Good evening.

It's six o'clock.

I'd like to call this meeting to order.

We'll begin with an invocation led by Councilmember Grant, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Honeycutt.

Please rise as you're able.

Tonight, let us gather with open minds and open hearts in a time where this country feels divided by politics, race, class, and ideology.

Let us remember that our duty is not to deepen those divisions but the rise above them.

There are communities across the nation that feel unheard, unseen, despite the same people who have helped build this country, fought for this country, and continue to believe in its mission.

We cannot ignore these troops.

We should not follow growing the culture of division and silence.

Instead, let the city of Knoxville lead by example.

Let us come together, no matter status, no matter background, but as people first.

Let us align ourselves back with humanity and commit to progress, not through words, but through policy, action, and accountability.

Made tonight's decision reflect wisdom, compassion, and the courage to build a stronger, healthier future for the next generation.

Amen.

I would like to please certify of the United States of America.

Under God, indivisible liberty and justice.

Okay, Miss Hopper, would you please call roll?

Councilwoman Adams.

Councilman DeBarta Laban?

Here.

Councilman Grant?

Here.

Councilwoman Helsing?

Here.

Councilman Honeycutt.

Councilman Lloyd?

Here.

Councilwoman Parker?

Here.

Councilman Thomas.

Here.

Okay, thank you.

Is there a motion on the minutes of the April 23rd workshop?

Okay, motion made and seconded.

Any questions or discussions?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Is there a motion on the minutes of the April 28th meeting?

Okay, motion made and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Are there any items to be withdrawn from tonight's agenda?

Are there any items to be postponed on tonight's agenda?

Okay.

Are there any items to be added by motion?

Okay.

There are no memorials or honorary resolutions tonight.

Um, is there a motion on the consent agenda?

Mayor, um, I plan on um on voting on the consent items, but I did want to raise that on item 10 D.

Uh I serve on the IMS Nature Center board, and it's a volunteer position.

I don't receive anything for that and haven't been involved in the grant selection process.

So I do plan on voting on the consent, but just wanted to make note of that.

Duly noted, thank you.

Councilmember Parker.

Uh yes, I'd like to remove 13 Z through 13AB.

Okay.

Um, we'll be removing from consent item 13 Z, AA and AB.

Okay.

Gotcha.

Any other changes to the consent agenda or items to be noted for the record before we vote on it.

I need a motion on the consent agenda.

Move to approve as amended.

Second.

Okay, motion made and seconded.

Any questions or discussions?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Okay.

Time now uh for my mayor's report.

I just want to start by thanking a council for your very um studious and um scrutinizing uh long and really uh helpful uh legislative budget hearings last Thursday.

I think it was uh over eight hours of discussion and um questions and answers, and I just want to say thank you.

Uh your questions make the budget better, make the process better, make it more visible and transparent to the public what we're doing and why.

Um, I also want to say I know that while uh staff were able to answer many questions during the course of that hearing.

Uh Mr.

Evans and the finance team are planning on following up with any questions that required a little more uh background information.

We should get that to you later this week.

Um, if you have any additional questions about the budget that didn't come up during the legislative budget hearings, please let me and uh Mr.

Evans or the relevant staff member know so we can try to get back to you in a timely manner.

I also want to take a moment to recognize a group of students who have dedicated their time to make our city even better.

I'm talking about our members of the youth council who are wrapping up their terms, 11 of these members are now graduating from the program, and we're really proud and thankful for them right before uh this council meeting.

I went to the youth council meeting and had the chance to visit and celebrate with them.

So I just wanted to take a moment to say thank you.

We appreciate you.

They're all sitting over here.

Um, and also I already asked them, but I'll ask council too.

The applications for the next um cohort of members of the mayor's youth council uh are open, and we encourage everyone to look for that on the website and encourage people to apply, but especially let's take a moment to recognize and give a round of applause.

Please stand to be recognized.

Members of the mayor's youth council.

