities. One report led to Members represented the states’ three grand the formation of the Tennessee State Park 38 divisions; no more than six could be of the System. same political affi liation. For the next two decades the state had an The commission’s earliest work emphasized active planning offi ce and staff . By 1947, physical planning. Its staff prepared state the offi ce had 26 employees. Governors and regional plans, collected data, conducted Browning, Cooper, McCord, Clement, and research, edited reports and publications for Ellington relied heavily on their work. In the governor, and assisted communities with 1959, the state underwent a massive reorgani- local planning. Enabling legislation stated zation, aimed at centralizing and streamlining operations. The planning commission and that the state plan shall be made with its staff became part of the then new staff the general purpose of guiding and division of Finance and Administration. That accomplishing a coordinated, adjusted, same year, an amendment to the Federal effi cient and economic development Housing Act of 1954 gave state planning of the state, which will, in accordance agencies greater responsibility for helping with present and future needs and their cities meet requirements for urban resources, best promote the health, renewal funds. As a result, the division safety, morals, order, convenience, increased its functions and prepared a series prosperity and welfare of the people of reports on the state’s characteristics, of the State of Tennessee, as well as problems, and opportunities. effi ciency and economy in the process of development; including, amongst In 1972, the General Assembly passed other things, such distribution of Public Chapter 542, which created the State population and of the uses of land Planning Offi ce (TSPO) within the Offi ce of within the state for urbanization, the Governor. Its staff director was to be trade, industry, habitation, recreation, agriculture, forestry and other uses as 38 James B. Wagner, Jr., The State Planning Agency of Tennessee: 1935-1974; pp. 2-5.

48 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the offi ce led policy initiatives in criminal justice, Governor. The law further specifi ed, “It shall environment, solid waste, and clean water. be the function and duty of the state planning offi ce to prepare a general state plan for the In 1995, during Governor Don Sundquist’s physical, social and economic development of fi rst term, the General Assembly passed the state.” The law created a Local Govern- Public Chapter 501, repealing the State Plan- ment Planning Advisory Committ ee to advise ning Act and abolishing the State Planning the governor on local government conditions Offi ce. Its library moved to the State Library and needs, as well as employing profession- and Archives. The State Data Center was ally qualifi ed personnel to provide planning sent to the University of Tennessee-Knoxville. services to local governments. In the next few Governor Sundquist created a strategic plan- years, however, the planning functions were ning function, but its focus was coordinating decentralized and the TSPO assumed more of the state government agencies’ functions a coordinating and oversight role. rather than establishing a vision for the state as a whole. He also established the Commis- In the ensuing years, the state planning sion on Practical Government, a 37-member offi ce lost its broader statewide focus almost advisory commission that produced a report entirely and became an operating arm of the in 1995. In the report’s transmitt al lett er, governor’s offi ce. The offi ce’s operations Chairman Ronald Terry stated, “We are changed with each new administration, encouraged by your desire to work with depending on the initiatives of each chief the General Assembly to establish a vision executive. Governor Lamar Alexander of Tennessee’s future that not only tran- sought to move the research and planning scends terms of offi ce and political parties, functions into the various state departments. but produces goals toward an ever-bett er He used the planning offi ce more for special Tennessee.” It’s not clear, however, whether projects, particularly to launch “Homecoming the report was used to promote any changes ’86,” an initiative designed to bring native in the state government. Tennesseans home. Alexander also split the state and local planning functions and In 2007, Governor Phil Bredesen established transferred the Division of Local Planning to an Offi ce of Policy and Planning. Interviews the Department of Economic and Community with its staff indicate that it mainly worked Development. on specifi c initiatives such as the American Diploma Project and a Criminal Justice Governor Ned McWherter re-established a project, and did not consider long-range more central state planning function, but also issues. used it to coordinate various interdepartmental policy initiatives and special projects. In 2011, Governor Bill Haslam directed all The offi ce facilitated two major statewide state departments to conduct a “top to bott om fact-fi nding trips by the governor and cabinet review,” which resulted in 332 recommenda- to observe state service provision fi rst-hand tions. His administration also developed and recommend improvements. The offi ce a “dashboard,” a set of fi ve policy areas also developed a comprehensive initiative to designated as priorities. fi ght alcohol and drug abuse, the Governor’s Alliance for a Drug Free Tennessee. The

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 49 Table 3. A History of State Planning in Tennessee

1921 The General Assembly established the Memphis Planning Commission with power to adopt zoning regulations. 1922 to 1931 The General Assembly established planning commissions in Knoxville, Chattanooga, Nashville, Johnson City, and Shelby County. 1933 State created Tennessee Valley Commission, which later became the Tennessee State Planning Board. It provided coordination of state agencies with TVA. 1935 Public Chapter 43, the State and Regional Planning Act, established the State Planning Commission which included the Governor and eight citizen members. Also established the structure for local planning in Tennessee.

