Good evening.

It's six o'clock.

I'd like to call this meeting to order.

We'll start with an invocation led by Councilmember Honeycutt followed by the pledge of allegiance led by Councilmember Debart Labin.

Please rise as you're able.

Let us pause for a moment and pray.

We are grateful for this community and for the chance to serve it.

Help us remember how fortunate we are to be here tonight and to keep in mind the people we represent beyond this room, especially those who need us most.

Guide our conversations and our decisions so they're rooted in care for one another and love for our neighbors.

May the work we do tonight and in the future help improve the quality of life for everyone who calls Knoxville home.

Amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Councilwoman Adams.

Here.

Councilman DeBarde-Laban.

Here.

Vice Mayor, if you good.

Councilman Grant.

Councilman Helsley.

Here.

Councilman Honeycutt?

Here.

Councilman Lloyd.

Here, Councilwoman Parker.

Councilman Thomas.

All members present, Mayor.

Okay, thank you.

Is there a motion on the minutes from our last meeting?

Second.

Motion made and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Are there any items from tonight's agenda to be withdrawn?

Are there any item items to be postponed?

Councilmember Honeycutt.

Yes.

All parties have requested that item 11H.

Uh the resolution from Leland Hume in the West Hills community be postponed by two weeks.

Okay.

Motion has been made to postpone for two weeks.

Items 11H has been made and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Are there any items to be any further items to be postponed?

Any items to be added by motion.

There are no memorials.

So the consent just one note.

We um mistakenly put item 120 on consent, because it's a grant, but it's a grant we're giving out, not receiving, so that was our mistake.

So we're removing that from consent.

Item 12.0 as an Oscar.

Any other um items to be removed from consent before we hear a motion to approve the consent agenda.

Seeing none, is there a motion?

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay.

Motion on the consent agenda has been made and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Okay.

Time now for my mayor's report.

Okay, that just uh oh, Councilmember Parker, yeah.

Sorry.

Um just a point of clarification.

Um items to be removed from consent.

Do we need a motion to remove it?

No.

Member just last meeting, you asked one to be removed, it's just done.

Just takes one person.

Does it need to be a council member to request it to be removed?

Um I guess maybe it does.

We so we could go back and and ask one of you to remove that from consent by um, you know.

Sorry, I just thought since it was our mistake and it was adding it back for more discussion.

Just for point of clarification, uh we'll move that we remove item 12.0 from consent.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Well, we don't need to vote.

Oh, we don't need to.

I just wanted to clarify that.

Oh, yeah.

My uh okay, so we don't even need to vote on it.

Okay, so item 12 that we remove 12.0.

Thank you.

Thanks for uh that point of clarification, Mr.

Thomas.

Yes, I just had a question uh Mr.

Frost.

Um I know that any council member without a second can have something removed confirmed consent.

If someone um signs up to speak on an item that's on consent, does it still remain on consent or is that removed to allow them to speak thank you, Councilmember Thomas?

Thank you, Councilmember Thomas.

Yes, I think something remains on consent until a member of council asks for it to come off consent.

Regardless of whether someone signed up to speak to it.

Okay.

Thanks for the clarification.

I can add one element to that.

In your rules, uh I am to report if someone has signed up on a consent item to speak.

Which gives council the opportunity to remove it.

Thank you.

Okay.

There's some new rules, and so we're still adjusting.

It's just been a couple weeks.

So thanks everybody for your patience as we navigate these improvements to how we operate the meetings.

I think we're done with all the agenda items, right?

I mean agenda discussion.

Yes, ma'am.

Item five.

All right.

We'll move on to my mayor's report.

Just want to start by thanking everyone who came out last Friday to celebrate the uh reopening of the Gay Street Bridge.

We had about 150 people come out, and they were walkers, runners, cyclists.

Uh we had someone dressed up as a giant squirrel.

Uh and that was exciting.

Um we had a more than a dozen businesses, um, mostly on Sevier Avenue, but also some downtown businesses let the participants who had a bib um, you know, come into their places of businesses for various discounts and and specials.

So it was really fun.

Uh Councilmember Adams and I were um part of that, and um it was uh and it was it was a good time.

It was a little cold while we were waiting, but then once we got moving, it was no problem.

Um I want to give a special thanks to our uh special events team that helped uh you know put on this unique and special event and also the Knoxville Track Club.

It wouldn't have been possible without the help of the Knoxville Track Club, and there's some um hardy runners who run in all kinds of weather and uh in the sunrise, sunset, and dark, and uh they showed up and and participated in this as well.

So it was it was a lot of fun.

Um in the more good news department, uh tomorrow we're gonna have a ribbon cutting for a very special first-time type of housing in Knoxville.

And it's affordable housing.

It's um and it's for it's um first of all, it's 11 a.m.

It's the Lumen Flats Rim ribbon cutting.

And these are 18 supportive housing apartments, uh, which we've done supportive housing many times, and we're really proud of those efforts.

But in the past it's been for um you know people who are chronically homeless or veterans or um you know people with disabilities and that sort of thing, uh seniors.

But this time it's for the first time it's for uh young people aging out of foster care.

Um and as you know, having once been 18 or maybe being parents to someone who are young, um, even though you're legally an adult, uh you still need a lot of help and support and maybe coming out of foster care even more so.

So these are uh apartments uh but with some supportive services to help those young people get on their feet and and make their way in the world even as they um come out from the foster care umbrella.

So uh please come join us for sharing this special event.

It's at 1585 Coleman Road, um, and we're asking people to park at a church uh across the across the street, City Hills Church, because there's not much parking on site.

There will be shuttles provided from the church to 1585 Coleman Road.

Again, that's 11 a.m.

tomorrow.

And again, um special thanks to our housing neighbor development team and others who helped make this possible.

Uh that's gonna be 18 young people who might otherwise be, who knows how they would be housed.

So we're really uh pleased, pleased about that.

Um tomorrow, uh the National Police Department is holding a promotional ceremony.

Uh four officers are being promoted to the rank of lieutenant, seven officers are being promoted to the rank of sergeant.

It takes place at 3 p.m.

at the Civic Auditorium, and everyone is invited.

Um and while on the topic of KPD, um I want to share tonight a special proclamation.

As many of you know, um, and this is something that I remember has been talked about for many years.

How are we gonna get KPD up to fully staffed?

This has been a question uh that I faced it when I was first running for mayor, and um I am proud to say that as of today, we have reached a major milestone at KPD.

We're fully staffed for the first time since 2014.

And that's a really big deal.

Uh yes.

We'll clap now, we'll clap some more.

Um I think there's a lot of reasons for this.

I think we've had a very uh supportive council.

Um we've had a very supportive community.

Uh we've we've done a lot of things.

So I just want to share a proclamation to recognize uh people in the administration, Chief Noel, um, all the people involved with the recruiting and training, because once you get the new officers, you know you have to equip and train them and make sure they have all the tools and training they need to keep our city safe.

So I wanted to take some time tonight to recognize uh this effort and extend a special thanks to the people behind the scenes that helped make this happen.

And I have a proclamation to present.

So I'm gonna uh read this proclamation and then present it to those who were want to particularly recognize tonight.

So this is I'm gonna this is what it's in contained in here.

Whereas in 2025, KPD exceeded its goal of hiring 100 recruits, bringing on 118 recruits who started the academy, that 118 in one calendar year.

Whereas KPD Training Academy staff hosted three academy classes in 2025, devoting countless hours to shape KPD's future and prepare recruits to serve the Knoxville community with purpose and professionalism.

And whereas KPD field training officers work tirelessly throughout 2025 and to this day to provide continuing in-the-field training, guide academy graduates and help them hone their skills, and whereas the collective efforts of KPD, human resources, and civil service staff to develop innovative and collaborative strategies for recruiting and training, have strengthened the department's ability to staff a capable and dedicated group of police officers committed to serving the community with excellence.

Now, therefore, I, Andy Canter, mayor of the city of Knoxville do hereby recognize on January 20th, 2026 that KPD is fully staffed.

So, and I would like to ask the following people to come join me on stage with Chief Noel to um you know give to hand this proclamation over to you on this important occasion.