They did a great job this year, and their focus was on youth mental health and um had a summit about it and helped produce some publications about it, and uh really really grateful.

They've they come from um high schools all across the city, and they just did a great job.

So we're we're thankful.

Uh, this Sunday is is one of my favorite events uh that happens every year, is open streets, May 17th on Sunday.

Bike walk Knoxville's hosting open streets from 2 to 6 p.m.

And this year, the street that they've selected that uh is Gay Street.

Uh, it'll be an afternoon of Car Free Gay Street, it's designed to cultivate community connection and have healthy activities and just some family friendly fun.

And everything is free and open to the public.

We hope to see you there.

And 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.

And 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 respecting these rules.

And that concludes my mayor's report.

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

Are there any general council member announcements?

Councilmember Adams.

Um I just wanted to say that the rules committee will be meeting later this week on Thursday at 3 p.m.

in room 461.

Okay.

Rules committee meeting.

Uh any other general announcements?

Or can uh council member Honeycutt?

Yeah, just two quick ones.

One, again, I wanted to thank uh Vice Mayor Lynn Fugit and the city uh staff and team members for organizing the budget legislative sessions last week.

Uh, you know, they were long, but it was a great conversation, and because everything was so well organized and the sessions so well set up, we were able to have really productive work sessions, and so just appreciate everyone's effort to get us ready to be part of that process.

And then, you know, uh, I'm gonna probably say this at every city council meeting for the next six months, but uh we are in the middle of the comprehensive plan process.

Uh so please everyone go to what's next knoxville.com uh to learn more about uh how to be part of that process.

And a comprehensive plan is setting a vision for ourselves as a city and what kind of city do we want to be in 15 20 years?

Uh and and then it's up to us to help implement that.

But we that plan isn't successful unless it hears from the community and gets good feedback from you all.

So on the website, there's upcoming listening sessions.

They'll be out at a lot of the festivals.

Uh, and then there are there's a home base on Market Square where you can actually go in over the summer and give direct feedback.

And then, of course, you can do a lot from the actual website in terms of just giving feedback from your home.

Takes 20 minutes.

So please, what's next knoxville.com, log on, participate, be part of the future of Knoxville.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Grant.

Yes.

This Thursday at 5 30 on the Jihadi Park Advisory Group is going to be meeting at the Jacobs Building.

Continue conversation about the future plans at Yahweh Park.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Adams.

Thank you.

Just a few announcements as well with the theme of providing feedback.

The Corbella proposal is going to be heard by the Planning Commission this Thursday and encourage anyone who has an opinion or thoughts about that particular proposal to make those comments to the planning commission website.

That's where they can best be heard by the planning commission.

Um also on the same day as Open Streets, there's another festival happening in South Knoxville that is the Caddy Wampus Parade, and it's down at the Suttery Landing Park.

So I encourage everyone to also, you know, experience open streets and uh either take their bike from Open Streets or hop on a free shuttle that is being piloted on that day from the downriver area to that Suttery landing area and back.

It will be running all day from 1 p.m.

until 7 p.m.

And this is a pilot.

And I really want to thank um the merchants of Old Sevier, Kat, um Ellie Moore, who has helped make this possible, and hope that we get a lot of good ridership and a lot of good data from that experience and can see what we can do with that kind of idea in the future.

Okay, thank you.

Seeing no further lights on, we'll move on to the next agenda item.

Ms.

Hopper.

12E is a resolution authorizing the mayor to amend the contract with APAC Atlantic Incorporated for the Bomb Drive Stormwater Improvements Project, increasing the amount contract amount by 33,380 for a new total contract amount not to exceed 652,988.50 cents funded with the American Rescue Plan Act grant.

Motion made to approve and second it.

Any questions or discussion?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12F is a resolution authorizing the mayor to amend the contract with Adams contracting LLC for the North Cherry Street stormwater improvements project, increasing the amount by 51,615.91 cents for a new contract total, I'm sorry, new total contract amount not to exceed two million eight hundred forty-five thousand eight hundred forty-six dollars ninety-one cents funded with the American Plan Rescue Plan Act grant.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Councilmember Parker.