1943 First permanent field office of Local Planning Division established in Johnson City.

1944 to 1957 Commission established additional field offices across the state. 1945 The commission designated six staff divisions: Administration, State Planning, Community Services, Industrial Development, Local Planning Assistance, and Research. Commission designated as agency to receive and review all applications for federal funds. 1959 The Government Reorganization Act (Public Chapter 9) transferred State Planning Commission and its staff to new staff division of Finance and Administration, but it remained the legal and official planning agency for the State of Tennessee. Amendment to Federal Housing Act of 1954 designated state planning agencies to conduct comprehensive state planning, prompting a series of reports about the state’s population and economy. 1965 The Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 required that all projects initiated in the states be submitted by the states’ members. The State Planning Commission was designated Tennessee’s representative agency. 1972 State Planning Commission was abolished. Public Chapter 542 created the Tennessee State Planning Office (TSPO) within the Office of the Governor and moved all administrative powers, duties, and functions to the new office. The new planning office had a staff director appointed by and serving at the pleasure of the Governor. A Local Planning Advisory Committee was created, made up of local elected officials and department heads. 1974 to 75 State planning staff attempted integration into the state’s annual budget process. Prepared The Future of the Tennessee State Budget 1976-1980, “the first formal attempt to put Tennessee’s annual budget in perspective by analyzing past trends in State outlays and anticipated future directions in state progress.” State took on federal A-95 grant review process and coordination of many development district activities. 1983 to 1986 During Alexander's administration, many planning functions transferred to applicable state departments, including the Local Planning Office to the Department of Economic and Community Development. TSPO became headquarters for “Homecoming ’86.” Executive Order 58 of 1983 made the State Planning Office the state clearinghouse for federal assistance. 1987 to 1995 Under McWherter’s administration, the Planning Office received new responsibilities for program areas and special projects including Listening to Tennessee, Drug Free Tennessee, 1996 Bicentennial. 1989 The General Assembly passed the Solid Waste Planning and Recovery Act requiring the State Planning Office to establish a comprehensive solid waste management plan. Development districts were directed to prepare and adopt regional solid waste plans, consistent with the priorities and criteria of the state plan. 1995 At the urging of Governor Don Sundquist, the General Assembly passed Public Chapter 501 repealing statutes pertaining to the Tennessee State Planning Office. 2007 Governor Phil Bredesen established the Office of Policy and Planning, budgeted through the Department of Finance and Administration but reporting to him through the Deputy Governor. The staff worked on education and criminal justice initiatives. 2011 to 2012 Governor Bill Haslam abolished the Division of Local Planning in the Department of Economic and Community Development. He initiated “TNFORWARD” which included a “top to bottom” review of all state agencies of their operations to become more efficient and effective. In addition, it includes a “dashboard,” a set of performance indicators in five policy areas. Sources: Tennessee Public Acts, Miller (1987), Wagner (undated), State of Tennessee website, various records of the Tennessee State Planning Commission and Tennessee State Planning Office, and interviews.

50 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR References

American Lung Association. 2011. State of the Air betesPrevalenceEstimates.aspx?mode=DBT 2011. htt p://www.stateoftheair.org/2011/ (accessed June 18, 2012). assets/SOTA2011.pdf (accessed January 31, 2012). Clarksville-Montgomery County Partnership. htt p://www.clarksvillepartnership.com/learn/ The Annie E. Casey Foundation. 2012. KIDS history (accessed April 10, 2012). COUNT. htt p://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/ bystate/StateLanding.aspx?state=TN (accessed Colonial Pipeline Website. htt p://www.colpipe. August 2, 2012). com/ab_map.asp (accessed March 4, 2012).

