All right, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and happy new year.

Welcome to our January the sixth City Council meeting.

This afternoon as duly chosen by our by the majority of this council at our two PM strategic planning meeting.

All right, we have no special presentations this afternoon.

Could I get a motion on the minutes?

All right.

We have a motion on the minutes with a proper second with no objections.

The minutes will stand as recorded.

All right, this afternoon we will be discussing our agenda purchasing questions and looking at future considerations in the way of committees.

We do have a public safety committee this afternoon.

I'll be presented by uh Chief Knowles.

Thank you for being here.

You're a prestigious fire command.

A good looking group.

Uh we'll also have a planning and zoning committee uh chaired by uh Chairwoman Burrs.

Uh so at this time, if you would look at this week's uh agenda under final reading, we do have the horse drawn uh carriage ordinance and council.

If uh if you would um uh since I'm in the chair position, I will not be able to make a motion for that.

I would appreciate uh your assistance with that.

We do have one other planning item on um on the agenda for final reading, and um councilman Clark, any questions or comments concerning that?

Uh not at this moment.

I think thank you, uh Chairman Henderson.

I think we've uh exhausted some of the concerns.

There was a nearby neighborhood called Waterhaven that was not in my district uh that was concerned about notification of this process, and I think we addressed it in the fact that the people who live in the surrounding areas, including myself, uh were involved in a really good community engagement process where I think is it Mike Price who's the person on this who's consulting on us.

I can't remember who it is.

I mean with so many uh okay.

Um we did the community engagement process by going door to door, um, and I'm excited about this in the district.

Um, and tonight I plan to approve it on final reading.

So if there's no objection from the council, I will be taking uh 7A and B together uh as a package then if there's no objection.

All right, under ordinances first reading, and like I say, we do have uh a planning committee uh schedule for today.

So the planning item that's on here.

If you have a question, we'll just wait till uh we have a committee, and then we have um uh an abandon abandonment.

We can uh take that at that time.

Uh and then under police.

Any questions on the and I think this was in district two.

Is that correct?

District two?

Yes, sir.

Uh, and as far as did we make contact with councilwoman heel or chairwoman heel, she's good with with this item.

To my knowledge.

Okay.

All right, moving into resolutions.

I'm sorry.

I'm gonna sure.

I'm sorry, Councilwoman Burr.

Yeah, I just uh had a quick question about the two that you wanted to read as a package.

Do we have anybody that's here that plan to speak on on either of these matters?

Well, typically we have our uh public hearing during first reading.

Okay, so if somebody was here to speak, that we typically they missed their opportunity.

Yes, okay, all right.

That occurs during first reading.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Councilman Elliott.

Uh thank you, Chairman.

And I want to if we may if I miss excuse, please excuse me.

I think uh councilman all will like our items referred uh while she's out.

Yeah, that's correct.

Uh any of the items that and I think she had some planning items.

Uh yes, sir.

I just want to just assume that we would uh address accordingly at the dear committee.

Thank you.

All right.

Now moving under resolutions.

Uh council, I do have an appointment uh for district one for the IDB.

If someone would be so kind as to make a motion uh to approve David Hudson to that uh board, I would appreciate that.

And then we do have an item uh on the uh concerning the industrial development board uh the development agreement with the CBL.

Uh Councilman uh Davis.

I must I'm I'm gonna go out on a limb here and uh say that you want the alternate version read.

Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

Yeah, that's what I was going to uh to point out.

So that alternate version uh the the substance of it is really very similar to the original version, but uh the form of the resolution changed just to kind of clarify the intention behind the resolution.

So the intention is to give a very clear written uh expression of kind of the public will for what folks in the area would like to see come out of the ground once the infrastructure is in place there at Northgate.

Um the intention is not to place any conditions in the way that we would if we were rezoning property.

That's not what we're doing here.

Uh we're also not amending our previous resolutions on the economic impact plan or the intergovernment agreement regarding the sales tax portion of the plan.

We're not doing that either.

Uh this is just uh an expression of what the public expects to see, what they expect from CBL and what CBL is committed to going forward, which is to engage with the community and make sure that what's developed there is um is in the best interest of the community.

All right, thank you.

Councilman Elliott, I'm you got your question answered.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Well, looking uh over the rest of our resolution items, any questions or comments under economic development, family justice, finance, library, mayor has uh several appointments this afternoon, and I will be taking those as a package if there's no uh opposition to that under public works.

Any questions or comments?

Councilman Elliott.

Um sorry, I'm backtracking slightly.

Economic development.

I see we're taking over the uh James A.

Henry building.

Will we be able to actually use it?

Well, is it immediately Richard, or is this gonna take some sorry, you had the whole long walk.

Yeah, no problem.

Um so yes, we will take possession of the building.

This is phase uh one of the building.

I see that Mike's here from the housing authority, and uh then we will begin to populate it with Prince says here with head start.

Um we'll begin to start moving in in the spring.

There's still some other things that the furniture still needs to be delivered there as well, and then um we'll begin to Cedric here as well.

Yep, and then we'll Cedric with community development will begin to um look at the rooms that are uh that are set aside for them in this part of it, and then yes, we will be able to start using it.

This is specifying will our West Side Center be going in there?

West Community Center?

Yes, sir.

No, not yet.

So that is for a future phase that will be built um on the side of the building for now, it's going to be staying where it is.

Will we pay for that or the housing board to pay for that building?

For the building that's going to be built.

The one that we have the housing authority is working on part of it as part of the CNI grant as well.

Okay, and um, we're fundraising for it.

Okay, perfect.

Thanks, sir.

Sure.

That's it.

Okay.

Well, I think we had no questions under public works moving into wastewater.

Deputy Chief Leford, I think.

Did you have some concerns with us or uh during our 930 meeting mentioned that this might need some explanation?

Thank you, Councilman.

No, I think uh it wasn't so much as a concern as probably explanation on the project due to its large amount.

Okay, yeah.

If there are any questions from council, anyone have any questions over we did cover this uh prior to our break.

Yeah, okay.

Okay, and then under planning, we do have a special exemption permit uh that we'll be voting on this afternoon.

And um Mr.

Attorney, uh you have a sheet that needs five signatures as well.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Oops, Mr.

Chair, I'd like to make a public comment on the Councilman Clark.

Okay, uh, I I would like to make some public comments regarding this resolution.

Um I have not met with the individuals, and I think I've raised concerns about uh the addition of a liquor store on Highway 58 and its proximity to the uh Chattingwood School for the Liberal Arts, and I need to get clarity from regional planning agency that we did do our due diligence as far as the measurement from the door or from the parking lot to the parking lot of CSLA.

I cannot find I know I I have belabored this, but I need to enter this into public comment.

Sure.

Just for clarity, like what was the measuring mechanism from the parking lot to CSLA's parking lot or from the front door or the back door?

Yes, sir, and I apologize.

I'm referencing the phone and the um link on the phone.

And so we had RCM land surveying provided a measurement from liquor from the back the existing rear door of the liquor store to the across the street, across Jersey Pike to the CSLA property, and that is showing as excuse me.

I'm trying to make sure I have the right measurement.

From the building to the property line.

Currently, the rule is the measurement is 200 feet.

The distance prohibition is the 200-foot distance requirement.

So they did 300 feet plus or minus by the registered land surveyor.

And we've had questions in the past and followed up with land surveyors, but we did not have a question about this survey.

So the difference here from the this proposed liquor store to CSLS, CSLA is 100 feet, is what you're telling me.

It's over 300 feet from the rear of the leased space, the least building space, the rear um door.

It's over 300 feet from there to the nearest property line of the school property.

Well, as far as the what the ordinance allows, it's over 100 feet from the required minimum.

So this is a 100 feet difference.

