Land for 'Career Academy' issue at meeting

I don't follow the logic in this comment: "Yearwood wants what's best for him and the IBA NOT the citizens of Barrow County"

How exactly is proposing the use of the land at Highway 53 in the best interests of Yearwood? He doesn't own the property. The IBA owns that property. And who exactly is the IBA? A panel of citizens appointed, and approved, by the BOC to represent the interests of Barrow County citizens in the area of economic development. They are certainly not a shadowy organization that will reap any personal benefits from the proposal, and any suggestions to the contrary are slanderous.

That property is owned by the IBA, i.e., the taxpayers. The IBA (and Barrow County taxpayers) also happen to own the property directly across 316 from the proposed site. Yearwood's proposal to use the school board's SPLOST portion of $1.5 (which is again taxpayer dollars) would fund infrastructure improvements for both properties. That investment of sewer and water to both sites would enhance the marketability of the IBA property (Parkway Pointe) directly across from the proposed Lanier Tech/Career Academy/Arts Center location and make it more valuable to potential investors. That property is currently being marketed to businesses seeking to invest in Barrow County. The infrastructure improvements sought by Yearwood increase the prospects of drawing jobs to Barrow County.

Conversely, let's examine the Maddox/Norton/Parker/Garrison proposal. A 30 acre, or 23 depending on your view, property located adjacent to the Barrow Crossing shopping center. That is valuable real estate indeed, especially located next to what is quickly becoming Barrow's main retail center. But is that land appropriate for an institution of higher learning? A writer above made note of the aesthetic value of having a lake on campus, but what about the aesthetic value when the backdrop to that lake is a parking lot and strip mall? The Maddox proposal before the BOE will consume all of the $1.5M of their (our) SPLOST money for property alone. Sure, that property already has water and sewer, but why use taxpayer dollars to purchase land, when we (the taxpayers) already own prime frontage on 316 that can be used for this facility a mere few miles down the road? And where will the money come from to fund the required road and intersection improvements the Maddox property will require? Barrow Crossing has already clogged that area with traffic, and a college located there will choke every street in the vicinity.

Besides, Barrow Crossing by its very existence will create growth. Retail breeds retail. The success of this development is already evident with the recent opening of Chick-Fil-A and Athens Regional. More are sure to follow. Would the Maddox property not make more sense for the natural evolutionary growth of the Barrow Crossing complex?

Conversely, the citizens of Barrow County already own the IBA property. The $1.5 million investment of BOE SPLOST funds for the Highway 53 location will not benefit an already wealthy family and a well-connected real estate agency. It will benefit the taxpayers of Barrow County by helping to expand the marketability of property they, the taxpayers, already own in order to lure future commercial development and, by the logical extension, much needed jobs. Having a commercial magnet that already exists with Barrow Crossing at 316/81, coupled by an educational complex and adjacent office/industrial park at 316/53, will further spur growth along the entire Barrow portion of the 316 corridor.

The Yearwood proposal makes sense. Using the Highway 53 property for Lanier Tech develops another major intersection on 316 to serve as a growth seed. The Barrow Crossing area will continue to grow (as it already has) thanks to that shopping center, and the taxpayers can use the $1.5M of OUR own money not on acquiring more land (Lord knows the county has over-speculated on this for years), but on actual infrastructure improvements that will benefit all Barrow County citizens, and not just those in the real estate or banking industry.

Leave your personal feelings about Yearwood at the door and really think about this: use taxpayer dollars to acquire more land, which is landlocked on one side by a shopping center and all others by roads? Or should we invest more taxpayer dollars to enhance GUARANTEED development for a property we already own, and has the needed acreage to develop, expand and create jobs and opportunities for all Barrow County citizens?

I’m sure this lengthy post will draw plenty of fire accusing me of being some rabid blind-faith Yearwood supporter, but I am far from that characterization. I am simply a Barrow county citizen who tries to review the merits of all proposals presented before us, and make my own determinations on an analysis of the facts. In this case, I think he and the IBA have it right. Don’t use my tax dollars to buy more land, especially when land we already own makes more economic, and long-term development, sense.