Anderson, Glen. 2008. Clean Energy and Air Combs, William H. and William E Cole. 1940. Quality: State Policy Review. National Confer- Tennessee: A Political Study. Knoxville, Univer- ence of State Legislatures. htt p://www.ncsl. sity of Tennessee Press. org/Portals/1/documents/energy/cleanenerg- Connected Tennessee. 2010.Technology Assess- yair1208.pdf (accessed April 27, 2012). ment of Residential Consumers. htt p://www. Aud, S., W. Hussar, G. Kena, K. Bianco, L. connectedtennessee.org (accessed September Frohlich, J. Kemp, K. Tahan. 2011. The Condi- 19, 2011). tion of Education 2011 (NCES 2011-033). US Connected Tennessee. 2012. Broadband Availability. Department of Education, National Center htt p://www.connectedtn.org/sites/default/ for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: fi les/connected-nation/Tennessee/fi les/ US Government Printing Offi ce. htt p:// tn_availability-feb2012.pdf (accessed August nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_scp.pdf 5, 2012). (accessed December 2, 2011). Connected Tennessee. 2012. Progress Report: April Backlund, Peter, Anthony Janetos, and David 2007 through May 30, 2012. (e-mail to author Schimel. 2008. The Eff ects of Climate Change on dated August 7, 2012). Agriculture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United States. US Climate Cortright, Joe. 2010. Driven Apart: How Sprawl is Change Science Program. htt p://www.climate- Lengthening our Commutes and Why Misleading science.gov/Library/sap/sap4-3/fi nal-report/ Mobility Measures are Making Things Worse. sap4.3-fi nal-all.pdf (accessed April 27, 2012). CEOs for Cities. htt p://www.ceosforcities.org/ driven-apart (accessed August 16, 2011). Bhatt , Neha, Colin Peppard, and Stephanie Pott s. 2010. Gett ing Back on Track: Aligning State Council on Virginia’s Future. htt p://www.future. Transportation Policy with Climate Change virginia.gov/about.php (accessed November Goals. Smart Growth America. htt p://www. 3, 2011). smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/gett ing- Cumberland Region Tomorrow. htt p://www. back-on-track.pdf (accessed June 14, 2011). cumberlandregiontomorrow.org/about-us/ Center for Colorado’s Economic Future. htt p:// (accessed April 10, 2012). www.du.edu/economicfuture/ (accessed Daigneau, Elizabeth. 2012. A Sustainable November 30, 2011). Leader: Envision Utah is a National Model Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. htt p:// for Creating the Green City of the Future. apps.nccd.cdc.gov/DDT_STRS2/NationalDia- Governing. htt p://www.governing.com/topics/ energy-env/gov-utah-envisions-sustainable- future.html (accessed April 27, 2012).

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 51 Detch, Ethel. 1991. Planning and Service Delivery Friedman, Thomas L. 2005. The World is Flat: A in Tennessee. Tennessee Comptroller of the Brief History of the Twenty-ﬁ rst Century, New Treasury. Oﬃ ce of Local Government. York City. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

Duncan, Arne, US Secretary of Education. Lett er Friedman, Thomas L. 2008. Hot, Flat, and Crowded: to Commissioner Kevin Huﬀ man. February Why We Need a Green Revolution—and How It 9, 2012. htt p://www.tn.gov/education/doc/. Can Renew America, Thorndike Press. ESEA_Flexibility_Approval_Lett er.pdf (accessed February 10, 2012). Governing. 2008. Grading the States. htt p://www. governing.com/gpp/2008/index.htm (accessed Economic and Social Research Council. 2008. November 30, 2011). Education, Globalisation and the Knowledge Economy. Government of the United Governor’s Oﬃ ce of Children’s Care Coordina- Kingdom. London. htt p://www.tlrp.org/pub/ tion. 2011. htt p://www.tn.gov/goccc/initia- documents/globalisationcomm.pdf (accessed tives/women/index.html (accessed June 21, January 9, 2012). 2011-no longer posted).