Had it been less than this would not have been in compliance based off the measurement from the back door to the CSLA what?

It's the nearest property line.

Which in that case would be the driveway into the school.

It shows is a um angle distance from the door in um and it is um and so obviously it depends on where you measure, but I think that is the it should be and what we require is the nearest the distance to the nearest property line.

So the angle can change depending on how they measure that.

So what was the nearest property line?

Pardon?

What was the nearest property line for CSLA?

Um and again, referencing the survey is lot one division of Lakeside School Track, and that's the um, and then that is the shared property line with the CSLA school.

And the the driveway into CSLA off of Jersey Pike is the school's property.

Is that correct?

It is pointing to the edge of the CSLA property um based on the survey and the service, um, and I'm sorry, I don't know where the road is.

It's not on the shown on the survey because we don't require that.

Okay.

But I can find that for you.

I would highly recommend you find out this the driveway is owned by Chatting, the the school, that driveway is owned by the school system and not the church in front of it.

Yes, and so the survey shown is the CSLA school, and it has um, and then there's a small portion that's the Lake Scott side lakeside school track and then Hamilton County Department of Education.

So it's that shared property line is the nearest one.

The closest property line to the liquor store is the driveway to the school.

According to the survey, it is the shared property line that of the CSLA school in a lot that's a subdivision of that.

Gotcha.

I I wanted to enter that into the record because that's where the discrepancy is for me.

And based off you the ruling of the regional planning agency from your measurements, and so I want this to be correct, is that I don't believe that it was measured properly from the actual closest property line to the liquor store, which in this case would be a hundred-foot difference.

Okay.

And so I would hope that is accurately measured from that closest property line, which in this case would be the driveway, in which we are saying is the existing rear door to that complex off the Jersey Pike.

I can contact the um person that did the survey and confirm that that is the nearest property line, and I can see if they can also give us the distance to the driveway.

And uh, Mr.

Chair, the reason why that was vital because we are restricted by case law in how we approve these certificates, and that if they meet all of the RPA requirements, i.e.

your measurements, then we are bound by state law to approve it or we'll be sued again.

Um however, for my comfort level, I think it's too close.

I don't it's not within I've been on record and saying that an additional liquor store on Highway 58 is not in line with our current plan Chattanooga outline for economic development for that area, and it's no difference from our restrictions that we put on payday lending lawn places and what have you.

Um I just want to my concern with this this is too close, is it's not within our guidelines as far as playing economic planning for that area tonight to because of legal advice, I will be abstaining on this, but I like to encourage my colleagues to vote in a way that is uh congruent congruent with the law.

Uh, but I do want to express my discontent that this liquor store is coming that close to that school with only a hundred-foot difference, and I question the measurement from the rear door to the actual property line of the driveway of the school.

And I want to make sure that is on the record, and that if it is challenged.

Tonight I cannot use my vote in opposition of this, but I will use my voice to that neighborhood and saying that when there are businesses that are not a part of our economic development plan, that that's not a business that I would prefer to support, especially that close to a school.

Okay.

Uh so that's Councilman, I have a question in this to you and I guess to the attorney.

Is there a time constraint on this being voted on today?

Because Councilman Clark has asked for this to be remeasured.

Is there a reason that we would vote on this before it is remeasured?

There is a statutory time frame that it has to be done before the 16th, which I believe is your next meeting on that end of it here, or else it's uh automatically approved.

Well, my next question is then why did I really never understood why we have to vote on something if we do not have the ability or the prerogative to vote no.

The state is wanting to make sure at least y'all have complied with the requirements of determining and and you have a a city ordinance here, the special exceptions permit requirement in the city code to do that, and that comes through the council that could uh be delegated to another entity if you wish, but that's what is in the city code at this point in time, and uh there is a requirement that certain actions have to occur within a time period uh under state law whenever that application is filed.

And what if this item does not have enough yes votes tonight?

Then uh it would uh if it does not have enough yes votes this evening here, um uh it would come up for a review uh uh pursuant to your council rules when you have a full body.

I believe that that is the requirement in that regard.

I will have to look and make sure at least of the provisions because I thought there is a requirement that if there is not a total of at least four votes or five votes in in favor of something, it comes up at your next meeting.

Okay, yes, sir.

Which I would request uh Karen, can we get a copy of whatever uh I guess distance plan that we have here that could be made part of the record in this case because I don't think I have a copy of that.

Okay, thank you.

Council, I'll leave that up to you whether you want to defer this for a week.

Well, what I'll do I wanted to I also want to point out that when the application is made, and if you guys recall, I requested that once the application is made that city council members be notified so that we do have the amount of time to deliberate defer.

And that was not done in this case by the department of our treasury department for where the applications are filed.

Is anyone from that department here, Kevin?

Yeah, so to just for the record, the reason why we're so stretched for time on this is that we were not notified.

And notifications through future considerations are not considered notifications for this council because those notice notifications come from the mayor's office.

Okay.

So we're in this pickle because of that, and I've already been on record in this particular application and requesting that I have ample time to discuss this with my community where there's opposition, and now we could potentially be um in a legal conundrum because there is case law when we don't approve these, which I don't understand.

So Chip, what I would like to do, uh Mr.

Chair is defer um until next Tuesday.

Okay.

And that would be the last day according to the state law that we would have to decide.

And uh Karen, thank you so much for your work on this.

Uh but I would like to uh have more understanding on what they considered as the property line, in my opinion, it is the driveway that is closest to the door, which is owned by the school system.

Okay.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Uh moving now to next week's proposed agenda.

We will have uh the items that's on first reading will uh go to final read.

We do have a couple of items including the uh planning items on first read for next week that we'll be covering in our planning and zoning committee under resolutions.

Have a couple items under economic development.

Uh a couple of appointments from the mayor's office and then uh parks and public works out.

Any questions on any of those resolutions for next week?

And then under other business, I think, Chief.

Next week you'll be given a report on a donation uh that the police department received okay.

All right, moving to our purchase items for this week.

You've had an opportunity to look those over.

Any questions or comments on any of our purchase items?

Councilwoman Harvey.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I want to bring attention to one of our purchases under parks and outdoors tonight.

We'll be considering a purchase uh for some playground equipment uh at heritage park in my district in the amount of eighty-one thousand two hundred dollars, and I would ask the council to please consider approving this.

This is something that we've been working hard towards at least since 2018 with Captain Schuyler Phillips, scholars here, but uh we would love to see this come to fruition and and we absolutely need this to go through.

So uh ask you all to please consider doing that for us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, and I do not think that we have any items on future considerations uh at this moment.

So anything else concerning the agenda that needs to come before the body at this time before we go into our committee uh meetings.

And we will uh go into public safety committee.

Let me get on the right week.

I'm on next week.

Uh at this time we will uh open up the public safety committee.

I'll call that meeting that committee to order.

Could I have a uh motion on the minutes?

All right, we have a proper uh motion to approve with a second.

Uh if there's no objections, the minutes will stand as recorded.

So this afternoon, and uh by the way, council, you should have received in your box uh a strategic plan from the fire department 2026 through 2028.

I hope all of you have that.

Uh Chief Knowles will be going over that.

So Chief, I'm gonna ask you if you would to come up at this time and uh give your presentation.

Good afternoon, Council.

Thank you for your time this afternoon, and I also want to thank uh Chairman Henderson for a little extra time putting this together.

I know a couple of months ago you asked me to to speak and uh and go over uh the vision of the fire department and and things that are going on, and I wanted to get this plan together and have it ready to present before we did that.

So thank you for that extra time.

So year 2025 was busy and productive year for the fire department, marked by a continued commitment to service and operational excellence.

Our members continue to provide a high level of service to the community while responding to increasing demands and maintaining a strong focus on safety, professionalism, and accountability.