Yes, question.

We have a limited amount of time to spend the funding from the American Rescue Plan Act, correct?

Would it be possible for council to get an update on where we are with the expending all of those dollars?

Yeah, Mr.

Claybook, the TDEX stormwater grants have to be spent by.

Yeah, I think you know that off the top of your head.

Um we're wrapping out the construction up by July.

I think closeout date is September of this year.

September 30th, I believe.

See, okay.

September 30th for all.

Well, we'll confirm if there's any if there's anything different from that, we'll send an email out.

So and so all ARPA projects will all ARPA funding will have been allocated by September of this year.

I think it has to even be expended by that time.

All ARPA dollars have long since been appropriated for the departments and the various projects.

Uh the only thing remaining is to disperse them, and I believe this is the last of the disbursements.

It's been a while, but I'll check and make sure I'm correct.

We'll confirm, but that is our current understanding.

Do we have um reporting of all of the projects funded by the ARPA funds?

Anywhere?

I haven't looked at it in a while, but I think we have a whole website about it, and I might I'm sure that's still up there, so we can um send links out and updates to council uh after the meeting.

If possible, I do have an Excel spreadsheet of the first round of funding, but I couldn't find a similar spreadsheet for the second round.

Well, there was some funds that uh went directly to the city.

I think it was about 42 million.

Right.

And then these monies that you're voting on tonight uh came separately through TDEC and were only for stormwater.

So um we'll we'll uh get that information to you guys.

Um, thank you.

Okay.

I will and just add in something when you said I'd have all the answers to the due outs from the hearings.

It may go into next week, so I'll add this one in there and I will get them out.

Yes, ma'am.

Before you before the second meeting.

Yes, ma'am.

Yeah.

Sorry, I didn't mean to uh put the added pressure on you.

No, sorry.

No, it's fine.

It's just he's fast, but he's not the superman.

Okay.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you for um managing our expectations more realistically.

Um any further discussion co questions or discussion on items 12F.

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12G is a resolution of the city of or the council of the city of Knoxville authorizing the mayor to execute any and all documents necessary to effectuate an amendment to agree number C-22-0552 with Samsara incorporated to provide an additional 376 AVL licenses and equipment and to provide route planning functionality and 20 forward-facing dash cameras to enhance brush pickup operations for a new total annual contract price not to exceed 207,400.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Any questions or discussions?

Oh, Councilmember Parker, sorry.

Just quickly, we have policies on the management retention of data for KPDs dash cams.

Do we have similar policies for fleet services?

Mr.

Brownshaw, uh Director of Fleet Services, I saw him earlier.

See, there you are.

Uh if you could please come to the podium and um address Councilmember Parker's question, please.

It's not, yeah, the mic is not on.

No.

Oh, he may have to push the button.

It may have to be.

Is there a card?

It doesn't look like there's a card on the back.

A button on the back.

Um just push it completely in.

Well, if you could go to um a side, Mr.

Bradford, you could just go to one of these desks right there and and use one of those.

I don't know.

It sounds like we're staying there.

Yes, thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Please, if you could just state your name and who you are for direct.

Uh Nicholas Bradshaw, Director of Fleet Services, maybe an anticlimactic answer.

Uh, we uh there is a policy in place for the uh um for the uh access public access of uh of records.

Um there is some differentiation between as I as I recall and uh we've worked with Charles' team on developing these policies.

I think fire is a little bit different.

Uh I think there's some um has to do with some some HIPAA for forward-facing dash cams and they go to a scene.

Uh and then police obviously has their own policy which is separate, uh, and then uh there's a more generic policy for uh for the other vehicles.

Uh very few of the uh non-emergency vehicles have cameras, so it's more about just the vehicle history.

And in addition to public access to those records, I'm assuming there's also policies regarding retention and management of that, how long you will keep that uh video for inspection by the public, etc.

I'm I'm not an expert in that particular policy.