Education Week. 2011. “State Report Card for Green, Harry A., Bob Allen, Leah Eldridge, et Tennessee and State Highlights.” Quality al. 2000. Tennessee’s Growth Policy Act: A Counts 2011. htt p://www.edweek.org/ew/ Vision for the Future. Tennessee Advisory qc/2012/16src.h31.html?intc=EW-QC12- Commission on Intergovernmental Rela- LFTNAV (accessed February 9, 2012). tions. htt p://www.tn.gov/tacir/PDF_FILES/ Growth_Policy/annexation00.pdf (accessed English, Mary. 2010. Statewide Water Resources November 30, 2011). Planning: A Nine-State Study. The University of Tennessee Institute for Secure and Sustainable Greene, Lee S. and David Grubbs. 1982. Govern- th Environment. ment in Tennessee, 4 ed. Knoxville. University of Tennessee Press. The Enterprise Center. About High Speed Ground Transportation. htt p://www.theenterprisectr. Heat USA. 2008. The Southeast Gas Shortage (The org/high-speed-ground-transportation/about. Northeast is Okay). htt p://www.heatusa. html (accessed April 5, 2012). com/uncategorized/southeast-gas-shortage- northeast (accessed February 24, 2012). Envision Utah. htt p://envisionutah.org/ (accessed November 30, 2011). Hirst, Caty. 2011. “TN’s poor health is drain on resources, Haslam says.” The Tennessean. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. 2012.Manu- htt p://www.tennessean.com/article/20110610/ facturing Employment in Tennessee. htt p:// NEWS/306100066/TN-s-poor-health-drain- research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TNMFGN resources-Haslam-says (accessed June 10, (accessed August 8, 2012). 2011).

Finkelstein, Eric A., et al. 2009. “Annual Medical Huotari, John. 2011. “Solar-assisted electric vehicle Spending Att ributable to Obesity: Payer-And- charging station fi nished at Oak Ridge lab.” Service-Specifi c Estimates.” Health Aff airs. The Oak Ridger. htt p://nl.newsbank.com/ htt p://content.healthaff airs.org/content/28/5/ nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_ w822.short (accessed August 19, 2011). docid=1377D2F6ED263A40&p_docnum=3&p_ theme=gatehouse&s_site=TORB&p_

52 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR product=TORB. (accessed March 31, 2012, the Tennessee Higher Education Commission, used by permission). April 8, 2009. htt p://www.tn.gov/moa/documents/TNPolicyAuditMakOppAﬀ ord.pdf Innovation Valley, Inc. htt p://www.innovationval- (accessed December 8, 2011). leyinc.org (accessed December 18, 2011). National Conference of State Legislatures. 2010. Leadership Middle Tennessee. htt p://leadmt.org/ Meeting the Energy Challenges of the Future: about.html (accessed April 17, 2012). A Guide for Policymakers. htt p://www.ncsl. Lyons, William, John Scheb II, Billy Stair. 2001. org/issues-research/energyhome/meeting- Government and Politics in Tennessee. Knoxville. the-energy-challenges-of-the-future.aspx University of Tennessee Press. (accessed April 27, 2012).

Massachusett s Institute of Technology. 2011. The National Conference of State Legislatures. 2012. Future of the Electric Grid: An Interdisciplinary Transportation Energy for the Future: A Guide for MIT Study. htt p://web.mit.edu/mitei/research/ Policymakers. htt p://www.ncsl.org/documents/ studies/documents/electric-grid-2011/Electric_ energy/tranenergyfuture.pdf (accessed March Grid_Full_Report.pdf (accessed September 14, 22, 2012). 2012). National Conference of State Legislatures. 2005. Massachusett s Institute of Technology. 2011. The The Cost of Low Birthweight Babies. htt p:// Future of Natural Gas: An Interdisciplinary MIT www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=14387 Study. htt p://web.mit.edu/mitei/research/ (accessed August 19, 2011). studies/documents/natural-gas-2011/Natu- National Resource Conservation Service. 2007. ralGas_Report.pdf (accessed March 21, 2012). National Resource Inventory, 2007. htt p:// Memphis Fast Forward. htt p://memphisfastfor- www.farmlandinfo.org/documents/38415/ ward.com/ (accessed January 3, 2012). FIC_NRI_2007_Data_Tables.pdf (accessed February 22, 2012). Michigan People and Land. htt p://www.peopleandland.org/ (accessed November 3, 2011). Nichols, Russell and Ryan Holeywell. 2011. “Six Ideas for Fixing the Nation’s Infrastructure Miller, Harold V. 1987. I Was There. (Memoir of Problems.” Governing. htt p://www.governing. previous director of Tennessee State Planning com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/ Offi ce) (no publisher listed). six-ideas-for-fi xing-the-nations-infrastructure- problems.html (accessed June 17, 2011). Murray, Matt hew N., et al. 2011. 2011 An Economic Report to the Governor of the State of Tennessee. Nine Counties One Vision: A Region Growing Into University of Tennessee Center for Business Greatness. htt p://www.discoveret.org/nc1v/ and Economic Research. htt p://cber.bus.utk. index.html (accessed January 3, 2012). edu/tefslist.htm (accessed November 30, 2011). Pew Center on the States. 2009. Trade-Off Time: How Four States Continue to Deliver. htt p:// myregion.org. htt p://www.myregion.org/ www.pewcenteronthestates.org/report_detail. (accessed April 27, 2012). aspx?id=48868 (accessed November 30, 2011).