This work would not have been possible without your continued support, and on behalf of the entire department, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to Mayor Kelly and City Council for your ongoing commitment to public safety and to the fire department.

As we look ahead to 2026, our focus is on sustaining our progress and preparing for future challenges.

This afternoon, I want to recap 2025 and then provide an overview of our three-year strategic plan, which serves as a guiding framework to support our personnel, strengthen our operations, and ensure the department remains well positioned to protect our community today while preparing for the needs tomorrow.

Please enjoy this short recap video of 2025.

Like I said, a busy 2025.

So still gets my heart pumping when I see videos like that.

So I want to thank uh PO Lindsay Rogers for incredible work as she always does uh on that video and everything.

So with that, you should have a hard copy of uh last year 2025's calls um in your packet there.

And so 2025 showed a slight decrease in overall calls.

Uh Chattanooga Fire Department ran uh just over 22,000 calls of service in 2025.

You'll see that uh uh a couple of areas that we look at showed a slight decrease.

Our fires were down by about a hundred fires.

We had a thousand and sixteen fires in uh twenty twenty-five.

Our rescue and EMS calls um went up drastically, about two thousand to ten thousand and eighteen for EMS and rescue calls.

Uh motor vehicle accidents with injuries dropped about seven hundred to eleven hundred and two assisted citizen calls increased um to fifteen hundred and seventy-eight.

Also like to note, Councilman Harvey, uh, ladder 21, just that single truck in two months has ran over 265 calls of service just by itself.

So thank you for helping getting that placed out there.

So next I would like to just uh go over a brief overview on uh the fire department's three-year strategic plan.

I thought it was very important to put a plan like this together.

Um you see it's the first time in the department that a single plan has been uh put together to connect our vision with our operations, and really it's just about setting a direction and then being able to communicate that direction to the entire department.

And uh this plan is about consistency, safety, clarity, and support.

And uh it's our roadmap.

It defines where we're going, why it matters, and how every member plays a part in it.

And so I want to speak just a little bit about how this plan came together.

It just wasn't things that uh that I thought about.

And then for our citizens, it's transparency, it's accountability, and it's also a visible commitment to continuous improvement.

Two weeks before Christmas, we sat down or I sat down with all the command staff and operational staff.

We went over this plan.

I sat down with the employee organizations and went over it with them.

I sat down with uh deputy chief uh Darren Ledford and went over it with him.

And then I went out to the uh stations and I met with every firefighter at every station on every shift and gave them a hard copy of this plan and went over it with them so they could ask questions and and they could hear it from me what the next three years looks like in the department.

So I thought that was very important.

The mission or the vision of our department is to be a renowned fire department where the wellness, safety, and training of our members enable us to deliver exceptional service through prevention, public education, professional response, and innovative practices, we protect our community today while preparing for the needs tomorrow.

That vision is important to me because it first and foremost it puts our members first, as you can see there.

We want to be known for our members and the wellness, safety, and training of members, what we do for them.

And in order to do that, that's how we deliver the exceptional service that our department does.

And through our different programs, you see prevention, public education, professional response, and innovative practices.

What are we doing to make ourselves better every single day?

We're thinking outside the box, we're not doing the status quo.

We're bettering ourselves every day, and that's how we're going to protect our community today while preparing for the needs of tomorrow.

Our values in the department, integrity, commitment, humility, purpose, and community.

And then our command staff, uh, what our responsibility was that was that was the communication that went out within this plan was what our responsibility is as the command staff, and that is to provide the vision, the accountability, direction, and most importantly, the support for every firefighter.

And I know that the command staff is ready to do that, and we'll do that for every member of the department.

And so at this time, I would like to introduce my command staff for the department.

Um, and so I'd like to introduce executive deputy chief Seth Miller, Deputy Chief of Operations, Ashley May, Deputy Chief of Administration, Carlos Tibbs, and Deputy Chief Fire Marshal William Matlock.

And I'd like to note that every one of these command staff have more than 25 years of service to this department and city individually.

So over a hundred years of experience with the department here in the command staff.

Our non-negotiables in our department, six principles that guide our actions, chain of command, communication, professionalism, safety, training, and readiness and accountability.

The next slide is four themes.

So these themes are now the filter for every decision in this department.

If something does not support one of these four, it does not move forward.

So we looked at operational excellence, community trust and engagement, wellness, and organizational resilience.

And with that, we'll move into some of the things that that uh some goals and some objectives and and programs that we would like to implement over the next three years.

And so, first of all, is the community part of it.

And so, if you look there, expand fire prevention bureau, conduct a community risk reduction program feasibility study, formalize emergency housing partnerships, and then expand the connect program.

I'll elaborate on that just a little bit.

Our department does an incredible job before an incident with our public education, our community outreach, we do an incredible job.

We do an incredible job when the incident happens on mitigating the incident.

So, what else can we do after the incident, though?

What can we provide for post-incident follow-up to support our affected families?

Is it to just uh go out and make sure that they have the resources they need to get back on their feet?

Or is it after a fire in a neighborhood can we can we go out into that neighborhood and hang smoke detectors or check smoke detectors to make sure that that neighborhood that just had the fire has smoke detectors in it.

So, what can we do after the incident?

Increased command presence, chief officers will be at community events along with the men and women from the stations.

Modernizing our systems, so policy audit systems, standardized communication processes, quarterly video briefings for myself.

Trying to communicate one message across 447 members, 20 stations, 27 trucks, three shifts is a is a challenge, as everyone would know.

So making sure that we we find ways to consistently communicate everything that's going on in the department.

Redesign training systems built on our new drill tower.

We all know that our drill tower just opened last year, so redesigning our training systems and getting everything and doing everything we possibly can with our new drill tower.

Optimizing operational systems, seeing how we can respond more efficiently.

ISO Class One readiness plan.

So we know that uh ISO will be coming back around 2027 to GRADUS, so we are gonna be ready for that when they when they arrive.

Next is in investing in our people.

So a couple of things that was uh really hit in the uh survey that they asked for is um a more robust officer development program, leadership training with our battalion chiefs, and then formalize uh physical and mental health benchmarks and integrate support services with that.

We all know that uh firefighting is a very physically demanding job.

Heart attacks are a number one cause of death.

So, what can we do as a department to help um get ahead of those and try to be in front before something like that that happens?

We've already started doing things in in these goals and and projects that we're doing.

One of those that we've already looked at with this one is uh with our yearly physicals, firefighters have to have yearly physicals, and so we've added a couple of more tests in there to try to be proactive and see cardiac issues before they actually happen.

So that's what we're doing to try to help our members physically and mentally.

Um create cross-divisional apprenticeship programs.

So, with that, that's succession planning for our department.

Um, bringing over firefighters that are out in the companies to bring them over and let them see what day shift, what administrative positions do, and see if they any of them would like in the future to come over and take those jobs in administrative positions.

Uh probably over half of the administrative positions uh the men and women are eligible to retire within the next three to five years, if not today.

So making sure we have succession planning within our department to be ready.

Uh rebuild the recognition program and then managing our resources, uh maintaining equipment replacement plans, so on large purchases like uh fire apparatus.

2025, Chattanooga Fire Department received six new fire trucks.

This year, 2026, um, we're supposed to receive 10 new fire trucks.

So remove rolling over our aging fleet and making sure that the firefighters have the best possible equipment and the newest equipment possible for their safety.

Plan for new fire stations, using growth data to identify priority areas for new fire stations.

Quartermaster program, standardizing our uniforms and equipment management, and develop a heavy rescue program.

When we went out to the companies, this was the slide that we show, and where I told the firefighters or let them know that this isn't just my plan, this is our plan.

And for this to work, you know, the plan only works if every firefighter makes it their own.