Uh I do I can get that to you for sure.

Uh I do think that the policy addresses retention.

Um I cannot recall off the top of my head what specifically it says.

And so who would manage that footage?

Would it be IT?

Uh it sounds like you you yourself are not deleting footage.

Correct.

It's it's an online, it's uh it's managed through the same SERA platform.

So it's it's not on a city server or anything like that, it's all online.

Uh my recollection is that uh the data is at least six months uh old that it that it goes back.

Uh but that is uh that is determined by the uh the software provider.

Yeah, any clarification you could find, I would appreciate.

Yeah, absolutely.

Thank you.

Yeah, no problem.

Any further questions or discussion?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12H is a resolution authorizing the submission of the two 2026-2027 annual action plan to the five-year consolidated plan for housing and community development to the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development and authorizing the mayor to execute any required documents under the community development block grant home investment partnerships act and emergency solutions grant programs.

Motion made to approve and second it.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries 8 1.

12.

I is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an amendment extending contract C-21-0269 with Goodyear tire and rubber company for a period of 90 days with a price cap of 39,750 in order for city purchasing in Knoxville Area Transit to complete the procurement process for a new bus tire source contract.

Motion made to approve 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 agreement with Nourish Moxville Incorporated to operate a farmer's market on Market Square in an annual amount of $25,000.

So motion made to approve and seconded.

Councilmember Grant?

Okay.

Uh any questions or discussion?

Councilmember Thomas.

Yeah, just uh some appreciation for what all the farmers market does.

I mean, providing all that healthy food from local farmers and providing a market for them.

And uh downtown doesn't have a full grocery store, so that fills a big gap.

So uh happy to support them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I'm also a regular shopper and um joined by thousands of others.

It's really uh particularly Saturday morning, so it's come a long way.

And is it 20 or 25 years?

You've been?

23 years, okay.

Well, thank you.

Any further questions or comments?

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12K is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute a sub-sorry, sub-recipient agreement with the Knoxville Knox County Community Action Committee to provide an amount not to exceed 100,000 from a state of Tennessee grant for broadband ready communities to support the expansion of the Knoxville Knox County Community Action Committee's Tech Smart Knox Seniors program.

Motion made to approve and second it.

Any questions or discussion?

Councilmember Adams.

I just wanted to say um I was really glad when I was doing research on this project that it will be inclusive of helping seniors with senior scams um and uh in the internet.

So just appreciate that because it's a real issue.

Thank you.

Any further questions or comments?

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12L is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute contracts with Davy Resource Group Incorporated, Forest Edge LLC, Richmond Tree Experts GA, and Invasive Plant Control Incorporated to perform invasive species control services across the city for an annual amount not to exceed $80,000 among four contractors.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Councilmember Parker.

Uh yes, could we get an overview of the process?

Um Rachel Butzler is here, uh Director of Public Service, and um she's here to give an overview and answer any other questions.

See if that works.

Yeah, it is.

Are you looking for an overview of the the bib process or kind of our invasive species process?

The invasion species process and the um, you know, the application that would be used to control the invasive species and the cities.

Um due diligence that you have done to ensure that this is a safe process.

Yep.

So I just um I'm glad that we're talking about this.

So we've had um limited projects of invasive species removal across the city already.

Um, but with the state funding that we have, we're able to go into larger projects.

Um, and so I I think most people know um invasive species, they can reduce habitat quality, um, and impacts the diversity of the plants and the animals and things like that.

Um, and we're losing um kind of the quality of the ecological habitat as these invasive species take over, and that's why we're tackling the problem itself.

Uh, there's a number of methods that you can treat invasive species with, so manual would be just pooling, and that's for kind of the lesser established ones, and you can pull that when the roots are small.

Um, another one we do is cut stump methods, so that's the more woody species where you cut it off close to the base and then you do put some chemical application on there.

Uh and then there is the foliar application, um, and that would be things for like kudzu that completely take over an area.