National Center for Higher Education Manage- PlanET: A Regional Partnership of East Tennessee ment Systems. 2009. Making Opportunity Communities. htt p://www.planeastt n.org/ Available: Tennessee Policy Audit. Submitt ed to (accessed January 3, 2012).

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 53 Pott s, Kim. 2010. Adult Education. Tennessee Schwartz , Peter. 1991 and 1996. The Art of the Long Comptroller of the Treasury. Offi ces of View: Planning for the Future in an Uncertain Research and Education Accountability. World. New York. Doubleday. htt ps://www.comptroller.tn.gov/OREA/Publi- cationDetails.aspx?ReportKey=bc73ed56- Sisk, Chas. 2011. “Haslam Refocuses Job Growth 1295-4f5d-ab56-73573307116f (accessed June Strategy.” The Tennessean, April 21, 2011. 25, 2012). Smith, Ben. 1986. “Alexander’s department heads Puentes, Robert. 2008. A Bridge to Somewhere: tell achievements; First of Series: Health Rethinking American Transportation for the 21st and Environment.” Tennessee Town and City. Century. The Brookings Institution. Metropol- Tennessee Municipal League. itan Policy Program. htt p://www.brookings. Southern Growth Policies Board. 2010. Seeing the edu/reports/2008/06_transportation_puentes. Future: Leadership and Social Capital. htt p:// aspx (accessed August 19, 2011). www.southerngrowth.com/pubs/pubs_pdfs/ Raab Associates, LTD. Tennessee Governor Brede- SFModule_leadership&socialcapital.pdf sen’s Task Force on Energy Policy Final Report: (accessed November 30, 2011). Executive Summary. htt p://raabassociates.org/ Southern Growth Policies Board. 2005. The main/projects.asp?proj=68&state=Current. Southern Community Index. htt p://www. (accessed August 25, 2011). [Note: Apparently southern.org/pubs/pubs_pdfs/community_ the task force never produced the report index.pdf (accessed November 30, 2011). itself]. Southern Regional Education Board. 2005. Reeves, Scott . 2005. “An Aging Workforce’s Eff ect Investing Wisely in Adult Learning is Key to on US Employers.” Forbes.com. htt p://www. State Prosperity. htt p://publications.sreb. forbes.com/2005/09/28/career-babyboomer- org/2005/05E04_Adult_Learning.pdf (accessed work-cx_sr_0929bizbasics.html (accessed December 10, 2011). September 15, 2011). Southern Regional Education Board. 2010. A Smart Robyn, Mark and Gerald Prante. 2011. Special Move in Tough Times: How SREB States Can Report: State-Local Tax Burdens Fall in 2009 as Strengthen Adult Learning and the Work Force. Tax Revenues Shrink Faster Than Income. The htt p://publications.sreb.org/2010/10E06_ Tax Foundation. htt p://www.taxfoundation. Smart_Move.pdf (accessed December 8, 2011). org/research/show/22320.html (accessed February 24, 2011). Spradley, Greg. 2003. Where Are We Going? A Look at Transportation Planning in Tennessee. Roehrich-Patrick, Lynnisse, Catherine Corley, Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury, Offi ce Chipo Maringa. 2012. Building Tennessee’s of Research. Tomorrow: Anticipating the States’ Infrastruc- ture Needs, July 2010 through 2015. Tennessee Stair, Billy. McWherter: The Life and Career of Ned Advisory Commission on Intergovern- McWherter (no copyright page or publishing mental Relations. htt p://www.tn.gov/tacir/ info). PDF_FILES/Agenda/June12/Tab%2010_Book. Tackett , Judith. 2012. “Claude Ramsey-the Gover- pdf (accessed June 26, 2012). nor’s Problem Solver.” Tennessee County News, Vol. 35, No.1, January–February. htt p://www.