And so, you know, we wanted to reassure them that our commitment to be there and support them to make this plan come to life and to work will be there.

And then what to expect over the next three years, expect clear priorities, consistent communication, and visible accountability.

And so with that, that is the end of my presentation, and I would take any questions from counsel if you have any.

Chief, I will say that truly the fire department is more than just putting the wet stuff on the hot stuff.

I mean, it's truly public safety.

And I think this strategic plan that you've laid out is a roadmap of how to provide that public safety for the citizens of Chattanooga.

One of the things that I noticed on the little handout that you gave me is the reduction in fires that we have from 2024 to 2025, a little over 15 percent.

I hope that was intentional efforts.

What were we doing?

Do you think that helped us decrease our fires by 15% from one year to the next?

They those fluctuate.

I mean they fluctuate.

Um we see that, but I think the our public education and our community outreach.

Um Captain Damian Vincent, who's here with us um this evening.

Also, Lieutenant Al Green, who used to be our public uh education officer who now has moved on into the fire marshal's office, and Lieutenant Lanier has taken his position.

So them being out with the groups that they have together with um educating out there in the schools or in the neighborhoods getting out, I think is um has helped out, you know, a lot, and that's that's what it's about.

It's about we would rather prevent fires from happening than them ever happen.

And so that was one of the things, you know, with within the the plan that we talked about expanding the connect program is that we do an incredible job up front.

We do an incredible job responding and how how can we do better after the incident um to help those the communities help those families after that.

Yeah, so that's great, thank you.

Yes, sir.

All right, any any questions from the council for Chief Dowles?

Chief, looks like you're off the hook.

Thank you for this presentation and for introducing your command staff to us.

Um we appreciate the work that you're doing.

Appreciate y'all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

At this time, we will roll into planning and zoning.

Cheered by Council Burge.

That's for my back.

Oh, sorry.

Roll that okay, council members.

Uh I'd like to call to order the planning and zoning committee meeting for this evening.

Um, can I get a motion on the the uh minutes from last month's meeting?

Second, okay.

Uh thank you.

We will accept those minutes into the record officially.

Uh Karen, seems like forever.

Yeah, um, okay.

Um council, you have your notes in front of you that um Karen Rennick prepared for us, and as always, she does such a good job of highlighting the cases that stood out.

In addition to the cases that are highlighted, is there anything else that you would like to hear more information on tonight?

I see no lights.

Um, Karen, so with um with that, we'll start with item B.

Um, well, there's two item B's.

Uh item B under first reading.

Okay.

0176.

176.

Um, so all the cases that I'm covering had opposition in one form or fashion.

Just um none of them had a lot of opposition, so just one or two.

I guess sometimes I'm not clear if there's one person there, 100 people there.

These um just had a few um folks in opposition to each, and then I'll have um I'll address the two ordinance amendments.

Um the first case is on Dodds Avenue.

The Dodds Avenue corridor is the main spine running um kind of north um east to southwest.

Um Dyes Avenue is primarily a mix of um in heavy industrial and commercial zoning.

This is a request to rezone from that heavy industrial IH zone to the CC commercial corridor zone for grocery store restaurant.

Um so pretty easy comparison.

The IH zone is one of the heaviest zones, industrial zones in the zoning ordinance.

The CC zone is probably most similar to the um former C2 convenience commercial zone found along many of our commercial corridors.

Um there has been some uh there have been zoning cases in the area, they've been primarily rezoning from manufacturing to residential.

That's been um we've had several cases in Rossell Boulevard over the time or the Russell Boulevard East Lake area over time.

Similar to that, is a mix of use in the area, it does reflect the zoning, which is um RN15 is uh much of the East Lake Rostro Boulevard area outside of the um those commercial manufacturing areas and the land use pattern is pretty similar to that.

Um staff found that um the request is so is compatible with the Rossville Boulevard plan that recommends a commercial mixed use.

Um that CC zone allows both as commercial office um and residential uses.

Um so staff had recommended approval.

There was opposition present um from a neighboring property owner, concerns about speeding and traffic, um accidents, um, and really during peak times, quite a bit of discussion about kind of traffic traffic operational planning commission um did put them in contact with public works transportation, feeling like some of those operational issues would better be addressed that way, and planning commission um does recommend approval for this rezoning.

And I just want to uh highlight that I know this is in district eight council members and council uh vice chair noel said that she would be asking for deferral on anything this week.

I went ahead and asked Karen to give a presentation.

Sometimes some of the issues that come up on other districts may be questions or issues that you experience in your district.

So I don't see any lights.

Are there any questions about this particular matter?

Thank you, Karen.

Um yes, I realized some of these might be um might be quick, and I can also share um the slides with um the council members on the cases that aren't here for their questions.

Well, and if they're going back and watching too, they may get some more information.

So thank you.

Okay, and the next case that had opposition um was uh it's a rezoning from RN2 to RN3 to construct an additional housing unit, and this is on East 12th Street.

There's no recent zoning history in the site.

Um pretty much everything around it is the RN2 zone, and then our new open space zone is shown in green.

That's the um Ridgedale um safe walk, and then the Watkin Street Park.

And so the difference between the RN2 and the RN3, and this is something that um Councilman Burrs said it's a great time to learn about our new zones as we're going through these just to kind of highlight the changes.

The RN3 starts, you'll see that multi-unit dwellings come into place.

So as an existing duplex, the applicant wants to add an additional unit, so the RN3 zone allows that to happen.

Um the site surrounded by single unit detached residences to the west and south.

Um again, the park sites we mentioned.

There's a newly constructed duplex south of the site.

Um, and the RN3 zone allows a more intense use and is kind of in keeping with that area, and so staff was recommending some conditions, and so um the plan recommends the area three plan recommends urban residential single family um overlay, which is really keeping thinking about keeping that single family, but the existing zoning doesn't reflect that, and so um staff is recommending to um with conditions to um approve it.

So there was opposition present, concerned about the alley.

So you'll see on the site plan um the existing alleyway, concerned about um access off that alley um and a kind of a site triangle.

There's a shed blocking view.

Some of the discussion at Planning Commission was a setback for that new unit.

Um Planning Commission has a recommendation approve with the conditions um recommended by staff, which is a maximum of three dwelling units and a maximum building height of two and a half stories or 35 feet, and that's to um help support that plan recommendation.

Thank you.

Any questions about this particular case?

Ah, Councilman Elliott.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um interesting.

Karen, I met with this individual a couple months ago, and they were looking to do an ADU.

Yes, and I believe, and so um when I was I think the site plan our application calls it an ADU.

And so um, and I kind of played with that when I was doing the presentation because it does say the proposed use deplex with an ADU.

We think of an ADU as what is um, it's probably what is allowed under zoning, which is an ADU, which is with a single family detached home.

So in this case, um ADUs are not an allowed by by right use um with duplexes.

So in this use, we're I calling it an additional unit.

So probably to an applicant they plan on using it as an ADU under zoning, technically, it's an additional unit, which is causing that trigger for that RN3.

Okay, because this is a problem because I didn't know they had to rezone.

Um I know there's a the lot next to them are also building an ADU.

Um is that a different zoning?

Do you know?

So the lot next to them, and this is just an example of any of those, and so the applicant could be building an ADU if they have a single family home.

So there's mix of um the zone, the original zone probably was an R2, which allowed duplexes and single family, and there's kind of a mix in the area.

Let's see if it has it on the site plan.

So the R map is showing you there's single unit residential to the west.

So someone could be building an ADU that meets that, you know, pretty much every single family detached home can have an ADE requirement.

So they are could be building an ADU by right.

Um if you have a duplex and you're adding on the additional unit currently, that's triggering the need to rezone.