Uh Deputy Chief Susan Coker, Captain Chris McCarter, personnel director Brooke Bright, recruitment officer Micah Hutchins, Sergeant Amy Cardona, training director, Lieutenant Adam Minner, FTO Supervisor Sergeant Carl Kennedy, training staff member Sergeant Chris Hutton, and any other training staff, training academy staff here tonight.

Please come up to the stage and let me give you this proclamation.

We're so proud and thankful.

Come on up, please.

Oh, it's hard.

All right.

Um more round of applause for all the people.

And this is uh this is you know good news for our department, but also just good news for our whole city.

It's gonna make our officers uh able to be what well well rested and well trained as they always have been, but uh being fully staffed is gonna make our city safer.

So we're really grateful.

Uh last, I want to just a quick reminder about our rules of decorum.

We are here to do the city's official business.

Those who wish to speak either to a specific agenda item or during public forum need to sign up with the city recorder before 4 p.m.

Do not use profanity and when speaking to specific agenda items, you must stay on topic.

Remarks must be germane to the question ahead of the assembly.

That is, statements must have bearing on whether the pending motion should be adopted.

Those who fail to adhere to these rules will be ruled out of order.

For those who are listening, please note if you disrupt a public meeting, you will be asked to leave or escorted out.

Thank you in advance for your respect for these rules, and that concludes my mayor's report.

Are there any reports of committees or council members serving on committees or boards?

Okay.

Are there any general council member announcements?

Council member Adams and then Honeycutt.

Thank you.

We were having some issues with uh some uh unplanned traffic there.

And uh they were able to provide bollards and some signage to help with that management there.

Really appreciated the the action on that item.

Um the second report is there's an art trail that is uh happening in South Knoxville.

Uh many people may have heard of it.

If you haven't, it is planned to go from Kerns all the way out to IMS Nature Center along uh an existing rail bed.

But the news I have to share is that Legacy Parks and Gulf and Ohio are beginning the work of pulling up the rails and ties.

Uh it started now at Meads Quarry and should take about four to five weeks uh for completion.

So you'll see some activity there.

That's what's going on, and we're really excited about this trail moving into another phase.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Honeycutt.

Yes, thank you.

I just have two brief uh announcements.

Uh first, I just want to take a moment to acknowledge the passing of Natalie Haslum, a prominent uh district two resident who has also has a lot of family in District 2.

I want to honor her lasting legacy of generosity and leadership in Knoxville.

Her impact on education, the arts, and our civic life will be felt for generations.

Um so thank you to her and her family.

Uh on a more positive note, um, I always like to share good news when uh when I can, and uh I'd like to share some good news from West Hills and thank Tyler Motton, uh, who led a very large group of local families for advocating for a safer walking path to their elementary school.

Thanks to their positive leadership and the responsiveness of City Public Works, who they're very happy with.

That path will be installed this spring, improving safety for students and the community.

So thank you to Tyler for leading that group of parents and just wanted to report and thank you to Public Works for being so proactive.

They're very happy with the city, which is great.

Okay, wonderful.

Any other council member reports or announcements?

Okay.

Moving right along, Mr.

Johnson.

12 resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with Whalley Construction LLC in an amount not to exceed 397,241 dollars fifty cents for the 2026 Curb Cuts Project.

Motion made and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12J is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an amendment to the agreement with High Street IT solutions to provide additional SAAS implementation services to the city in order to transfer data to Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP in an amount not to exceed 1 million fifty thousand dollars for a new total contract price of 2,099,500.

Move to approve.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries eight one.

12K is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute a second amendment to C 24-0416, an agreement with Axon Enterprise Incorporated to provide additional goods and services to the Knoxville Police Department in support of the city's existing axon systems at an additional cost not to exceed 9,407,699.

Move to approve.

Motion made and seconded.

Um council members, as you know, uh this is an extension, an amendment of a contract that was approved by council a year ago.

Um we just honored uh the fact that we're at fully staffed, so this will allow all of our officers uh to have all the equipment they need, body worn cameras, uh tasers, and so forth, and um also would um add our new technology to KPD's facilities, including stones as first responders and put the license plate readers um under the same bundled contract.

Um as we've always said, public safety is job one, and um, I'm glad to be bringing this contract amendment to you all to make sure that we give our officers and our department the tools they need to keep our city safe.

Um this amendment will be spread out the cost over the life of the contract that runs through uh 35 2035 36.

Um and I just I think you all have had a lot of information um to digest on that and had some questions asked and answered.

Um I'm sure there'll be more discussion, but I do appreciate hopeful that I'm hopeful that you will support this item.

I think it's good for our city and good for our public safety.

Councilmember Grant.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Um I have a couple questions for Chief Noel.

Um I did have a few community members, a handful, quite a handful of community members reach out uh regarding this particular uh resolution.

I did speak with Chief Noel uh briefly, and he was able to catch me up uh to speed on some things.

But for public record and um for you know my constituents, I just had a few questions uh that I would like to ask, re-ask them rather, um, just to give them a better explanation.

Uh Chief Noel, um can you talk about the public facing dashboard that would that you know will come uh with these resources from Exxon.

Sure, absolutely.

Um so right now, you know, we have six drones right now, the the the hand flown drones, and um while like we record every time or we we we capture every time we fly those drones, we don't have any public facing component of that.

So one that's one thing I'm really really excited about with this program.

So once we get this DFR program up and running through Scottio, we will build out or they will build out for us a public facing dashboard that will show every drone flight, the flight path, all of that information will be publicly available.

We probably have a couple hour delay from when the drone flies um to when that um appears up on the dashboard just for safety reasons for our for our purposes, but it's gonna be a very, very transparent process.

Um one thing that I really like about this system is when the drone flies to its destination, the camera faces forward, it doesn't look down, it doesn't look down to it gets where the area where we where we're trying to get a view of what's going on.

Um I'm really really excited about that public face dashboard.

Thank you, Chief Noel.

And can you talk about um as I was you know doing my research, um the Freedom from Unwarrant Surveillance Act.

Can you kind of give us a little bit of information about exactly what that is?

Absolutely.

So I have that right in front of me right now.

So what um what the council member is talking about is TCA 3913609, which governs the use of law enforcement drones in the state of Tennessee, and it's pretty restrictive, and it lays out when we can fly an unmanned aircraft for law enforcement purposes without a search warrant.

And you know, really, you know, to sum it up, but anybody could go look at it.

TCA 3913609, you know, the way it really lays it out is that these drones are reactive.

They're not you know proactive or like looking to, you know, really surveilled, looking for crimes.

They're designed to respond when a crime occurs.

Um one of the cities that uses Scottio drones is Oklahoma City, and they've done a really good job of coordinating with the fire service there of you know having eyes on a structure fire before um before the fire department shows up.

But it it lays out when we can fly the drone, when we can fly the drone, it lays out the um we could only save the video footage for 15 days.

Obviously, unless it's an evidence of a crime, then then we could keep it long because it's evidence, but it lays out how long we could keep the evidence, uh keep the video, and it really lays out when we can fly these drones.

And if you have any specific questions um about when we can fly them, I I mean I could read all this out if you like, but you know, it says that you know we cannot, you know, we you know we can't just use this to go surveillance, look for a crime in progress.

Thank you.

That's all I have.

Thank you.

Councilmember Thomas and then Parker.

Uh yes, uh, just a question, and you may have answered it.

I just want to make sure that I understood it and it was also for our constituent that answered the question.

And it does have to do with uh the drones collecting information, and then later you find out that this is not a law enforcement issue.

I think I heard you say that um this evidence would be erased um after 15 days.

Is that correct?

So, unless we film a crime in progress where it would be used as evidence in a crime.

Obviously, that what once we have evidence of a crime, then that's in the jurisdiction of a court.

But just regular drone footage that we would have by law by Tennessee state law, we cannot keep that footage for long in the 15 days.

Okay, thank you.

You answered my question.

Councilmember Parker.

I was curious if there were any public forum speakers signed up on this matter.

No, ma'am.

No, nobody signed up to speak on this item.

Okay.

Then my question.

Well, I have a lot.

I have more than we have time for.

And my preference would be that we do not vote on this item tonight and instead hold some public information sessions so that the public is clear on how this technology would be used and would have policies in place and understand what those policies are.