54 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR tncounties.org/publications.html (accessed Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce April 5, 2012). Development. 2011. Jobs Forecast News: Jobs to 2018. htt p://www.tn.gov/labor-wfd/outlooks/ Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergov- statewide.pdf (accessed July 24, 2012). ernmental Relations, Forum on Tennessee’s Future. htt p://www.tn.gov/tacir/ (accessed Tennessee Department of Transportation. 2005. July 14, 2011). PLANGo: Vision, Strategy, Responsibility. htt p:// www.tdot.state.tn.us/plango/pdfs/plan/LRTP. Tennessee Commission on Practical Government. pdf (accessed August 19, 2011). 1995. Report of the Tennessee Commission on Practical Government, December 20, 1995. Tennessee Department of Transportation. 2012. “Governor Haslam Announces $1.6 Million Tennessee Department of Economic and Commu- in Safe Routes to School Grants.” htt p://news. nity Development. Energy Division. htt p:// tn.gov/node/8324 (accessed February 21, www.tn.gov/ecd/CD_offi ce_energy_division. 2012). shtml (accessed July 24, 2012). Tennessee Obesity Taskforce. 2010. Tennessee Tennessee Department of Economic and Commu- Statewide Nutrition and Physical Activity Plan: nity Development. 2011. Economic Status of A Comprehensive Plan to Reduce Obesity and Tennessee. htt p://www.tn.gov/ecd/maps.html Chronic Disease in Tennessee, 2010-2015. htt p:// (accessed January 14, 2012). www.eatwellplaymoretn.org/assets/fi les/plan. Tennessee Department of Environment and pdf (accessed September 21, 2011). Conservation. 2010. 2010 305(b) Report: the Tennessee Offi ce of the Governor. 2012. TNFOR- Status of Water Quality in Tennessee. htt p:// WARD: Top to Bott om Review. htt p://forward. tn.gov/environment/wpc/publications/ tn.gov/toptobott om/ (accessed March 27, pdf/2010_305b.pdf (accessed March 22, 2011). 2012).

Tennessee Department of Environment and Tennessee State Planning Commission. 1968. State Conservation, Water Resources Regional Planning Division Newslett er. Publication No. Planning. htt p://www.tn.gov/environment/ 366. regionalplanning/ (accessed February 1, 2012). Tennessee State Planning Commission. 1971. Tennessee Department of Health. 2009. Report Functional Planning in Tennessee: Preliminary of Tennessee Births 2009. Division of Policy, Analysis of Selected State Agencies. State Plan- Planning, and Assessment. htt p://health. ning Division. state.tn.us/statistics/PdfFiles/TNBirths09.pdf (accessed June 6, 2011). Tennessee State Planning Commission. 1966. A Report on Function, Organization and Operation Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce of Statewide and Regional Planning in Tennessee. Development. 2008. Growing Green: The Publication 350. Potential for Green Job Growth in Tennessee. Employment Security Division, Labor Market Tennessee State Planning Oﬃ ce. 1989. Economic Information Section. htt p://www.state.tn.us/ Prospects for Tennessee’s Future. labor-wfd/Publications/EmploymentSecurity/ GrowingGreenInTN2008.pdf (accessed March Tennessee State Planning Oﬃ ce. 1974. The Future of 28, 2012). the Tennessee State Budget 1976-1980.