We do have a um just to show I did mention that primarily it is RN2.

There is an RN3 just across the kind of the safe walk greenway from this site.

Yeah, that's the city owns that we're not that's correct.

That greenway, yes.

Yeah.

Um he's not here.

Usually I have people reach out to me before they rezone.

This is a little abnormal because he did.

And I went to the site and I actually saw this.

Now he has also issues with street curves.

It's a lot of flooding down there too.

Um, this will call me off guard a little bit.

The person who had, because I think I know who they are.

The person who had issues with the alleyway.

Yes.

They're trying to access the alleyway.

They're trying to access the back of their house through the alleyway.

Is that correct?

Um, my memory is that they had concerns um coming off the alleyway, and that right now the view is blocked, and maybe it's from the new duplex or fence.

And so they had just had concerns that that left, you know, being kind of the view looking left would also be viewed using the alley.

And I can go back and double check the um the recording.

But for my memory, was it was site site distance pulling out and being able to see coming out of the alley being able to make a churn.

And I think their problem is also gonna become this lot right behind them.

There's a huge new development.

Yes.

That had I think has like zero setbacks.

It is a larger home.

Yes, we have a picture of that.

I can you do you have the contact info for the person who was it opposition?

I can I can pull that for you, yes.

Get that, and can you give me Blake's info again?

I'm gonna circle back to him and then I'll go from there.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, ma'am.

That's all, Madam Chair.

Okay, thank you.

I see no other lights on this case.

Uh so we'll move on to 0183.

Okay.

Um, this is in North Chattanooga, and I'll move um quickly.

It gets kind of a little um complicated during the because they have a variance, but um the this property and the surrounding property are RN15, um, just to help orient Tremont Streets to the um southeast.

Um the applicant would like to get rezoned to TRN one, which is more of a um kind of an urban zone.

You'll see in the description the purpose it adds um two unit, three unit, four unit dwellings.

So I'm just starting to get into um and then the um some of the setbacks are a little bit different.

The applicant had previously received a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals based on the zone at the time.

Um they have a house plan set that they like.

Um, and so they still instead of going back to the Board of Zoning Appeals, um, they feel that rezoning is the best path.

And so um staff had recommended going back to the Board of Zoning Appeals to get um the additional variants.

Um Planning Commission um recommended approval with the condition single unit dwelling only.

There was opposition um concerned about that zone that allows those multiple units and then just discussion about property values.

Um but the applicant had proposed a condition, a single unit dwelling only, because it does allow um two, three, and four unit, and planning commission recommended approval with that.

Um I did talk to the applicant today, um, and I need to reconfirm that he needs to speak with um Chairwoman Hill.

I don't believe he'd done that.

And I just need to make sure that I did convey that.

Okay, sounds good.

Uh seeing no lights, um 0193.

I think I have one more.

Let me just um so did I I mean sorry, nine zero one nine two.

My bad.

I don't know.

No, thank you.

I have one.

It's kind of hard to navigate sometimes.

Um Chamberlain Aven Avenue, um, the request is to rezone from RN15 to RN13.

Um right now the person can build one home, the person would like to build two homes, and so just a reminder the difference between the RN15 and RM13 is that minimum lot size.

Umit residential around, primarily single unit.

The plan supports um a single unit, and but talks about maintaining existing pattern.

So there's some recommendations, a discussion in the staff report about minimum lot about the lot size and the block and lot width, but um staff felt the proposal meets the character and pattern of the neighborhood and recommends approving.

Um there was opposition present.

The person did want to maintain single unit dwelling.

I think there might have been some confusion about the zone and what was happening.

These are single family detached homes, planning commission's recommending approval.

Councilman Elliott.

Thank you, madam chair.

Uh, Karen, this person has not reached out to me.

Okay.

So if you're listening on the ethos out there, um please reach out, or this project would not be continuing.

Can you give me their contact info as well as to the person who did opposition?

We just had a similar issue, similar rezoning case in the same neighborhood.

I just want to make sure the neighbors are comfortable.

Yes, I will do that.

And this one is about a lot and a half width, and that's one of the factors that went into it instead of the rezoning of just of one standard um kind of urban lot, it's a lot and a half.

Okay.

So it gives a little bit more area.

Yeah, that was just like the last case.

Yes, it was a huge lot.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you, madam chair.

All right.

Uh moving on to these are the rest of these are our amendments.

Is that correct?

I think I have uh 182 and that's a lift of conditions.

Okay, and then the other two are okay.

Um, and this is um for the Erlinger East project, uh, lift conditions for future hospital expansion.

Um this was there's actually three ordinances they're requesting to lift conditions from, and I'll move through them quickly.

But there was something called a growth court or overlay zone policy in place then.

Um, and I think that was really to try to get a handle at the time on all the growth that was um resulting on Gun Barrel Road, which later was replaced by the Hamilton Place plan.

Um, and it was addressing um some design elements, but primarily landscaping.

So there's a series of three of them.

Um, and these were developed before we had the landscape ordinance in effect.

And so one of them does talk about accessing off Apple Gate, but there's no immediate access point to Applegate.

Um, and so staff felt that it was reasonable.

Um, the new landscape, you know, we have landscape um requirements now for parking lots for perimeter, and so those will come into play if those conditions are lifted.

There was opposition present um from two people that lived kind of on the corner of the um of the subdivision that's to the southwest.

Um this is not actually impacting the property that abuts them.

They were just interested in knowing what's going on.

So um planning commission just confirmed that it's not for the site that immediately butts them, and the landscape ordinance would still be in play, and so planning commission recommended lifting um those conditions.

Okay, councilman Harvey.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I know this is district nine on our agenda, it's actually district four, so yeah, it is still it's my district.

So I I did reach out to uh the developer on this, and uh yeah, basically what you said it's just an old old ordinance that was before any of that was our already there.

Uh and so yeah, I I don't have any problem with this.

Um just uh it's just gonna be in addition to what our area needs and increase in services there.

So yeah, I'm good with that.

Thank you.

And I apologize, that district reference was probably our fault, so I'll ask them to correct it.

Well, I made that contact with you because I knew it was yours.

So yes, thank you.

Okay, I see no other lights regarding this matter.

So moving on, the last two are ordinance amendments.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

Um there's two text amendments, and these are um originating um from staff.

The first one is to address vesting, and we did a zoning 101 several months ago now, and we touched briefly on vesting.

Um, but in 2014, um, public chapter 686 was a vested property rights act.

And um this and this language is I think from MTAS, it basically um established a ving period um for properties that have gone through the development process and are pulling permits.

And so this went into effect in 2015, and that time we responded by saying what are the triggers for everything that would vest.

The state law said um you can choose you, the jurisdiction can choose what what constitutes vesting, but you and we developed a list at that time.

Um, I don't believe we've amended um that section of the zoning ordinance um until recently this year, um public chapter 465 went in play, and instead of vesting happening upon some um approval, it happens upon submission.

And so um, and then it's been talks a little bit more about uh state law has some other items in there, and so um this is trying to address those changes.

So um now that um development plans are vested, um, instead of approved development plans, submission of development plans, um, and invested rights not established until it substantially complies with the requirements of local development ordinances or regulation, and then the local government can specify what constitutes substantial compliance.

So we took public chapter 465 and Brian Schultz did all the work.

So Braun Schultz took for chapter public chapter 465.

And so took that also and combined those.

And so this determines to be substantially compliant, it determines what that means.

So includes that all documents, plans, forms, ensures that they're consistent, and term demonstrates can general conformity with the zoning ordinance, subdivision regulation, and codes.

So I guess for us, an example when we first read it was that someone could submit a zoning, a site plan with a zoning case.

So they have, and it could substantially conform with regulations, but we don't review that at the time for that.