And looking at what other cities are doing, that's exactly what Louisville is doing.

They brought the idea of drones as first responders before the public and announced three public information sessions before attempting to negotiate a contract.

We had a holiday coming out of a holiday to read a lot of information about how this technology would be used and what is being acquired.

Some of the items were replacements, upgrades to what we'd had before, but we clarified in our meeting last year that it was an increase in cost.

Around 10 million over a 10-year period, 11 and a half.

So around a million in annual cost that we approved last year.

An additional annual cost.

And within one year, we've already seen that happening.

Wanting to change over the license plate readers from Flock, another expense that we should have been able to foresee last year as Flock was changing their policies on how they would interact with Axon.

And so we rushed into a contract last year, $27 million contract, only $2 million covered by grants, $25 million coming from local city dollars.

Another $1.4 million a year.

First three years covered by grants, but then we it's all on us after that.

Then those are local dollars we have to budget in.

So while last year there was a deadline of January 15th.

We had a meeting on January 7th.

We had to approve the contract that had already been negotiated by January 15th.

And the contract was approved.

This year, Chief, can you tell me?

Is there a reason why we could not postpone this to allow more time for public discussion, education around what the drone is first responder program would look like.

And you know, answer some of the questions that I have regarding the ongoing cost that comes with some of the subscriptions that we are acquiring.

So that would be my question for the chief.

We've spoken about it a lot on media, um, all the media outlets have reached out.

I think pretty much everybody is from the new Sentinel from the COPUS to all the TV stations have run um at least one story, some of which more.

So it's certainly not something that's not been in the public domain for a little while as far as with the specific contract of postponing it.

I'll defer to the finance director on how that would work as they really negotiate these contracts.

But uh this information has been in the public domain for a little while, including when we did a um a pilot program on this, I think back in September of last year.

Isn't it also true, Chief?

Uh or Mr.

Evans, that uh there's some things that we negotiated in this contract uh that were 2025 um prices, basically.

Yes, ma'am.

The uh prices are based on uh they're 2025 dollars and uh you know procurement for a long time.

I don't know the exact amount, but anytime you're going prior years dollars, they've got it locked in there and you've bundled it up and you're getting it through uh part of a cooperative agreement, you're gonna get a better price than what you would if you waited, I don't know, six mates, eight months, whatever in uh 2026.

So yeah, that's in generalities that's very true.

Um other council members have uh questions or comments.

I have additional.

Council members, uh, I believe your rules, I mean, do you if there's no other further discussion?

We just move to the vote.

I believe I get another opportunity to ask questions once everyone else has a chance to speak.

Okay, we'll start another five minute if you if that's your is that I'm not sure.

I think that the interpretation.

Yeah.

Why don't you go ahead and ask uh take another five minutes?

And if there's other questions.

Um we'll do our best to answer them and then see if any council members have questions besides you.

Um and I'm just gonna go through the questions uh because it'll probably take me five minutes to list them off.

And you can you have no five-minute limit on your answers, so you can take as much time as you would like, or you can follow up with me later and we can postpone the vote, which would be great.

Um questions about the operational policies.

You have mentioned some state laws, some other laws that govern um the real-time information center.

Um, but those policies for the center, you've notified council that they're still in process.

So I I have questions about what the intended uses of the technology incorporated into the center will be, who will have access, how often audits will be conducted to identify any disparities in the use of the technology or unauthorized use of the technology?

Um in terms of the drones, will the public have access to drone footage through public uh records request?

We've seen uh federal court decisions out of California that have determined that those are subject to public records requests.

So when you speak of footage uh that we're keeping for 15 days outside of investigations, those would be privy to uh public records request.

Uh what will KPD's redaction policy be for drone footage?

Um will drones be integrated into the license plate readers and the FUCSIS system.

Other cities like Boulevard have already informed their public that those uh connections will not be made uh because the drones will be used for emergency response only and not investigations.

Uh do the drones use facial recognition technology?

Do the drones use AI technology?

Uh what does it mean for drones to be automated?

Uh in an interview, you said one pilot could man four drones.

Um I've also seen uh uh an announcement that the drones could be automated, meaning no.

I don't understand what that means.

I would like a further clarification on that and what technology is involved to make them automated.

As I said, well, not so commit as Louisville has done that drones will be used for emergencies and not for surveillance and investigations.

Would the city to uh agree to host the public information sessions?

Um would be another question that I have.

Um and then I've had concerns that I I would shared with you about the equipment that's a part of the uh this amended contract, and trying to get an understanding of what has already been authorized under the contract approved last year, and what represents new equipment, what represents replacement equipment, and understanding with this subscription plan, uh how replacements work.

Um it seems if we are subscribing to be to this technology and not purchasing this technology.

Um we should be able to swap it at no cost.

And when I inquired about contract changes last year, one of the contracts um had replacement cost, had replacement equipment included with it, but no cost were incurred by the city because it was a replacement of equipment.

Um you know, this may be difficult to convey in a five minutes.

Um I I agree with you that it's difficult to uh understand what my questions are and to have a real conversation about them because this is not the proper venue for this level of discussion.

This level of discussion um uh deserves a workshop.

But um I do not feel the support around the table for a workshop or a postponement.

So those are the questions that I have.

Um councilmember Parker, thank you for those comments and questions.

Uh I would say the bulk of those uh were addressed in the um in the email that Chief Noel sent to council and and the links that he sent to the public dashboards that other cities have done in this program um to the state law that talks about some of the policies and so forth that we will be following.

Um but uh yes, we if this is uh approved, we'd be happy to continue to have uh info info sessions uh uh on this topic in particular.

I know KPD has uh um various uh community meetings by district pretty routinely once every other month or more, but we can have a special planned one just uh um focused on this if that's what uh community members want.

But I think uh I think that a lot of the information uh has already been supplied.

And just as a point of information, this isn't good.

Real-time information center hasn't opened yet, and we don't plan to roll this out uh quickly, but just with all intention and lots of transparency with council and the public uh throughout this.

Um and so that will continue.

Chief Noal, did you have any other um any anything else to add?

Just a couple of things real quick.

So before any of this goes live, before the real time information center goes live, um, we will certainly invite council in to come take a look at it and see what we're gonna do.

Um we've been working very, very deliberately with the real-time information center, um, losing Captain Sammy Schaefer to the airport, um, set us back a little bit.

And you just so we're really taking our time to make sure that we're ready to go before we open this up, but we'd invite you all in to take a look at everything.

To answer a couple of your questions, the drones do not use facial recognition technology.

Um I mean, I'm just trying to remember all you questions, but they're not used for surveillance.

You know, the state law would prohibit that as the state law is written for us to use that for surveillance.

We would have to use it for um you know, a major event, natural disaster, a or a call for service.

So they just like with Louisville call for service comes out, the drone goes, gives officers real-time information in the field, but not um not to do a surveillance.

We would not be allowed to do that.

So I mean I think that the state law when you when you get think I'll get a chance to look at it, and if you don't have it, I'll be happy to send it to you.

Um I think it really spells out when we can and also what we cannot use these for.

And how about the integration with the likes of the process?

Council Member Parker, uh, you do not have the floor.

Well, just to clarify, Mayor, all of the questions I asked were not answered in the email.

The document that was shared with council, I've shared it publicly so the public can see what was shared by KPD.

I would appreciate answers to the questions.

I'm happy to send a follow-up email.

Um, but the answers have not been shared to the questions that I've asked.

The DFRs do not have um LPR technology in them.

Thank you.

See, when you allow a conversation, you see what can happen.

It's amazing.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries eight one.

Next item, please.

12 L is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with area-wide protective to provide flagging and traffic control as needed for city projects for an annual amounts not to exceed 42,500.

Motion made and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12 M is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with Middle Tennessee traffic management LLC to provide flagging and traffic control as needed for city projects for an annual amount not to exceed $42,500.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12 N is resolution expressing appreciation to Pelissifi State Community College for the donation of $15,123.65 cents toward ball field improvements at Ridley Hilton Ballfields and authorizing the mayor to execute all documents necessary to accept said donation.

