Some more
OK, mea cupla on the gender of Pat Priest. I actually knew it was 'she' and for no good reason whatsoever, apparently kept on writing 'he' ... my bad. And, while I'm critical of what I think is a rather weak argument put forth by her, I am appreciative of the general activities she's done for local progressives over the past few years.
But to address some comments in the original post ...
You don't think it's because they're just freaked out about a facility studying animal diseases? If it's because they hate growth, why didn't they organize sooner and protest, say, the Eastside Lowe's?
Yes and no. Though it may be shocking to some, we've actually been studying animal diseases in Athens-Clarke County for quite some time ... some pretty serious ones actually. And it's been done safely and responsibly, and NABF would be no different.
Is much of this outcry based on the fact that NABF will be researching animal diseases? Definitely. But it's also important to note that not only was there some opposition to, say, the Eastside Lowe's, but that many of the folks who work with FAQ have voiced opposition in the past to other areas of economic development, economic development and growth in our community (often, it must be noted, for legitimate reasons).
I agree w/Nicki, it's a leap to assume that because someone opposes this project he or she opposes all growth. Opposition to one project doesn't mean anti-everything, lol, but nice try.
True, but what was once a more quiet opposition to some elements of growth - even smart growth - has transformed into something more vocal (and more angry) since it was given a face in NABF.
This isn't rocket science ... so many proposed developments we have are scrutinized by some in our community to a degree that often staggers me. On one hand, it makes me proud because we have an engaged and informed citizenry, but on the other hand it has to be acknowledged that this does place some inhibitors on our growth potential (or just leave us with crappy growth the sprawls out Atlanta Highway or bleeds across the county line into the Clarke-Oconee corridor).
Lord help me that I agree with him, but Reggie actually made a good point in noting that if the impression is that we don't land NABF because of our opposition, then we've just shot ourselves in the foot for any type of bioscience development.
UPDATE: OK, all is right in the world because I disagree with Reggie on this ...
But if you think there were no long-range consequences for how that thing unfolded in public--consequences that have a lot to do with a lot of things beyond Five Points (God, look up "provincial" in the dictionary and you get a picture of Athens) then you need to talk to some different people. People who actually know things about economic development.
But our service industry hasn't been deterred though. We've landed Walgreens and Lowe's and Southern Foods and so on and so on. What has changed has been the political leadership in Atlanta, and it's one that is more resistant to working with us now. Granted, we need to work with them, but to think that Eckerd's not setting up shop in Five Points was the nail in the coffin for our economic development opportunities is silly.
But to address some comments in the original post ...
You don't think it's because they're just freaked out about a facility studying animal diseases? If it's because they hate growth, why didn't they organize sooner and protest, say, the Eastside Lowe's?
Yes and no. Though it may be shocking to some, we've actually been studying animal diseases in Athens-Clarke County for quite some time ... some pretty serious ones actually. And it's been done safely and responsibly, and NABF would be no different.
Is much of this outcry based on the fact that NABF will be researching animal diseases? Definitely. But it's also important to note that not only was there some opposition to, say, the Eastside Lowe's, but that many of the folks who work with FAQ have voiced opposition in the past to other areas of economic development, economic development and growth in our community (often, it must be noted, for legitimate reasons).
I agree w/Nicki, it's a leap to assume that because someone opposes this project he or she opposes all growth. Opposition to one project doesn't mean anti-everything, lol, but nice try.
True, but what was once a more quiet opposition to some elements of growth - even smart growth - has transformed into something more vocal (and more angry) since it was given a face in NABF.
This isn't rocket science ... so many proposed developments we have are scrutinized by some in our community to a degree that often staggers me. On one hand, it makes me proud because we have an engaged and informed citizenry, but on the other hand it has to be acknowledged that this does place some inhibitors on our growth potential (or just leave us with crappy growth the sprawls out Atlanta Highway or bleeds across the county line into the Clarke-Oconee corridor).
Lord help me that I agree with him, but Reggie actually made a good point in noting that if the impression is that we don't land NABF because of our opposition, then we've just shot ourselves in the foot for any type of bioscience development.
UPDATE: OK, all is right in the world because I disagree with Reggie on this ...
But if you think there were no long-range consequences for how that thing unfolded in public--consequences that have a lot to do with a lot of things beyond Five Points (God, look up "provincial" in the dictionary and you get a picture of Athens) then you need to talk to some different people. People who actually know things about economic development.
But our service industry hasn't been deterred though. We've landed Walgreens and Lowe's and Southern Foods and so on and so on. What has changed has been the political leadership in Atlanta, and it's one that is more resistant to working with us now. Granted, we need to work with them, but to think that Eckerd's not setting up shop in Five Points was the nail in the coffin for our economic development opportunities is silly.
posted by Jmac at 4:42 PM
10 Comments:
Talk about a strawman. I don't believe I said anything about a "nail in the coffin."
What I said was that some pretty significant movers and economic shakers in Georgia took note, and still remember, the Eckerds affair.
That's not my opinion, that's a fact.
