The Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) today signed a new pact designed to establish a coordinated planning and development process for transportation projects. The goal of the Tennessee Environmental Streamlining Agreement is to ensure that the state’s vital transportation improvements can be implemented without unnecessary delays, while protecting and enhancing the quality of Tennessee’s environment.
TDOT Commissioner Gerald Nicely said "This will allow us to more quickly identify and resolve environmental concerns."
Resolve or circumvent?
On the other hand, it makes sense to incorporate environmental impact studies into the planning process, so we don't waste time and money on projects only to find out they are environmental disasters.
Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 12/19/2007 - 21:10.
The only way to see that this coordination is not "circumvention" is to see that the two organizations have accountable leaders. If they operate in good faith, this type of cooperation allows TDEC to bring its forsight to bear on TDOT planning. Why would Tennessee taxpayers want TDOT to do twice what it could do right the first time?
Submitted by persimmon on Thu, 12/20/2007 - 00:20.
TDOT is a fairly good actor when it comes to environmental compliance. Their overall mission is another matter, but at the project level they are more likely to conform to best practices than private developers. I worry about streamlined permitting cutting down on the opportunity for public input, but public road projects usually require notice and public input at earlier stages.
I agree with the anonymous commenter that both agencies need good leadership for this to work, and I lament that we must temper policy discussions with worries over incompetent or corrupt people in appointed positions. It seems like in the past the occasional bad-apple appointee got tossed from the barrel, but Republicans and lobbyists have created a world where being corrupt is viewed as a basic qualification. Fortunately, both TDEC and TDOT have good leaders at the moment.
The only way to see that this coordination is not "circumvention" is to see that the two organizations have accountable leaders. If they operate in good faith, this type of cooperation allows TDEC to bring its forsight to bear on TDOT planning. Why would Tennessee taxpayers want TDOT to do twice what it could do right the first time?
TDOT is a fairly good actor when it comes to environmental compliance. Their overall mission is another matter, but at the project level they are more likely to conform to best practices than private developers. I worry about streamlined permitting cutting down on the opportunity for public input, but public road projects usually require notice and public input at earlier stages.
I agree with the anonymous commenter that both agencies need good leadership for this to work, and I lament that we must temper policy discussions with worries over incompetent or corrupt people in appointed positions. It seems like in the past the occasional bad-apple appointee got tossed from the barrel, but Republicans and lobbyists have created a world where being corrupt is viewed as a basic qualification. Fortunately, both TDEC and TDOT have good leaders at the moment.
Post new comment