Move to approve.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12-0 is the resolution authorizing the mayor to execute any and all documents to award a total amounts not to exceed $60,000 and empower Knox Youth Mental Health Grants to provide support and programming for youth and young adults and to six community-based organizations in the city.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Councilmember Parker.

Thank you.

Yes, can we get an explanation of the application process for this grant?

Miss Middlebrook.

Yes.

Um the application guidelines and uh physical application are released.

Um, I believe they were released this year on November 3rd.

Uh looking to Miss Norris, she can fill any blanks if I forget anything.

The application was open uh until the first week in December.

Applicants could submit applications uh via email online or in person.

Once those applications were received and the process was closed, those applications were collected, reviewed by staff, and then taken to our volunteer review committee uh for them to review and make recommendations regarding funding.

And so applications for this uh funding opportunity opens each year in November.

Uh for the past two years, it is opened in November.

Two, three years.

Past two years it has opened in November.

Okay.

Is that what you anticipate for this year as well?

Um we hope so, yes.

And we try to be very diligent about uh releasing that information uh via social media, via media releases, uh, to the um round table, which encompasses several dozen youth serving organizations and to other networks so that organizations are aware of the opportunity.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Councilmember Grant.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Uh before I get started, um, I do want to make it clear that I definitely support mental health programming.

Um and the intent of Empower Knox and its initiative.

Um, um I'm gonna go ahead and say that I'm in opposition of this resolution is written because of its funding structure and its process.

Um, the resolution states fund decisions were made through a competitive review process.

Um have a lot of questions in terms of what that process is.

Um you did mention the committee uh and city staff.

Who's on that committee?

What city staff are part of this application process, what volunteers are part of this application process.

All six organizations receiving a maximum of 10,000.

Applicants, the report in the service of reach varies very, very widely.

Another applicant says it will serve only 10 individuals aging from 12 to 24.

And then others estimate 120, and then another says 80.

Equally funding vastly different levels of impact to me raises concerns and physical responsibility and return on investment.

Limited public dollars should be strategically allocated to maximize youth service and community impact.

My position is not to the mission or the inner organizations individually, but a one-size-fits-all funding approach.

I can't agree to.

They're from Florida.

They're from Orlando, Florida, based on what you know what I was able to find.

So again, not even based out of Knoxville.

I've spoken to a number of applicants who were denied, who are small grassroots organizations who are now doing, you know, providing youth services and youth mental health.

And so here we are again.

Receiving the small dollars that a grassroot organization would need to stay above water.

KLF has an eight million dollar year budget.

Their net revenue last year was 1.4 million dollars.

Net.

This is a nonprofit we're talking about.

And the list goes on.

I mean, when you when you when you talk about providing funding for these multi-million dollar organizations, and you have small grassroots organizations who are out here every day doing the work, um, I think it's time to change that.

And so um I'm hoping my my constituents up here will take heed to that.

And um, you know, I would love the opportunity to sit down with the Office of Community Safety and Empowerment, Empower Knox to uh learn more about what the process is, um, how could how can we include the community and council members in terms of what that process is uh so we can have more confidence more confidence in making these decisions when you talk about public dollars.

Thank you.

Um Ms.

Middlebrook, did you have um the names of the people on the committee or did you want to respond to some of those questions?

I believe I included in the email to council that the committee for the volunteer committee for this particular grant consisted of members of the mayor's youth council, uh, which we have done for the past three years, I believe.

Um we regularly include members of the mayor's youth council in our review process for our volunteers.

To be clear, staff review the applications for completeness.

We compile the information and share it with members of the committee, the members of the committee review those applications and make recommendations to the staff.

The staff do not vote on those um recommendations, members of our volunteer committees make those recommendations.

Uh, with regards to the size of service, it a lot of it depends on uh the types of services that are provided.

So some of the organizations are going so far as to provide direct mental health services, providing access to counseling services for their participants uh through mental health providers.

Some of them are using resources to provide additional training for their staff to support the mental health needs of their participants to support social emotional learning uh and to be able to recognize other signs to best support the mental health needs of uh their uh participants, and so the range in uh the number of participants that are served heavily depends on what specific services are being provided, and I can defer to Ms.

Norris to provide any additional information about um the some of the feedback that the uh review committee uh provided.

I did not participate in that process.

I do not participate in those processes uh heavily, um, and so she can provide additional feedback.

But members of the mayor's youth council served as the review committee for this particular process.

Thank you.

Any further questions or discussion?

Seeing none.

Oh, Councilmember Honeycutt.

Sorry, uh, in light of uh some of the information Councilman Grant brought up, what are what and again forgive me for uh being new to the process, what are the pros and cons of of asking for a postponement for 30 days so councilman grant and others that are interested can learn more and bring this back to council.

Um Ms.

Middlebrook, are some of these scheduled for you know to be uh operationalized in the near future?

Can you speak to that question, please?

Yeah, so uh the awardees have uh submitted time frames for when they plan to implement program, and there's also associated with the grant um technical assistance for the awardees uh for the grantees uh to receive uh technical assistance through Harmony Family Learning Center to support the organization's capacity because a big part of what we do is not only related to providing direct funding but also capacity building for organizations in our community, and so that cohort uh is already is scheduled to start uh in the very near future, um, and so in it could directly impact our organization's capacity to implement their programming in a timely way.

I would just say that also just as I know council members know this, like um the city of Knoxville is not a mental health provider, and you know, generally that's the role of uh the state and and county government to help, particularly with people uh and we have uh in our country massive gaps, and Knoxville's no exception.

So we recognize that you know this these grants are just helping out organizations, particularly for young people, um, around the edges as our resources allow.

We are not trying to um we do not have the fiscal capacity uh to address the systemic problems, but this will help around the margins, and our our mayor's youth council.

I just met with them on Sunday.

They're they're really proud of their role and and being able to help be uh decision makers and in a small grant program that's supposed to help people their age.

Um, you know, that being said, if if you all wanted to postpone it, uh, you know, that's your prerogative, but I I uh I'll let you guys decide that.

Well, and I'm I'm me and my mother, you know, spent her entire career in mental health.

I'm a big big proponent of mental health and and helping in any way we can, you know, the organizations that do that good work.

Uh I do have you know uh a lot of respect for Councilman Grant and appreciate him bringing up you know the uh concerns and questions on this particular topic uh that I wasn't aware of.

So uh I personally would prefer at least two more weeks to to look into this uh item further, but I understand you know the depending and talk to everyone further, but I understand uh the situation and what other council members may want to do.

Councilmember Adams.

In um, I guess in response to some of council member grant's comments, this option uh in front of us is something that we see annually, correct?

Yes, but it's relatively new.

I mean, I I think this is the first time we've done these uh I mean the last two or three years.

Correct.

Um so in previous years, uh a lot of the some of the funding that uh came through what the previous generation of Empower NOTs was kind of done on a rolling basis.

Um we recently um revisited the process uh to make a more structured process to give organizations a better understanding of um what they could be applying for, uh, to have the opportunity to actually apply for more funding than they traditionally uh would have received through the previous process and to just offer kind of more structure and guidance to organizations that may be doing this work uh under the um the direction of Ms.

Norris and the Youth Council uh for the past couple of years.

One of the things that uh the youth council felt really strongly about was focusing in on an area that impacts youth and young people because it does go into what I would consider to be young adult um age range uh in this area, and so um the focus area um uh changes based on uh kind of some of the youth council's top priorities and what they see as impacting themselves and their uh peer group.

So last year uh the cohort was for focused around workforce readiness and funding programs that were supporting young people uh in being prepared um for workforce readiness, and this year the youth council has really honed in on youth mental health uh and doing a lot of programming and educating themselves and their peers around youth mental health and really felt strongly about supporting programming that could um help themselves and their peer group around addressing their mental health needs.

And this year, the youth council has really honed in on youth mental health uh and doing a lot of programming and um educating themselves and their peers around youth mental health and really felt strongly about supporting programming that could um help themselves and their peer group around addressing their mental health needs.

They're also planning a youth mental health summit in February.

I can't remember the date of weekend in February.

So I I appreciate the additional exposition in um in the process.

It it seemed like council member grant's questions, a lot of them were around uh process and some of the decision making that's happened there, but we're at the sort of 11th hour.