And so this is really trying to narrow down what that means.

And so there's some additional language in there, and if it's helpful, I can share the state law, the MTAS memo, and a little bit more information.

But this is something we've been working with for a while, that vested rights act, and we would just um need to make sure that that submission language and what in work with LDO, they did review it, but make sure that they're aware of that too.

Okay.

Um I want to make sure I understand the submission could be planning.

Is that what you're saying?

For the vested rights to start when they submit a plan to RPA staff.

Yes, and so right now it says submission means the date on which an applicant submits to the LDO or the RPA is appropriate, a complete application of a building permit or development plan listed, and then the vet we have later, and this is a vested right is established with respect to any property upon the following submission.

Submission of a preliminary subdivision plat.

And I'm this comes in because the section of code that got amended is the section related to planning commissions.

Um submission of a preliminary plat, submission of a final plat, submission of a final plat that could be staff approved, submission of a special exception permit required to complete a site or development plan, submission of a planned unit development, or any other submission or issuance specified in that code section, the TCA section.

The vested rights could come from a developer that does not own the piece of property yet.

Um I believe that is accurate.

In our case, the regional planning agency, the property owner is signing a letter that says this person is acting on my behalf.

And so we get the property owner's signature to say that this the work that they're doing, I understand that they are doing.

Okay.

So there's there's really nothing that would say that whoever submitting the development necessarily has to own the property.

No, I don't believe that that's the case.

And I believe the case.

Phil can give um, you know, I think originally the idea was is that someone could not be moving along, have an approved permit in 2014, have approval to do something, and in the jurisdiction change direction, change code, that then that person would have to do something completely different.

So vest for a period of time, and there's a time that tolls, so there's a larger act, there's more information in that.

And then they change it's not just that approval, but the submission is substantially, but we want to lock that down as much as possible.

And substantial compliance helps you in that regard of locking it down.

That's one reason because it has to be compliant with whatever zone zoning laws and regulations and subdivision regulations we have at the time.

But yes, and that we have a um site plans, conceptual plans submitted for rezoning applications are not considered to be a preliminary final development plan, and the submission does not trigger vested rights because we wanted to be really clear, like under state law, we don't want you to meet all the requirements and then turn it in for a rezoning application.

We're saying we're not reviewing it for that.

We're reviewing that as a conceptual site plan, so that is in here too.

Can we make a distinction between just a developer and the landowner?

I don't think we are given that authority right now.

If if we choose to do so here with our regional planning agency, that that would have to be uh something that we would adopt, you know, by our zoning provisions here.

Uh that's the only way I can see you can try to do that.

And that that that's the problem.

And it could be we do a little prose con list of property owner versus um, you know, someone else acting on behalf or developer, and then um give you some thoughts on that.

Okay.

Yeah, thank you.

I think this is one um that we will have to watch.

We did the only jurisdiction that we have seen had completed it, um, was Knoxville.

So we did look at theirs, but this is one I think state law is not completely clear.

That's why I think MTAS provided the memo, but this is one I think as we're working through.

We need to make sure that um we've got everything locked down.

That's right.

Yes.

Yes.

I see no other lights on this particular amendment.

Okay.

The next one is much easier.

Um there um the next one adds four graphics to measure regular shaped lots, um, and measurement of like setbacks for regular shaped lots, and then for building height.

And so um when you're measuring a setback, five feet from the side, not everything is a square rectangular.

We don't have any guidance specified in the zoning ordinance, and so this is in the next four series of graphics are intended to say how would that be measured.

So this is if there's no definable rear property line.

Um, this one is talking about the rear, the where the rear line would be.

This is talking about a curved frontage, and this one is showing, I believe, when uh this was harder, but it's addressing the side property lines in their configuration, and this is what we worked on with LDO to help them, and also to be clear when someone is thinking about five feet from a property line.

How would I know where that would be measured from?

This is intended to give um enforcement guidance and a little bit more clarity, and then um the last one of this amendment series form based code has existing language on how to measure average grade, and that's the statement across the top.

The existing um the existing graphic doesn't really reflect that, and so we've had a lot of discussion, we've had a lot of discussion lane lately about measuring height.

So the revised graphic is intended to show what the language says and how we actually do this, and was reviewed by a couple people, but that graphic is a better representation of the language than the the current existing um graphic, and so this is just swapping out those graphics.

I see no questions about this amendment.

Okay.

Any other questions for Karen while we have her about these cases or anything else?

Okay, thank you, Karen, as always.

Um a couple of notes.

I just want to remind you that you received from Brian Schultz the packet of applications that are coming before the planning commission.

You received those on December 12th.

So if you hadn't had a chance to look at those, dig back into your email list from Brian Schultz.

Those are the applications that are going to be before the planning commission a week from yesterday, so on the 12th.

So uh please review the ones that are coming before the council that are in your district because in that four-week period of time, if Karen needs to connect you with those folks in that four-week period of time, so when they make it to us in five weeks, we maybe we have the opportunity to have some more stuff addressed prior to like this meeting, like connecting you with a property owner or developer or somebody like that.

And if there's anything that is um that's on that uh packet or in that packet that Brian sent that I can be helpful with, just let me know.

Um again, it was sent to you.

I just went back to my email, it was just sent to you from Brian on December 12th.

Um let's see.

I think that is all I have.

I know that we have a client uh attorney client meeting.

What time would you like to still five thirty?

Okay, we oh oh I apologize.

I want to say this.

Councilman.

No, so that's off your committee.

Uh when I got elected, I told Karen and her staff early on.

Anybody looking to do rezoning for my district, they are to give them my number and a reach out ahead of time.

Absolutely.

And so they're instructed on the front end.

So if you ever see any confusion coming in, it's usually because they haven't done their due diligence out of front.

So I don't want to developer.

The developer.

Yes.

Yes, I don't know.

They're doing great.

They're doing just a lot of things.

Yeah, no, I agree with you.

It were it is a two-way street, and I get calls when RPA directs folks to me.

Usually those those applications don't even get onto the schedule until they've talked to us.

Yeah, they want to know that they've talked to us before they've accepted their application.

So they're pretty good about saying, have you talked to your council person beforehand?

So hopefully they haven't slipped through the cracks and application gotten on that schedule for like the planning commission meeting.

Oh, are we going to air me now?

I can't.

I can't.

I'm sorry.

You threw me off.

Oh, if there's pending this is a protocol question.

If there's pending cases that are that's going before the planning commission, i.e., next Monday.

On Monday, yeah.

To have those preliminary discussions with you because you represent the council on that planning body.

Do we do we have those public discussions, or can we just mention you mentioned having a discussion with you about some things that we could do in preparation for that meeting before it comes to this body?

Is it necessary that we do it here, or does it no, if there's something that I mean, if there's something I would be more of a connection to resources for you based on my experiences that I've learned over the last nine months, or maybe set suggested, you know, Karen get involved or somebody else with RPA.

That versus us having a discussion, yeah.

Discussion on decision making.

So five thirty still.

Item A, and Ornister Mint City Code, part two, chapter 35, Article 6, Horse Strong Carriages, section 35186 definitions, section 35203.

Item B, in order to amend Chattanooga City Code, part two, chapter 38 zoning orders.

So it's a rezone property located at 4272 Bonnie Oaks Drive from RN16 residential neighborhood zone and CC commercial corridor zone to IH industrial heavy zone subservant conditions.

All right now second.

We have a motion on the floor to approve items 7A and B with a proper second questions or comments before we vote.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, no?

So moved.

Madam Clerk, let's take A, please.

In ordinance to amend ordinance number one three seven four A closing and abandoning to unopened alleyways and the 6,000 block Outa Georgetown Road as detailed on the attachment subserved conditions and shall correct the scriptures area and orders number 1374A to reflect the correct alley number two legal description as being the alley that separates lot 16 from lot 17 block A Scoggin's addition to Udwa instead of lot 17 from lot 18.