Uh, this is not going to be a widespread spraying of glyphosate, or kind of that's everybody's worst case scenario.

So it's not going to be that it's going to be targeted application to these areas that are struggling with the invasive species removal or invasive species taking over.

Uh, all of these contractors, um, they'll be using there's like four different um types of herbicides that they'll use, and they'll select it depending on what the situation is.

Um, and these are all FDA approved, EPA approved, and they all have certified um herbicide applicator licenses, and they do it within the confines of those.

Uh the areas that we've targeted so far, um, I don't think any of them the ones we have in mind, they're not around water, but we know if it's around water that we need to select the ones that are water safe.

Um, and then I guess just kind of when we look at a success story.

If everybody remembers the bank right underneath the hospital on the river, uh, that was completely taken over by Kazu, and it was just a monoculture of not very ecologically healthy plants and everything.

Um, and it took about three years, and there was chemical application to that, but it didn't, um, there was no negative impacts to the water, and you know, three years later, it's a much more thriving habitat with a really good diverse um number of plants and trees and stuff like that.

So, we're using that as a success story, and that's our goal to kind of reclaim these areas that are suffering from invasive species.

Well, thank you for that overview, and very well done.

Very well done.

Um, and I appreciate that because I think there is a lot of concern in the community when they hear about the chemical application that uh addresses some of these overgrown areas, and so to hear what the plan is, you know, the the um limited application that's gonna be used, not widespread, um, and the attentiveness that the city um is committing to um when it comes to impacts on uh the surrounding environment and and surrounding residents, I think is appreciated.

So thank you for that overview.

Um, and that's all I have.

Okay, thank you much.

Thank you.

Um Councilmember Adams.

Yeah, I just wanted to second uh councilwoman Parker's compliments for all that information.

I know that I had some of my own concerns and was hearing some of those from the community and was really um aided by your feedback in um also when I was able to speak to Casey Krause and other people about how the process would go and and hear about that specific example that I could completely um recognize on the banks of the Tennessee there.

So just want to echo those positive comments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any further questions or discussions?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Thank you, Miss Butzler.

130 is an ordinance to amend Chapter 19, Article 5 of the Knoxville City Code so as to prohibit prohibit the use of tobacco and vapor products in age stick restricted venues.

Is there a motion?

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Council members, there are some people signed up to speak, three in favor and three against.

We'll start with those signed up to speak in favor.

Um council member Parker.

Only three in favor and against.

Yep.

Okay.

Good to know.

Uh first is Jeremy Corvelis.

If you could uh approach the podium, turn the mic on and state your name and address for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes to address counsel.

We won't start the clock till the mic's on because it's not on yet.

If you could there you go, yeah.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Council members, for your time and service.

I am Jeremy Corvellis, chair of Smoke Free Knoxville, a volunteer community-driven coalition.

Would my so would the supporters of this ordinance please stand up?

Uh, we are here in support of this ordinance.

So, this is the hardest time in modern history to be an indie artist.

Modern musicians are up against Spotify and AI.

And in Knoxville, it seems that the number of small to medium stages decreases every year.

As Chattanooga and Nashville become more competitive for up-and-coming artists.

So, for musicians with chronic health issues like asthma for with asthma like myself, uh, or autoimmune diseases, histories of cancer, or those who want to quit smoking or avoid it for its known health risks.

This means our opportunities for gigs are even fewer.

In the 2020s, you got to get the job you can get.

Some have said they should just go somewhere else.

What about the bartender that gets pregnant?

What about the cook who gets diagnosed with emphysema?

Why do these people now have to quit their jobs in order to protect their health?

Especially in a country where health insurance is often tied to employment.

Uh in that situation, they can go somewhere else, means they deserve less protection.

Some have said this also limits freedom, but this ordinance does not ban smoking.

It does not force smokers to quit.

It just says they need to step outside for a little bit to protect those who don't smoke.

People also said seat belts are a restriction on freedom.

They said the same thing about age limits on alcohol sales and even drunk driving.