So I was going to suggest this potentially another option that because of those concerns that those are ones that we take forward in a new process for the next year, uh, just as another thing to consider.

Uh Councilmember Thomas.

Oh yes, um, I think I'm familiar with um the grantees, uh, the proposed grantees, except for uh the verb kind.

I don't think I'm familiar with that one.

And I do see it's at least it's based in Florida, or that's their physical address.

Um and uh uh Ms.

Middbrook, could you explain to us what they do on a local level?

Yes, the VerbCon uh is an organization.

Um they are their home bases in Florida, they have local staff here, uh they've been operating here locally for uh a couple of few years.

Um we have actually funded this organization before through some of our other grants.

They primarily provide resources and services to young people involved in the um uh juvenile justice program, and so they do a lot of work uh with young people transitioning through detention or who may um have um uh issues around delinquency, and so most of their programming uh is tied through the juvenile court system and young people that are involved in juvenile court, providing mentorship, life skills development, um, social emotional support, uh coaching around um self-regulation and integrating uh into back into uh their regular lives for those who may have been um in detention for a period of time, and so most of their services and supports are focused around uh working with young people who are processing through Knott's County Juvenile Court, and again I'll defer to Miss Norris for any additional uh information about that particular organization.

Uh do you know if they have a brick and mortar office here that they uh operate from?

Is Ms.

Norris present?

She is.

Um looking at the case.

I just have a couple of questions, please.

And yeah, I'll be honest, I am not a hundred percent sure if they have a brick and mortar because like I said, they primarily serve young people at Knox County Juvenile Court, and so they go to them instead of the young people coming to where they are.

Uh Ms.

Norris, could you just uh state your name and role with the city and then uh try to answer those questions, please?

Sure, of course.

Emily Norris, youth engagement manager for the city of Knoxville.

Um and yes, I'd agree with Ms.

Middlebrook as far as I know.

Um I'm not sure if they have a physical brick and mortar space here, but uh I am familiar with the work that they do in our um with our juvenile justice system here.

You know what the how they're staffed and how many employees they have working locally.

I don't but it is in-home visits or in-person visits, it's not it's in-person visits.

Yeah, no, they're too remote or Zoom visits now.

Yeah, the the folks are local and they work primarily at the juvenile justice facility.

Yes.

So they're going to where the young people are.

Correct.

Well, I guess I am a little bit concerned that we don't have more information about this particular group.

They they sound like they're doing great work, uh, but um without having more information.

I guess I'm a little bit um hesitant to approve the funds on this one.

Um I I think uh with some of the sentiments I would lean toward uh a two-week postponement so that someone could come here and at least explain you know uh particularly this particular group.

It's not at all casting dispersions dispersions, it's just that we don't know uh where this money is going on and and what the operation is, and I would love for them to come here and inform us and and justify it.

So I think I'm inclined to um uh have a two-week postponement, but I I want to hear what my other colleagues say about that.

Um Vice Mayor Fugit.

I think Ms.

Parker's slide almost before Councilmember Parker.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um we have had uh members of the public raise concerns about the application process in the past, and that's why I asked questions.

Uh primarily for uh transparency.

Um, I would not be opposed to uh uh engaging in conversations uh further about the various grants offered through this office.

Um but but uh for tonight's vote, I'm I'm I'm uh not as concerned about sixty thousand dollars going to uh community-based organizations who we've previously already funded, um, especially when we won't take time for a public discussion of adding 1.5 million dollars to our annual cost.

1.5 million to our annual cost.

We won't have a public conversation.

We won't consider a postponement out of respect for our colleagues, but we're concerned about sixty thousand dollars going to community-based organizations by a council member previously funded by this office.

It's just disappointing.

1.5 million dollars and the potential impacts on the community.

You can sit down, I don't have any questions for you.

There's no need for you to stand there the whole time.

Um so I you know the the uh the groups of who have been involved, they've gone through a process.

When uh count when community members had brought questions about the process before, their end goal was not to uh uh prevent others from getting their funding.

Their their goal was to better understand the process and to make sure that it's fair uh and to make sure also that their reputation and reputation of their organization wasn't damaged through that application process.

I think for uh for these community groups who've gone through the process.

I can't imagine um a delay that happens, and we determine as a body uh that one of the groups isn't qualified or should not qualify for funding.

I'm just uh confused of what we would be trying to determine after two weeks.

You know, we can have a workshop and talk about the whole program and what changes are needed to it, but what do we hope to accomplish in the next two weeks?

Um so you know, I I'm in support of a workshop.

I'm in support of uh this agenda item moving forward and these entities uh receiving uh the funding that they have been uh awarded by the office, not approved by council yet.

Uh but I also just want to encourage my colleagues to give space to conversations about those large expenditures, even when it's controversial, you know.

There's something about when you have 50 police officers who show up in the room and you just you know, you want to support your city staff.

Um, but we gotta have these conversations.

And I appreciate Chief Noel every time I try to have a conversation with him, despite what the mayor does.

Chief Noel tries to have that conversation back.

And I think our communities would be healthier if we would just have those conversations instead of saying, oh, there's misinformation flying all around.

Let's have a public conversation, you know, and then we can get to those questions that community members have and those concerns that they have and communicate what what we're doing to protect our community members.

But that those conversations are needed for those 1.5 million dollar additional expenditures per year.

Not a little $60,000 grant.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor Fugin, I just want to say, as you know, uh you all decide your workshop priorities, and we'd be happy to work with you all.

If this is uh grants through the you know, through this and other programs if uh to try to understand what we do now and hear your thoughts on how we can uh uh improve those processes, we'd be glad to do that.

Uh I I think that's something that we could do for the future.

Uh you know, holding this particular one uh postponing.

I mean, again, your decision, but I think that might be something to do with going forward.

Council uh Vice Mayor Fugit.

So what I was gonna say is no one's made a motion to postpone.

People have talked about perhaps wanting to, but until a motion is on the floor and seconded, there is no there's nothing to act on about postponing.

I would say that um what I heard councilmember Grant say is that he could not personally approve them because he had questions with the process.

I think we've all heard that everyone thinks we'd like to understand more about the process and going forward how we do this.

I do feel that um we're at a point now that the people who participated did the process as it was laid out, and the deciding body decided this is who they wanted to give them to.

I don't know short of how you totally redo the process.

Um we're gonna get anything more accomplished by postponing for two weeks or four weeks because the folks who've asked for the grants have been awarded them by the group that decided.

So um my I plan to vote in support of these because there are people that we funded in the past and we um and a group, not not me, um, decided that they wanted to give these grants.

I also agree, and we have just filled out a list of workshop ideas that uh um everybody sent back to the city recorder, Mr.

Johnson.

Um, and we can then prioritize what workshops we want to talk about.

But um, I do think whether we have a workshop or not, discussion around the grant making process and understanding it better with some other input um is never a bad thing.

So I intend to support this.

Um I'm not sure who was first, maybe Councilmember Houseley.

That's fine.

I just have briefly.

I've never seen us question the grant process when we have like Miss Norris is leading the youth, the mayor's youth council, they've worked on this process, and I've never seen us do anything with the Office of Neighborhood grants and say you don't deserve that because citizens sit on that and they decide.

So it's like really people spending their own tax dollars, basically.

So I don't understand the questioning process on this at all, other than if we wanted to do it and understand uh whatever.

I mean, a workshop would be fine, I guess, but I've just never seen us try to pull something back that we had groups dedicated to decide, you know, how this was funded.

I don't know that that doesn't seem to be our place, but I plan to support it as is.

Thank you.

Councilmember uh depart-levin.

Um yeah, I appreciate uh that in the process that we voted on earlier um the new contract for KPD, uh, that I was able to ask a lot of questions of the city of uh police chief Noel and others and um sit down and meet with them and then really deliberate um and even talk to some of my peers uh in the fourth district.

So I appreciate that process.

This process happened a little shorter to be able to review this application.

We've only had it for a week.

Um Zill, I think uh one of your points that's very valid in addition to process is um the impact of this type of money has on these organizations.

What what is $10,000 gonna do for an organization with a you know multi-million dollar budget?

Um I'm looking specifically at what uh leadership knocks would do, and then it's counseling hours, so they're gonna spend 10,000 dollars and providing counseling hours, but again, how impactful is that to their organization?