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 55 Tennessee State Planning Offi ce. Tennessee State University of Tennessee Center for Business and Planning Offi ce: 1987-1990. (undated) Economic Research. 2007. Education Cross- roads. Tennessee Valley Authority. 2012. Form 10-K Filing to the United States Securities and Exchange University of Tennessee Center for Business and Commission. htt p://investor.shareholder. Economic Research. 2012. “Population Projec- com/tva/secfi ling.cfm?fi lingID=1376986-12-43 tions for Tennessee and Counties by Gender (accessed November 27, 2012). and Age Group, 2015-2040,” updated January 2012. htt p://cber.bus.utk.edu/ (accessed April Tennessee Valley Authority. 2011. Key Topic: 18, 2012). Clean Air Act Agreement. htt p://www.tva. com/news/keytopics/cleanairagreement.htm US Bureau of Census. 2008. “An Older and More (accessed August 25, 2011). Diverse Nation by Midcentury.” US Census Bureau News. htt p://www.census.gov/news- Terry, Bill. 2008. Corroding and Failing Sewer Lines: room/releases/archives/population/cb08-123. How Big a Problem? Tennessee Advisory html (accessed May 10, 2012). Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. htt p://www.tn.gov/tacir/PDF_FILES/Growth_ US Bureau of Census. 2010. “2008-2010 American Policy/corroding%20and%20failing%20 Community Survey 3-Year Estimates.” sewer%20lines.pdf (accessed October 22, American Fact Finder. htt p://factfi nder2.census. 2011). gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/product- view.xhtml?fpt=table (accessed August 2, Thurman, Libby and Bill Terry. 2011. Land Use 2012). and Planning in Tennessee: Part II, Land Use and Transportation Planning. Tennessee Advisory US Bureau of Census. 2012. Statistical Abstract- Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Agriculture. Table 825. htt p://www.census. htt p://www.tn.gov/tacir/PDF_FILES/Other_ gov/compendia/statab/cats/agriculture.html Issues/LandUseAndPlanning.pdf (accessed (accessed August 8, 2012). February 10, 2012). US Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2012. State Trust for America’s Health. 2011. Public Health Personal Income 2011. Table 1. Per Capita Data. htt p://healthyamericans.org/ (accessed Personal Income, Personal Income, and December 14, 2011). Population, by State and Region, 2010-2011. htt p://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/ United Health Foundation. 2011. America’s spi/2012/pdf/spi0312.pdf (accessed April 15, Health Rankings. htt p://statehealthstats. 2012). americashealthrankings.org/ (accessed August 19, 2011). US Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2009. “Labor Force Projections to 2018: Older Workers Staying University of Maryland Center for Integrative More Active.” Monthly Labor Review. htt p:// Environmental Research. 2008. Economic www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2009/11/art3full.pdf Impacts of Climate Change on Tennessee. htt p:// (accessed February 24, 2011). www.cier.umd.edu/climateadaptation/ Tennessee%20Economic%20Impacts%20 US Department of Agriculture. 2011. County Level of%20Climate%20Change%20Full%20Report. Unemployment and Median Household pdf (accessed November 30, 2011). Income. Economic Research Service. htt p://

56 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR www.ers.usda.gov/data/unemployment/ US Department of Transportation. 2009. Pipeline RDList2.asp?ST=TN (accessed April 27, 2012). and Hazardous Materials Safety Administra- tion. Tennessee Incident and Mileage Over- US Department of Agriculture. 2009. Summary view. htt p://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/ Report: 2007 National Resources Inventory, reports/safety/TN_detail1.html?nocache=2324 Natural Resources Conservation Service, (accessed March 20, 2012). Washington, DC, and Center for Survey Statistics and Methodology, Iowa State US Energy Information Administration, State University, Ames, Iowa. htt p://www.nrcs. Energy Data System, Table C11.2010. Energy usda.gov/technical/NRI/2007/2007_NRI_ Consumption by Source and Total Consump- Summary.pdf (accessed February 14, 2012). tion per Capita, Ranked by State 2010. htt p:// www.eia.gov/state/seds/hf.jsp?incﬁ le=sep_ US Department of Commerce. National Telecom- sum/html/rank_use_per_cap.html (accessed munications and Information Administration. August 2, 2011). Broadband USA: Connecting America’s Communities. htt p://www2.ntia.doc.gov/ US Energy Information Administration. 2011. tennessee (accessed May 10, 2012). Annual Energy Outlook 2011. htt p://www. eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2011).pdf US Department of Education. 2011. The Nation’s (accessed March 20, 2012). Report Card: State Proﬁ les. National Center for Education Statistics. Institute of Educa- US Energy Information Administration. About US tion Sciences, US Department of Education, Natural Gas Pipelines. htt p://www.eia.gov/ Washington, D.C. htt p://nces.ed.gov/nation- pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/analysis_publica- sreportcard/states/ (accessed September 13, tions/ngpipeline/dependstates_map.html. 2012). (accessed March 20, 2012).