Well we have a motion on the floor to approve the proper second questions or comments all in favor aye aye any opposed no motion carries eight B please in ordinance to amend Chattanooga City Code Part 2, Chapter 38 zoning ordinance so it's rezone property located at 2802 Curtis Street from RN15 residential neighborhood zone to TRN2 zone all right and this is in councilwoman knowles uh district district eight councilman ellick uh miss chairman I will uh like to defer this for week okay that would be thirteenth I believe yes sir so we have a motion on the floor to defer until January the thirteenth do I have a second second all right with a proper second questions or comments all in favor aye aye any opposed no eyes have it eight c please in ordinance to amend chatting city code part two chapter twenty-four article fourteen section twenty-four five oh two schedule two speed on third streets okay approved second all right have a motion on the four to approve a proper second questions or comments all in favor aye any opposed no motion carries uh let's take these going at a time under council office resolutions uh eight a please a resolution confirming the appointment of David Hudson to the industrial development board for district one for a term beginning on January 7 2026 and then on January 6th 2032 we have a motion on the floor to approve the proper second questions or comments all in favor aye aye any opposed no motion carries I don't see Mr.

Hudson is he here while we're looking okay if he's watching online we thank you for your service nine B please all yes thank you nine B alternate version madam clerk a resolution urging the industrial development board IDB to ensure that the following provisions are included in the development agreement which that body will enter into with CBR properties regarding the Northgate mall infrastructure project with the expectation that the redevelopment of the site of Northgate mall will balance the needs of the public with the needs of a viable commercial real estate project with the ultimate goal of transforming the site into a Comtact walkable town center as envisioned and plan Chattanooga's Hickson Red Bank area plan we have a motion on the floor to approve the alternate version with a proper second questions or comments all in favor aye aye any opposed no so moved uh with no objection from the council uh madam clerk let's read uh 9 c and e please item and L okay item C a resolution authorizing the administrative for the department of economic development to enter into a donation agreement with the Chattanooga Housing Authority and substantially the form attached for the property known as the James A.

Item E, a resolution authorizing the city finance officer to execute a contract with Henderson Hutcherson and McCullough PLLC relating to external audit services for a term of five years with pricing as follows.

Year one, 131,000, year two, 135,900, year three, 141,000.

Year four, 146,300, and year five, 151,800.

Item F, a resolution authorizing the executive director of the Chattanooga Public Library to accept $12,000 from the state of Tennessee, Office of the Security of State, Secretary of State, Tendency Library and Archives for the Purchase of Computers for Use by Library Patents and Staff, Library Management Software for Increased Efficiency and Access to Library Collection and Services, Network and Hardware, Mobile Devices, peripheral devices, software for library use and or other technological items and supplies to enhance the use of technology services available at the public library.

All right, we have a motion on the floor to approve items 9C D E and F with the proper second.

Who have any questions or comments?

All in favor, I aye.

Any opposed, no?

Motion carries.

Madam Clerk with no objection from the council.

Let's read 9G through N under the Mayor's Office.

Item G, a resolution confirming Mayor Kelly's appointment of Brent Smith to the Construction Board of Adjustments and Appeals for a term beginning on January 7, 2026 and ending on January 6, 2030.

Item H, a resolution confirming May Kelly's appointment of Casey Smith to the Board of Electrical Examiners for a term beginning on January 7, 2026 and ending on January 6, 2030.

Item I, a resolution confirming Mayor Kelly's reappointment of Randall Smith to the Board of Medical Mechanical Examiners for a term beginning on September 29, 2025 and ending on September 28, 2029.

Item J, a resolution confirmed Mayor Kelly's appointment of Cynthia Dale to the Library Board of Directors for a term beginning on January 7, 2026, and ending on January 6, 2029.

Item K, a resolution confirming Mayor Kelly's appointment of Dan Koff to the Library Board of Directors for a term beginning on January 7, 2026, and then on January 6, 2029.

Item L, a resolution confirming Mayor Kelly's appointment of Jared Pickens to the Library Board of Directors for a term beginning on January 7, 2026, and ending on January 6, 2029.

Item M, a resolution confirming Mayor Kelly's reappointment of Lee Brock to the construction construction board of adjustment and appeals for a term beginning on August 22nd, 2022 and ending on August 21st, 2026.

Item N, a resolution confirmed May Kelly's reappointment of David Norby to the Board of Electrical Examiners for a term beginning on November 17, 2025 and ending on November 16, 2029.

We have a motion on the floor to approve items 9G through N with a proper second.

Questions or comments.

All in favor, ahppos, no.

Motion does carry.

Do we have any of the appointees here with us this afternoon?

All right.

We do thank them for their service.

Madam Clerk under Public Works 90 P and Q, please.

Item O.

A resolution authorizing the administrative for the Department of Public Works to enter into an interlocal agreement with the town of Signa Mountain to perform stormwater maintenance activities as needed along SRA Highway 127.

Item P a resolution authorizing the administrative for the Department of Public Works to enter into a contract for the development and creation of a stormwater asset management plan swamp contract number S25009100 with Barsh Design Solutions in for professional services in the amount of $4,230,000.

Item Q, a resolution authorizing administrative for the Department of Public Works to execute a public-private partnership agreement between the city and hearing decide 3H group and SAI Maine Hearing LLC related to the Station Street Alleyway Expansion for reimbursement of 50 50% of incurred costs up to 150,000.

Second.

All right, we'll have a motion number floor to approve items 9 OP and Q with a proper second questions or comments.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, no?

So moved.

Madam Clerk, no objections.

9R and S, please.

Item R.

The resolution amending resolution number 32606 to remove clean methane systems LLC from the four-year Encore blanket contracts for plan production services.

Contract number W24026, reducing the total number of firms from 22 to 221 for use by the wastewater department.

Item S the resolution authorizing the administrative for the department of wastewater to apply for and if awarded it gets up funds for the linear generate generator LGM project.

Phase one including the TVA energy right incentive in the amount of $2,393,974 and a federal investment tax credit.

ITC not to exceed $2.4 million for a total amount of $4,793,974.

What's the pleasure of the council?

A motion on the floor to approve items 9R and S with the proper second.

Questions or comments.

All in favor, aye.

Any opposed, no?

So moved.

Now on to 9T.

Clerk.

A resolution approving a new special exceptions permit for a new liquor store located at 488 4850 Highway 58, suite 130 and 140, Chattanooga, Tennessee.

Councilman Clark.

Chairman Henderson, I'd like to make a motion to defer this for one week to January the 13th.

Okay.

Thank you, have a motion on the floor to defer until the 13th with a proper second.

We have any questions or comments.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no.

Motion to defer carries.

Moving on to purchases, Ms.

Tally.

Good evening, Council.

Good evening.

Have three purchases recommended for approval this evening.

The first one is for wastewater.

This is a one-time purchase to furnish and install a control centrifugal fans in the amount of $79,900.

The award will go to Echo Tech as the best bid.

Public Works has requested an increase of $100,000 to agreement PA 100409 due to the increase in usage.

The new estimated annual spend will be $725,000.

Public Works has approved the increase.

Parks and Outdoors.

This is a one-time purchase of the installation of footers and playground equipment at Jack Benson Heritage Park.

The sole source purchase from Bliss Products and Services will be in the amount of $81,200.

Technology Services.

Technology Services, this is a one-time purchase for Central Square Records Management Software used by the police department.

This purchase will be in the amount of 218,177.89 cents, and we'll be utilizing the Source 12 contract.

This purchase from Dell Market Marketing will be utilizing the Omnia contract.