Um and then uh reading, you know, basically it looks like the the group from Florida is primarily gonna have two speakers and their supplies.

So in their application, I'm I found information on what they would be doing.

Um I think again the challenge is just having the time to have the conversations to understand um that process.

So council Councilmember Grant?

Yes, I want to try to respond as quickly as possible.

Taking the time and listening, Nathan, I I definitely uh gotta get used to not calling you by your first name.

Councilman Honeycutt.

Uh appreciate you uh bringing a you know postponement into uh councilwoman Parker's and Vice Mayor uh Hugit's uh with you know statement of you know what's gonna change.

Um and then also councilwoman uh husley mentioned you know what the process has been.

This is a new city council body.

So what wasn't gonna always be today.

That's one of the reasons why I ran to do things differently.

So I I understand you know the process has been what it's been this whole time.

Um but it's our job to do what makes better sense for the community and for the people who voted for us.

And that's where I'm coming from.

Um yes, I do have experience with the Office of Community Safety and Empowerment, and that's why I feel inclined to speak to it, right?

In terms of my experience uh with the office.

And so as I said, my issue is when we're bundling up sixty thousand dollars, no matter how small it is.

Out of these six organizations, there may be two or three that we don't necessarily agree with, and there may be the other three we're in support of.

But we can't move forward with the entirety of it.

To me, because it it it's it's not it won't be productive.

And given my experience, I know it won't.

And that and that's not to throw shots at organizations that are receiving this funding, but there are a couple of them that I know won't be effective.

And when you talk about limited resources, we have to make sure, like our job is to figure out what the process is.

We can't say let's move forward and say yes, and then we'll figure out that's been the issue this entire time.

That's been the issue in the past.

And so if we gotta wait two weeks and we gotta wait 30 days to figure out what the process is, then that's what I feel like we should do.

We gotta stop not answering the question, right?

It was act it was asked two or three times.

Who sits on this committee?

Names, please.

Right?

We still don't know who sits on this committee.

Uh is there a point system in terms of these applications, right?

Were there 20 applicants and six were chosen?

Okay, you know, the other 14 or whatever the number is, why weren't they chosen?

I mean, we have way more questions than answers.

And when we have way more questions than answers, we can't continue to move forward no matter how small or how high the dollar amount is.

And so um this may move forward.

Um, but I'm gonna stand uh on wanting to know more about the process.

Um as I said, I I hope I can sit down uh with the office and empower Knox to figure out exactly what the process is moving forward.

Um these organizations I do see that some of them did receive it last year.

Um were the deliverables, right?

If you apply, right?

If you if you got it the previous year, show us the deliverables.

How did you deliver the first year?

Right?

We're not getting any of that.

And so again, spending, spending, spending, just because it's there, I have an issue with that.

And so um, yeah, I'm gonna vote against this.

Um, and I'm I'm hoping I can you know sit down uh with the Office of Community Safety and Empower Knox to figure out exactly what this process is to make sure that as we're allocating funds to organizations, uh we can put more grassroots organizations uh at priority.

Thank you.

Okay, um seeing no lights on uh all those in favor, please say aye.

Um there is no motion to postpone.

Yeah, I was gonna ask if you wanted to make a motion for postponement.

I want to make a most a motion to postpone for two weeks.

Okay, motions have been made to postpone for two weeks been made and seconded.

Um so any further discussion on the motion to postpone.

I did want to just point of information.

One of the uh potential recipients, uh the YWCA representative is here, Kathy Mack, if council had questions for that particular recipient, but um just as a point of information, Mr.

Thomas.

Yeah, I um partly because this is a new council and partly because I have questions as well.

Um I think a two-week postponement wouldn't be out of the question.

And um that will give Mr.

Grant some time to talk directly and the rest of us as well if we choose to talk directly and get some of the questions he's answered.

So I will support a two-week postponement.

Okay.

Uh any further discussion on the motion to postpone for two weeks, seeing none, all those in favor of the motion to postpone, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, the motion to postpone carries.

We can we'll revisit this and and Mr.

Grant, if if uh maybe we can speak later and so I have a clear understanding of uh the questions you have or you people you'd like to speak to and meet with between now and then and the vote in two weeks.

All right, next item, please.

13R is an ordinance approving the request of Dickerson LLC for an amendment to the south um South City Sector Plan from low density to residential to South Waterfront Mixed Use District Type 2.

For proper located at 1137 Simpson Street, leaving any and all special purpose land use classifications unchanged.

First district.

We have one uh speaker signed up to speak in favor in favor of this.

Uh Drew Harper.

If you could come to the podium, state your name and address for the record, please.

Uh please turn the microphone on at the base, please.

That's it.

This one check.

Yep.

Okay.

I'm Drew Harper.

I live at 1205 Kenyon Street and Knoxville.

Um I am the vice president of yes Knoxville, and I support the amendment to the sector plan as proposed.

Uh infill density, uh, such as this would allow, uh, would allow Knoxville to welcome more neighbors without the downstream harms caused by sprawl.

By adding homes and mixed use in already served areas, the city can grow its tax base without uh incurring the high cost of extending new roads, sewards, and sidewalks further and further away.

More residents and businesses on existing infrastructure means stronger public finances and more efficient city services.

At the same time, density supports walkable neighborhoods, local businesses, and a wider range of housing options that will help Knoxville become more affordable, fiscally responsible, and environmentally environmentally sustainable as it grows.

Um and how do we lower carbon emissions without density?

This is a serious question that I seriously want those of you that believe in climate change to think about.

Is there any nation on earth that has lowered its carbon emissions per capita without dense walkable cities as one of the primary tools toward that goal?

Uh the change, the sector plan uh aligns with adopted policy as confirmed unanimously by planning commission and staff.

It allows homes in mixed use near the waterfront, exactly where growth belongs, reducing sprawl, supporting walkability, and making a better use of infrastructure.

Um, time, time.

Last month I was honored to go to the swearing in of new city council members.

So this is the start of a new adventure for a lot of you, and I'm sure that you want to do some real tangible good for Knoxville.

I think nobody gets into this for the high salary and stuff.

Um that is awesome.

Uh but as you go on, you may find that your primary lever to wield power is often the power of no.

As council members, you cannot double the amount of people that will someday call this parcel home.

You cannot triple it, increase it tenfold.

But you can make sure that it's zero.

I encourage you to resist the temptation of no.

Uh we know that negative motivation is powerful.

We see that all the time on social media and the news cycle, especially federal news.

And part of the mission of yes Knoxville is to offer a counterweight to that negativity.

Um approving this sector plan amendment will not solve all the city's problems.

But it will be life-changing uh for the families that will one day call this parcel home.

Uh it is incremental.

And I've been told that uh doesn't make a difference, and I believe that it does.

Okay, I want to leave you with a quote from someone else who was recently uh inaugurated and is setting the tone for the uh future of his work.

That's Zoran Mamdani in New York.

Quote we want to build as much as possible across the city.

We want to build for those who call the city home and for those who would love to call the city home if only it were more affordable.

For a better Knoxville.

Thank you.

Yes.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um motions.

Councilmember Adams.

Thank you.

And I so appreciate yes being here to to speak.

I think they do phenomenal work and really appreciate the ethos of what they bring to cases.

But there are a lot of nuances with planning cases, things that we get from planning.

And there are umpteen plans.

So if you haven't gone digging for these and looking for the sector plan, the one year plan, uh you've heard talk about the comprehensive plan.

If you don't understand how all those things are connected, um, I think it's really important that we spend a little moment doing that.

Um what this case says, and I'm gonna ask um uh Ms.

Potier from planning to to speak into this as well, if you could.

But what this uh particular item asks is for us to bring alignment to the one year plan and the sector plan.

And as I understand it, um the reason that we are considering this is yes, because of the the applicant's request, but it is also something that is you're saying is kind of cleanup work that we need to just bring these plans into alignment.

Could could I ask you to speak to this uh just as an educational point for all of us?

Sure.

So um the one year plan was uh was amended um to back in 2006, 2007, whenever the Southwest Waterfront districts themselves were created.

So there was a governmental rezoning of a swath of properties along the riverfront, and then um a one-year plan amendment that went along with that.