US Department of Energy and National Associa- US Energy Information Administration. 2009. tion of State Energy Offi cials. 2009. Southeast State Energy Profi les. htt p://apps1.eere.energy. Petroleum Disruption and After-Action Workshop gov/states/residential.cfm/state=TN#sources Report. htt p://southeastpetroleum.govtools. (accessed September 15, 2011). us/documents/SoutheastPetroleumDisrup- tion_Report.pdf (accessed February 16, 2012). US Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Drinking Water Infrastructure and Needs US Department of Health and Human Services. Survey and Assessment. htt p://water.epa. State Estimates of Substance Use from the 2006– gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/dwns/ 2007 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health. upload/2009_03_26_needssurvey_2007_ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services report_needssurvey_2007.pdf (accessed Administration, Offi ce of Applied Studies. February 24, 2012). htt p://oas.samhsa.gov/2k7state/2k7State.pdf (accessed August 3, 2009). US Environmental Protection Agency. 2012. “Nonatt ainment Status for Each County by US Department of Housing and Urban Develop- Year for Tennessee.” Green Book. htt p://www. ment, US Census Bureau. 2011. American epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/anay_tn.html Housing Survey for the United States: 2009. (accessed August 2, 2012). htt p://www.census.gov/housing/ahs/data/ ahs2009.html (accessed December 28, 2011).

WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE 57 Valero Memphis. htt p://www.valero.com/ OurBusiness/OurLocations/Reﬁ neries/Pages/ Memphis.aspx (accessed March 4, 2012).

Vanderbilt Institute for Medicine and Public Health, Tennessee Department of Health, East Tennessee State University, Meharry Medical College, University of Tennessee Center for Health Sciences. 2011. Tennessee Women’s Health Report Card. htt p:// medicineandpublichealth.vanderbilt. edu/2011WomensHealthReportCard.pdf (accessed September 19, 2011).

Vanderbilt Institute for Medicine and Public Health, Tennessee Department of Health, East Tennessee State University, Meharry Medical College, University of Tennessee Center for Health Sciences. 2012. Tennessee Men’s Health Report Card. htt p://medicineandpublichealth. vanderbilt.edu/imph.php?userid=59950547 7&id=22365068 (accessed June 28, 2012).

Wagner, James B., Jr. Undated. The State Planning Agency of Tennessee, 1935-1974.

WESTSTAR. htt p://www.utm.edu/departments/ weststar/ (accessed December 30, 2011).

Zuzak, Charles A. 1967. The Role of the Tennessee State Planning Oﬃ ce, A Case Study. University of Maryland (dissertation).

58 CHARTING A COURSE TO TENNESSEE’S FUTURE WWW.TN.GOV/TACIR TACIR Members

Senator Mark Norris, Chairman Mayor Tom Rowland, Vice Chairman Lynnisse Roehrich-Patrick, Executive Director

Legislative Senator Douglas Henry Senator Jim Kyle Senator Mark Norris Senator Jim Tracy Representative Vince Dean Representative Curtis Halford Representative Gary Odom Vacant

Statutory Representative Charles Sargent, Chairman, Finance, Ways and Means Committee Senator Randy McNally, Chairman, Finance, Ways and Means Committee Comptroller Justin Wilson

Executive Branch Paula Davis, Assistant Commissioner of Administration, Department of Economic & Community Development Iliff McMahan, Jr., Regional Director, Department of Economic & Community Development

Municipal Troy Beets, Mayor of Kingston Tommy Bragg, Mayor of Murfreesboro Tom Rowland, Mayor of Cleveland Kay Senter, Mayor Pro Tem/Councilmember of Morristown

County Ernest Burgess, Rutherford County Mayor Jeff Huffman, Tipton County Executive Kenny McBride, Carroll County Mayor Larry Waters, Sevier County Mayor

Other Local Officials Brent Greer, Tennessee Development District Association Charlie Cardwell, County Officials Association of Tennessee

Private Citizens Rozelle Criner, Sr., Ripley Tommy Schumpert, Knoxville