Fleet, this is a one-time purchase for a Bobcat skid steer.

This will be purchased from Bobcat of Chattanooga in the amount of $58,697 and 4 cents utilizing the source well contract.

Fleet says a one-time purchase of 17 emergency uh lighting packages for police vehicles.

This purchase from Trucker's Lighthouse in the amount of 157,462.93 cents utilizing the state of Tennessee contract.

Facilities, year three renewal.

The DICO company has requested a 9% increase due to the increased cost of production chemical chemicals and labor.

The new estimated annual spend will be $87,200.

Public Works has approved the increase.

All right.

Councilman Clark.

Thank you, Chairman Henderson.

Ms.

Tal, I have a question about the facilities of public work swimming pool chemicals.

And it's really kind of a fundamental question about how we look at the request.

When we we're seeing an influx of requests of people who have bidded on things, and then they come back and they're like, oh well, it's a nine percent increase due to inflation, but there's very seldom any explanation for that.

And I guess my question is is that when those requests come, should it re-trigger a rebidding process if they had not already built in a certain percentage of contingency to cover those type of costs?

Because what if it's rebidted and we find someone who could do it less than the nine percent that they're requesting?

And I guess I just fundamentally ask that question because we're seeing that a lot, and it's not you know weird for someone to be like, oh, the city council is approving all the increases.

Like, should it go back out to bid because we might be able to get it less than the nine percent that they're asking for?

And what's your philosophy on that?

If not, you can prefer somebody else to answer.

When we get the requests, uh, first of all, suppliers can only submit those annually, they cannot submit them randomly.

Um, so they can only do it once a year.

Um, when we receive the request, we take into consideration what they're requesting and why they're requesting it.

We take a look at that as well as sending it to the department for their review to make sure that we're both on the same page.

If a we do also go back at times and negotiate with these suppliers to get them to come down, um so we're doing um everything that we feel that we can do to keep these prices as low as we can.

Um, in some cases, we have found when we take these back for out for rebid that we end up paying twice as much as we would originally.

Gotcha.

So, for an example, in the case of DICO company, they're requesting a nine percent increase due to increased cost of production.

Was this because later they are in the annual, are they in an annual time frame for where they could do that?

Every agreement that comes across is annually.

Gotcha, perfect.

Uh, one other question, Chairman Henderson.

This is in regards to the name change from iGov services to open gov at 156,000.

Is it the same company?

And we're just they were bought out.

Okay, so when open gov bought out iGov services, did it change the scope of their contract or as a it doesn't change the scope, it just buys out they buy out their contract.

So their contract, what we do is we take that same contract and we create a new agreement with the new supplier at the same amount of money.

There's no increase.

So this annual cost estimate for 150,000 dollars is what we currently were paying.

Correct.

So that is not a request for what was already there.

Okay, gotcha.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you, Chairman Henderson.

All right.

What's the pleasure of the council on tonight's purchases?

We have a motional four to approve the proper second questions or comments.

Just all in favor, uh any opposed, no.

That's purchases carry.

Thank you.

Mr.

Attorney, yes, sir.

There is no need for other business this afternoon.

Well, we would like to defer that uh passing around until next week and see where we are.

We'll see where we are next week.

All right.

We now come to the uh point in our agenda that we recognize people that would like to address the council.

Uh, do we have anybody that would like to uh speak to the council this afternoon?

All right, Mr.

Did I miss right past it?

Committee report do you mind holding one second?

I have uh I'm in error here.

We do have committee reports that we need to go over.

Councilman Elliott.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

We have the economic development meeting.

All right.

Um that's it.

Thank you.

Uh uh today we had a planning and zoning committee meeting, a lot of cases to go over.

As a reminder, we will there will be a planning commission meeting on January 12th, which will address where the planning commission will hear all of the applications that will come before us in another month.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Davis.

No report.

Councilman Harvey.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um, pleased to announce that I'll be chairing our first education and innovation committee on January the 27th.

So looking forward to that and an update on uh 311 and head start and all those fun things.

Right.

Stay tuned.

Councilman Clark.

Thank you, Chairman Henderson.

Uh, we will have a community development committee meeting uh next week as well uh during the same week as economic development.

Is that usually what happens?

Or um uh councilman Elliott Yes, that's what's on the that's what's on the committee report for it's mine is on a rotating schedule.

So is did you they're committee meetings on the same date as mine, and yours tends to go a little bit longer than mine, so do you do you want to we're still here as long as it takes, Cash.

Okay, well just saying the last time they put a name in on its committee meeting.

So what I'm asking is that would you is it okay to do those at the same time given the topic matter that we're discussing?

So community development will be discussing the senior centers that you and I have been working so hard on.

Yes, and I think we're discussing it also deals with the Higson T.

Okay.

We have two different things, I think.

Well, uh, Mr.

Chair, then we want we'll resume our community development committee meeting for January 13th.

I'm glad to hear it.

Trying to be complicated, counselor.

I'm trying to help you out.

Uh what you're saying, just back lunch and a pack lunch.

So council and I moved long.

All right.

Now we come to the time that we recognize persons wishing to address the council.

Mr.

Attorney, if you would, would you read the rules, please?

Yes, sir.

Uh since we do have a uh chairman pro Tim this evening, at the end of each council business meeting, the chair pro tem will recognize members of the public who wish to address the council, and here's your rules.

Each speaker wishing to address the council can only be recognized at the microphone provided up front for that purpose, can't have more than three minutes to speak, and you can address the council only upon matters within their legislative and judicial quasi judicial authority and not upon matters which are not under their authority or regulated by other governmental bodies or agencies.

Do not use vulgar or obscene language nor use the floor to personally attack or personally denigrate others and address your comments to the council as a whole and not towards individual council members.

And lastly, do not engage in disorderly conduct or disrupting a public meeting, which is prohibited by Tennessee law, and someone commits that offense if a person substantially obstructs or interferes with the meeting by physical action or verbal utterance with the intent to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting or gathering.

Having stated those rules, please give your name and go ahead, ma'am.

Thank you.

Hi, Council.

Anna Galladay District Eight.

I feel like I could recite those rules myself for you up here at this point.

Um in the last 30 hours, the Chattanooga City and the Chattanooga Police Department have displaced at least 40 humans and 20 dogs from an encampment on Hooker Road in District 7.

Were these folks on someone's private property?

Yes.

Were they told several times that they would be asked to vacate?

Yes.

Were transitional options provided for the folks and the animals?

Yes and no.

The city has been working with these folks for a month, letting them know that this was going to happen, but the city is also out of space.

So transitioning housing is full, like full full.

Yes.

But it's not enough.

In any way, shape, or form, it's not enough.

The responsibility for this should not solely rely on our nonprofits and faith institutions when we as a city can't pull up the slack.

Moving people without adequate options just moves people.

It doesn't solve a problem.

And these frustrations are not my own.

From as far back as Mayor Littlefield's administration, the need for a low barrier 24-hour shelter has been discussed.

There's a piece of property just down the road here at 710 East 12th Street.

The city has sought to rezone that property and did so in 2023 in order to make it into a 24-hour low barrier shelter.

Mayor Kelly's administration built a plan by which that building could be used.

It also set aside 2.8 million dollars of American rescue plan money to do the build-outs.

But NIMBYism reared its head again, and the neighborhood association used incomplete and skewed research plus fear tactics to get this plan squashed.

I know that because it was the only thing the neighborhood association wanted my opinion on when I ran for office.

How do I know?

Because I know that we wouldn't treat our neighbors this way.

Anyone else that would like to address the council this afternoon?

All right, council.

What is your pleasure?

We have a motion on the floor to adjourn with a proper second.

All those in favor uh any opposed?

We are adjourned.