Reggie
Reggie, your language can mislead given the ambiguity in what you wrote. At first, you noted that how we lose NBAF will be important, since if we lose it due to the perception of our community being strongly against biotech industries for political or ideological reasons, "no one who posits the notion of Athens and UGa as a bio-science and high-tech research setting will be taken seriously, ever again." You then compared this to Eckerds, making the analogy that this was that situation "writ large."
You then went on to respond to Hillary by noting that the Eckerds situation had "long-range consequences," consequences which someone non-tenured who knows "things about economic development." It can be that an economist (or any other someone knowing things about economic development) can construct a good model for the influence of political actions on things not necessarily monetary or fiscal ('economic' in the broadest sense). But it seems to me that what you're saying is that business people, entrepreneurs, could make highly probable speculations about what happened and continues to happen after Eckerds, and so similarly we can make such speculations about what will happen after NBAF.
But what will happen after NBAF is the claim that Athens is for biotechnology will never be taken seriously again. From an economic standpoint. Hence, "nail in the coffin," as your NBAF analogy works to frame why you brought up Eckerds: if NBAF means Athens won't be taken seriously, then a fortiori in the lesser writ case...
And...? Who are they? What have they done (or not done) about it? Are there specific economic opportunities that Athens would desire that it has missed out on because it didn't want an Eckerd (a business that often serves as a means of land speculation) on that particular corner? Could you please point some of them out instead of loosely alluding to "the Eckerds" affair as hurting Athens's economic prospects?
McG: I know animal diseases have been studied in ACC for some time. I lived a block away from the animal health research center at the corner of Carlton and East Campus for some years. I was not entirely comfortable with that project either (and, if I'm correct, it's still not open, due to problems with the design/construction that make it unsafe--although I may be wrong on this and please correct me if I am). I'm sure that, if you asked some of the FAQ folks, they might respond likewise. Can you fault them for not getting their act together at the time? I suppose you can, but, you know, it happens.
Okay, research has been more successful now. AHRC, from the ABH: "Structural problems though, are nothing new. The opening of the university's Level 3 Animal Health Research Center was delayed for years after officials discovered numerous design and construction flaws like cracked walls. Administrators blamed the shoddy work of a Canadian contractor for the problems, and spent about $40 million fixing them."
It's a good thing in many ways that its opening was delayed until these problems were fixed, but the existence of the problems at all raises an eyebrow.
"due to problems with the design/construction that make it unsafe"
Actually, this is an example exactly of why the anti-NBAF folks are wrong. There was indeed a problem w/ the construction. When it was completed, UGA recognized the contractor had not done something correctly (I don't know what) and refused to take ownership of the bldg until it was fixed. When the contractor wouldn't, the State sued him and he went bankrupt. UGA then had to go back to the legislature to ask for more money to finish the job. During this time period, requirements for labs became even more stringent and so much of the original equipment had to be ripped out and upgraded, thus adding to the cost and time delays. The point being, UGA wasn't going to operate a lab that didn't match safety protocols. The users of labs have a vested interest in making sure they're safe, for all sorts of reasons --legal, ethical, safety of their own workers, etc.
The point being, UGA wasn't going to operate a lab that didn't match safety protocols. The users of labs have a vested interest in making sure they're safe, for all sorts of reasons --legal, ethical, safety of their own workers, etc.
Right, which is all great in theory and stuff... but would you want to live a block from it?
It boils down to what we accept as acceptable risk. The idea that there is, or even should be, no risk is just so much silly wishful thinking.
To answer your question: I'd have no trouble living next door to an NBAF-like facility, at least not from a safety perspective. Fact is, more people die in apartment fires in one day than have died in the entire history of American bio-research labs. From a safety standpoint, you're far better off living next door to the CDC than in virtually any apartment complex in the world.
Yet, at the end of last night's meeting, dozens of people got into their cars (also a high-risk activity) and drove to their apartments and gave those risks not a moment's thought, thinking instead about the real but altogether hypothetical risks inherent to an animal research lab.
Logical? Hell, no. But there are some folks from whom logic is not much expected, and many of them were on display last night.
Reggie
Yes, but...
It's quite a bit simpler to avoid the risk of living next to an animal health research facility than the risk of living in an apartment or driving a car, no? That's part of logic and risk-assessment too.
It's not that I believe there should be no risk in life or that one should create "zero-tolerance" situations. Not at all. I'm simply trying to point out that it's not entirely wacko to be creeped out by something like NBAF or the AHRC being built next to one's house.
"I'm simply trying to point out that it's not entirely wacko"
It's not wacko, but it may be failing to put things into perspective and allowing paranoia to prevent one from thinking rationally about risk assessment --and driving one's car is definitely more risky than living next to NBAF. And, of course, most of the protestors don't live anywhere near the proposed facility.
Even Left-wing wackoes thing our Athenians Lefties are kooks. I don't know who or where this guy is, but...
http://newsweeks.blogspot.com/2008/02/bioterror-when-left-goes-anti.html
Reggie
Post a Comment
<< Home