Um a sector plan amendment was not done at that time.

I'm not sure the rationale beyond that.

I don't really want to speculate.

Have a couple of thoughts on that, but I I wasn't here at that time.

So there's been um some discrepancy between the one year plan and the sector plan since that time.

I will say that the vast majority of properties in the city, the land use classes do align between both the plans.

This is one area of very few in the city where they don't.

So there is that discrepancy.

Can you say just a bit more about the land use that doesn't line up?

Um the South Waterfront Mixed Use District 2 is the land use classification.

That is an area um consisting of a few blocks along the pathway that align with the South Waterfront one, um, South Waterfront 1, or the South Waterfront mixed use to district one.

That is what encompasses the form-based codes, the Southwest Waterfront or the South Waterfront code, sorry, I can't talk.

Um, and then this is just an area just south of that.

So it does have RN1, R and two, three, four, five um within its uh list of class of zones that it allows.

Um so I'm not sure if that answers your question.

It does, it helps.

And um, if I could ask Mr.

Johnson uh to pull something up, this is just to help me make a point um in terms of where that um that plan stops and where it is being proposed to go.

Um if my colleagues can look at the screen, um that uh where it says row right of way, um that's a train track.

And that has really operated as sort of a line of demarcation, uh unofficial, but when you look at the maps, the zoning maps, the um sector plans, the one-year plans, you see that is really the the point.

And then things beyond that are a little bit different.

So I'd like you to look at the moment where everything is R and two.

Now this gets into the next case, and I know I'm running out of time, but um the sector plan and the one-year plan right now are are out of alignment.

I understand that that needs to change, but um what this does is starts to introduce a pretty large change for what can be done uh throughout a larger section of um of land.

It doesn't mean that the um 13S uh is a die that's cast, but it is a significant change that we're being asked to consider that we will be going back to um for those land use classifications from here forward.

Okay, um further questions or discussion.

Mr.

Uh Councilmember DeBartelabin.

Um yeah, I'd like to note a couple things.

Um one is I pulled up the ward map on that as well, just if you look, I was trying to explore why is that piece of property so much larger uh of a plat than the other plates around it.

And if you look at the um the original ward map, it's actually three different properties.

So I would say that it's it's at least somewhere that changed, and that's part of why this cleanup is needed because it was not the original plan for that planned um area.

Um I drove down there this week, which I do often, but saw you know the river parkway, um, you know, those two townhomes that are caddy horner.

Um, and then with the art walk going in there, I think this neighborhood's gonna continue to see change.

I think something that's been negative is there's currently a duplex that's being built on this same hill.

Um it's allowed uh by right, it is not a pretty duplex, it's a very poorly designed building, and I think what people fear is that they're gonna get another very poorly designed duplex.

So the problem with that thing is not that it's a duplex, the problem is that it's poorly designed.

Um my hope for this property is that um that it will be well designed.

So any further questions or discussion, council member Adams.

Um yeah, I I agree with your opinion on that particular duplex.

Um I wish that what was coming in front of us right now was duplexes, I would be thrilled.

Um, but that's not.

Um the uh request for zoning that is connected to this is for something more intense uh than duplexes.

Uh I appreciate the research that you did on that parcel to learn about why it is is larger.

The the line that I was pointing out and the density that I think Mr.

Harper spoke about from yes, and that um Councilman Debartel Laban may be speaking about, we are seeing that absolutely right now.

And I think that it is welcomed along the corridor of Island Home.

Um what I'm pointing out is that that is a neighborhood right now that is completely RN2, and the change in the sector plan uh will still allow R and two there.

Uh so it these are connected in a way.

Uh if we vote yes on this um for 13 um sorry I can't give my numbers for 13R, um that doesn't mean that 13S uh has to be the zoning that is being requested.

But I'm trying to make sure that everyone is aware that if we vote uh for this sector plan alignment to be done, we are also um opening up a real change for this area that means that other more intense developments that may not be requested or desired on that other side of the train track there become um a sort of domino effect.

Uh we've got a lot of intense usage right now in South Knoxville, which is wonderful.

Um the the traffic and the construction isn't always wonderful, but we have a really welcoming and happy community about the development that is happening, but it is also a community that's very proud of its neighborhoods that exist there now, and that is a neighborhood.

That's why I wanted everyone to look at the RN2 that's there.

Um and when I think about the sector plan alignment, uh while I I understand that I don't want to postpone this for a comprehensive plan.

I feel like that is um the easier thing to do, because that would take two years.

And I really don't want to take two years in the same breath.

I don't want to um approve one development here and have that be a domino effect that takes away a neighborhood that people uh already have as their RN2 and the planning case uh talked about height a lot.

If anyone watched the planning commission meeting on this, and that was a big concern of the neighbor that spoke up that day.

Um 35 feet is what RN2 allows.

So I'm blurring these again a little bit, but if you start to get into the SWMU D2, and that's the sector plan change, height does go up.

You do have other things that have higher um heights in them, and that's a concern to me.

So um as much as I uh have struggled with this, and everyone in planning knows that because I've talked to them uh a ton.

Uh I've talked to the applicant quite a bit who's doing exceptional work.

Um but I'm going to need to make a motion um that we deny this sector plan change.

A motion uh made to deny has been made and seconded.

Um the applicant, you have not signed up to speak, so if council members have a question for you, they can pose that.

But uh thank you for letting us know you're here.

I appreciate that.

Uh just a one quick point of information from Ms.

Poitiers.

This was uh approved unanimously by planning.

Is that correct?

By planning commission?

That's what it says on the agenda.

Was did staff recommend it?

The applicant asked for R and five, we recommended R and four, and that's what the planning commission approved.

Okay.

And just a quick point of clarification and RN4, the height for multifamily, if that is what ends up being here, would be 45 feet unless adjacent to single family, then it's 35 feet, and this is adjacent to single family, so it would be 35.

If you guys approve R and four.

Okay.

Uh any other questions or comments from council.

Mr.

Thomas.

Uh yes, I just was gonna say that uh the 35 foot um height uh limit is that's pretty high for this neighborhood.

And uh those people have uh lived in that community for a long time, and I would proceed cautiously with uh major changes here, although incrementally, you know, we will do that.

But um I can support the motion to deny.

Councilmember Honeycutt.

Um because the applicant's here and has taken the time to come down.

Could we uh hear from him?

Um absolutely.

If council member wants to uh ask him to come up, please could please come up.

If you can state your name and address for the record, and um Mr.

Honeycutt can ask a question.

Start by stating your name and address for the record, please.

Yeah, Matthew Thompson with Dickerson LLC.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for coming down and being part of the conversation.

Like really, I'm shocked like how I got set down and you actually made that point.

I'm gracious.

Well, that's um I met with Karen.

She's um it thank you for your time, but I've seen her bobbing weave back and forth on me on this one.

We met at the site, and we we sat there and I I hear that the train tracks.

The train tracks are a marker.

Point of border.

I'm sorry.

A question has not been asked.

Okay, Mr.

Sorry, I'm just trying to make sure that's a good idea.

I don't know the rules, I apologize.

Mr.

Uh, what what did you say your name is?

Uh Matthew Thompson.

I mean, I just uh wait until uh council member asks you a question, and then you can speak to answering that question.

Mr.

Honeycutt, do you have a question?

Yeah, no, I just uh I completely understand councilwoman Adams' position on this and and understand what she's where she's coming from.

I just uh wanted to hear your perspective on her position uh and where your perspective was.

Absolutely.

So um right there when we're looking at I I'm following the Northwater District, right?

I mean the South uh waterfront, and I see the infrastructure going in.

I see the call for new homes, and I see that, and so as a developer, I started to move into notchall, okay, because it's it's energetic, it's vibrant, I love it.

And as I'm looking at the waterfront district, we spent this massive infrastructure, right?

The waterfront district uh acreage, that's gonna be million dollar plus acreage of land.

Y'all aren't gonna get homes there, right?

And so when I'm looking, what I propose, and we I met with Karen, and it's a great meeting, thank you so much, is town homes.

There's nothing more you can do there.

And then I hear, hey, wait a minute, I'm concerned about 35 foot.

I can put 35 foot on RN1 or R and two.