Uh, they uh but when the freedom to engage in one behavior infringes on the rights to health of another, our society has repeatedly chosen to protect the vulnerable.

This common sense policy is no different.

I sympathize greatly with those who are concerned about losing their routines, their smoking spaces for unwinding at the end of the day.

I hear you, these times are tough.

But again, your desire to have a smoke and drink with your friends will still be fulfilled.

This ordinance just makes it so that non-smokers can enjoy the same spaces that make the city special, whether it's a job, a gig, or just being invited by your friends.

Some have also says this jeopardizes businesses, but data from over 1,300 cities that have gone smoke-free, including Asheville, Atlanta, Birmingham, Nashville, Lexington, and New Orleans, which just celebrated 10 years going smoke free.

None have reported negative economic outcomes.

And in fact, decades of research show that business expenses decrease and customer numbers increase.

If anything, this ordinance makes our scruffy pubs more competitive with the larger, newer venues.

Our culture is not defined by cigarettes, it's community.

It's live music, conversation, local brews, darts, pool, conversations, shared experiences.

This ordinance is a balanced measure to protect public health, strengthen local businesses, and protect the workers who make these places special.

Smokers will still have the freedom to smoke, but with this ordinance, non-smokers will never have to risk their own health for a paycheck.

And I'd like to submit our partner sign on letter with our numerous uh affiliate organizations.

Thank you.

You can bring that up to the city recorder here if you want.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh while he's bringing that, um, next person signed up to speak in favor of this item is Michael Holtz.

Mr.

Holtz, if you could come to the podium, state your name and address for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes to address counsel.

Good evening.

My name is Michael Holtz.

I live at 4557 Twin Pines, Drive in the great city of Knoxville.

Um I lived in Knoxville for 34 years.

I'm also a fourteen-year survivor of stage three erectile cancer.

I'm here today because I believe the time for Knoxville to pass a comprehensive smoke-free ordinance and make all public places and workplaces smoke-free.

The time is now.

I can tell you from experience that you don't want any part of that.

I have a permanent colostomy and neuropathy in my feet that is only gonna get worse as I age, all from treatment for colorectal cancer.

I'm here today to serve as a cautionary tale to do everything we can to reduce everyone's cancer risk.

Exposure to secondhand smoke is a preventable cause of cancer.

We have known this for decades.

Today, people under age 50 are being diagnosed with cancer at increasing rates.

Fourteen types of cancer, including breast and colorectal, are on the rise among people under the age of 50.

These are our bartenders, our musicians, our waiters and waitresses, security personnel, kitchen staff, and others who are exposed to secondhand smoke in their workplaces.

I've been a cancer advocate for more than 24 years.

I've lost count of the people under age 50 I have known, loved, and lost to cancer, leaving behind devastated children, spouses, and families.

We don't entirely know why this is happening.

But we know that there are things that we can do to reduce cancer risk, like pass comprehensive smoke-free ordinances that protect every worker in every workplace from exposure to secondhand smoke.

Becky Siegel, cancer epidemiologist for the American Cancer Society, said at a congressional research briefing earlier this year that the rates of colorectal cancer among young people will continue to rise until we as a nation decide that it's time to do something about it.

I'm not here tonight to speak to what we can do as a country, but I have some ideas.

What I do need to say is in Knoxville, we can do this and reduce people's risk for cancer.

Thank you.

Next person signed up to speak in favor of this item is Kayla Smith.

Kayla Smith, if you'd come up to the podium, state your name and address for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes to address counsel.

Yeah, if Mr.

Frost will come get that, or Miss Middlebrook will get it.

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name is Kayla Smith, and I live at 704 West Hills Road in the city of Knoxville.

Um, chairs, mayor, and members of city council, thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

The American Heart Association strongly supports smoke-free indoor air policies because they are grounded in decades of peer-reviewed scientific evidence.

Smoking remains a leading cause of preventable death in the United States, and its health impact extends far beyond the individual who smokes.