That's just basic code.

Just because the folks that are currently there didn't choose to, they have that right.

But that's just code.

What it currently is, R and two is 35 foot.

So we're saying now, hey, wait a minute, we don't like 35 foot, but that's what the current R and two code allows.

So that kind of to me is that isn't a valid, you know, reason.

I mean, because across the street, they're allowed to be 35.

Okay.

The railroad, the other piece there, that's going away.

Because somebody along the way decl, you know, declared that as a landmark, therefore we shouldn't go past it.

That's just uh a I guess a myth, a legend.

I don't I don't know even what that would be.

It's not code.

That's all being ripped up.

We now have a gorgeous greenway.

We need town homes.

We need people moving into the area to use the infrastructure that the city is spending its money on, right?

That's all what we're all doing.

That's why I'm a developer.

I'm bringing here.

I'm not trying to put high rises.

I'm trying to put 35 less than 35 foot town homes where they belong, right?

In that area, a town home, that's the same as a regular home.

I don't see that as a bad word.

I'm hearing folks say, Man, we don't need town.

You Karen even, we sit out there, she'll tell you we sit out there and she's like, I like your idea.

She told me she liked the townhomes.

I said, hey, we're gonna go right here.

I can go to right here.

Four town homes.

That's my hope.

And they will be gorgeous.

If y'all want to go visit, she visited my work.

I do gorgeous work.

I take pride in what I bring to Knoxville City.

So when we're saying, hey, that community, yes, I'm bringing four new homes to that community.

Four town homes.

What's wrong with that?

They won't be higher than what's across the street allows.

That's the code.

If they want to rip down their house and throw up 35 foot, they're allowed to do that.

And I'm right across the street, and I could put a duplex.

That's 35 feet up.

But I want to do town homes.

They're gonna be gorgeous.

We're gonna do sidewalks.

It's going to look the park.

You will be proud of it.

That's what I do.

And so I'm just confused on hey, it's a neighborhood.

Townhomes are a neighborhood.

There's nothing wrong with living in a town home.

Right?

So that's where I'm confused is what are we pressing?

What what is the bad point here?

And that's where I'm truly I got 44 seconds left.

So I'm I am not understanding.

Do y'all want me to build town homes?

Do you want me to build big masters, just just huge homes?

Just one of them.

What is it that you want from me as a developer?

Because I'm gonna build it, I'm gonna build it nice.

But when you're telling me, oh no, we don't like townhomes, those aren't homes, those are something different.

We want you to build one home, Matt.

Or we want you to build two.

I'm just not understanding the rules that what you guys want.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Thompson.

Thank you.

Sorry.

Uh no, I just appreciate your time and clarification.

And just so we know, no matter or regardless of what happens here.

I've said this you know publicly as many times as possible.

I and I think a lot of people on this uh council are a proponent of town homes, and so I think it's a way to solve our affordability crisis and and a lot of good things.

So thank you for doing what you're doing.

Thank you, Councilmember Honeycutt, Councilmember DeBar Laban.

Um, I'd like to ask planning a couple clarification questions.

Um you mentioned 35 feet, so thank you for clarifying that.

Um, if this were to change from R and two to R and four, um, how many duplexes could somebody put on this property?

You can put one Mr.

Thompson, you aren't being addressed.

Thank you very much.

Uh this is for planning.

Sorry.

Let me look at the square footage.

Just a second.

And I'll clarify that again looking at the ward map.

I really see this as appropriate as three properties.

If you look at the size of this property compared to the adjacent properties.

Okay, so it looks like it's roughly 11,900 square feet.

Um in R and four, you're required to have um at least 7,000 square feet for a duplex or for a two-family, so um just one.

Okay, and then what about townhomes?

Um townhouses, you have got 3,000 square feet um per dwelling unit, so um two.

And uh so I should say KGIS is always it's kind of a best guess scenario.

So if they do have 12,000 square feet, then they could do um four, sorry.

Um they'd be able to do three with townhouses for the if it's 11, 8.

And then multifamily.

Uh multi-five multi-families, 2,000 square feet per dwelling unit.

So if they've got 12,000, they could do six.

If not, then they could do five.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay, council member Adams.

Uh thank you.

And I appreciate uh council member Honeycutt asking the applicant to to speak because he has been wonderful to work with and talk to, and he does do very good work.

So none of that is in question.

Um I I will say for the record as well, I I have no problem with townhomes.

I think that they are a very good form.

And to echo your point, I think that that's a way that we start to address part of our housing issue.

My concern is that if you looked at that map, it is akin it it almost looks like spot zoning because everything else is RN2.

And so when we talk about changing the base zone, as much as I like the applicant's proposal, that zoning stays with the land, and it does not necessarily stay with with the applicant that we have in front of us.

So that's why the concern I have is for the large change for the sector plan and then the specific change for that property.

Not because I think that townhomes are bad, I think they're they're very good, and we are seeing them across the um South Knoxville district, and they they're doing a really good job.

What I see here is a concern about an existing neighborhood that has all RN2 zoning, and we're going to put in one RN4.

And that means what will come next.

And I've certain planning commission long enough to know that that what happens next is that we have more and more RN4.

People buy up the houses that exist there now, they're gone, and we've lost the neighborhood.

Not that townhomes aren't neighborhoods, but that the character of that place, and I'm talking about architectural uh style, and I'm talking about the humans that are there right now is is lost.

And so that is my concern.

And why I'm asking for uh the denial of this case.

Vice Mayor Fugit.

Thank you.

Um I'll just say this this one is a hard one because when planning votes for something 13-0.

That's usually pretty good, and staff recommended it.

That's usually a pretty good indication that a lot of people have looked at it, talked about it for a long time, and have come to agreement.

I also share the concern that it can be the beginning of the slippery slope.

Um so that wasn't helpful.

I understand, but but I'm just saying I I feel what everybody has said.

Um I will also say for my new colleagues on council, um, this is the problem you're gonna have on pretty much every vote we have about zoning right now in the city of Knoxville.

We are in a city in transition.

Um people need more places to live.

Uh but nobody wants where they live to change, me included.

Some stuff changed at the end of my street.

I wasn't wild about it actually turned out looks pretty good.

Don't tell them.

But um, but I mean it's it's but it is changes hard, changes hard.

So um, and the other thing that is the hardest thing for me on the zoning changes, is that the applicant who comes who's asking for the zoning change always pretty much does something we exactly want done.

The problem then is that if it's rezoned, if for some reason financing doesn't come through, the deal falls through, then it's rezoned.

So I'm just telling you, it's never gonna get perfect.

You're just gonna have to make a gut decision factoring in all that we've heard because there are no guarantees in any zoning decision we make because I'll just hush, it's just hard.

Councilmember Thomas.

I guess um, thank you.

Yeah.

Uh is that helpful?

Yeah, I um I I do share the concerns of uh my colleague Ms.

Adams.

I was on the uh planning commission as well for quite a while, and that doesn't make me an expert, but I have seen things play out as uh council member Adams said, and uh if you look at the map and you look at what's around and what the the neighborhood has uh kind of treasured, um the zoning rezoning does go to the land, and this would open up maybe something that this applicant uh wouldn't have in mind, and um uh Miss Adams has lived in our district a long time and she knows it better than I so um on this one uh this property will be developed, uh but I would think that it would be better developed under the existing code.

And uh I will also say that when developers buy property they know how it's zoned.

Um and they should they shouldn't expect just to be able to change the zoning to fit what they want.

There is a caution there that this property is not zoned to do what I want it to do.

Um and then there is the down the road, it is a domino effect where you allow one applicant in a particular case like this to do it, and then next thing you know, the entire um area has been the context of it's really been changed as far as the neighborhood.

But you know, these are tough choices, and you know, and I uh the townhouses work great in lots of places and quite often they're our best option, but um I don't think it is here, so I will support the motion to deny any further questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion to uh to deny say aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, I think that's uh 7-2 motion carries.

Is that right?

Two?

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh the next item I believe is moot based on the outcome of the item you just voted on.

Is that correct, Mr.

Frost?

Mr.

Swanson?

Okay.

Is anyone signed up for public forum?

No.

Okay.

Then without objection, this meeting is adjourned.