Exposure to secondhand smoke causes serious and immediate harm to the cardiovascular system.

According to the American Heart Association, more than 480,000 people die each year in the United States due to cigarette smoking.

And over 41,000 of those deaths occur among non-smokers that are exposed to second-hand smoke.

In Tennessee, more than 11,000 adults die from smoking related illnesses each year, and these deaths are preventable.

There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke.

Smoke-free indoor error policies are proven to improve heart health outcomes at the community level.

And this ordinance is not about restricting choice, but is rather about creating environments that support healthier lifestyles for everyone, including hospitality workers, musicians, and the people that frequent the businesses.

Across the country, progress has been made.

Comprehensive smoke-free laws are now in place in more than a thousand cities, protecting approximately two-thirds of the U.S.

population.

These policies are widely supported and successfully implemented in cities large and small.

The proposed ordinance aligns with priorities in the 2023 abridged community health assessment, which highlights chronic disease prevention, improved air quality, and identifies tobacco use as one of the top five health issues impacting our community.

Published by the Knox County Health Department, the assessment guides the community health council in creating the community health improvement plan to improve health across Knox County.

The community health council has representatives that are appointed by this city council from the city of Knoxville, Knox County, and the town of Farragut, showing municipal support for smoke-free environments already exists.

This legislation is evidence-based, consistent with national best practices, and focused on protect protecting public health.

The American Heart Association respectfully urges the city council to support this measure.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Now we will switch over to the people who signed up to speak against this item.

First is Houston Forge.

Forge.

If you could come to the podium, state your name and address for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes to address council.

Name's Houston Forge.

I live at 8123 Taswell Pike, Corrington, Tennessee.

And although I don't live in Knoxville, I spend a lot of taxable money at these establishments.

Since I've lived here, I moved here in 2019, and in that time, Knoxville has become drastically more expensive.

Rent, housing, food, and gas prices are through the roof.

The cost of living keeps climbing while wages lag behind.

People are stressed, overworked, and getting squeezed from every direction.

And for a lot of us, these bars are not just businesses, they are places where people decompress, socialize, and support local culture after long weeks.

And for these businesses that are already struggling with inflation, rising operating costs, labor shortages, and an increasingly difficult economy, policies like this could absolutely push some smaller neighborhood bars over the edge.

And I'm not talking about the huge venues that are packed wall to wall every weekend.

I'm talking about the local hole-in-the-wall places like Marie's or Stillhouse Tavern that are operating on barely 1,000 square feet of real estate.

These are the businesses that are you are hurting, not the big music video.

And small bars like this will not survive this policy.

When a local business suffers, Knoxville's economy suffers with them.

In a little over a week, I've personally started and collected a petition with more than 2200 signatures opposing this proposal from Knoxville residents and patrons from the surrounding communities who regularly spend money in this city.

The only time that I have had to collect these signatures is on the weekends, and if this vote hadn't been rushed, I would have brought you 22,000.

I want to make something very clear.

The number one thing I've heard from people signing this petition is I don't smoke, but people should have the freedom to choose.

Many of the people signing simply believe that adults should be trusted to make their own decision, and business owners should have the right to decide what kind of environment that they operate.

Now I'd like to talk about the inconsistencies here.

We are being told that this proposal is about health and worker safety, yet certain establishments like cigar bars and specially licensed businesses may still be allowed to permit indoor smoking through exemptions.

And if the indoor smoking is truly unacceptable in every setting, then why are exceptions being carved out for some businesses while others are punished?

That is not equal treatment.

Knoxville has countless smoke-free establishments.

No one is forced to enter a smoking bar, and people already have the freedom to choose where they go.

And this proposal removes that freedom.

I urge this council to reconsider before lasting damage is done to small businesses that may not survive another major hit.

This is not balanced, this is not fairness, and this is not good for Knoxville's local businesses and economy.

And the last thing I'd like to leave this council with is the voices of this fine city.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next person signed up to speak is Chris Watson.

Chris Watson, if you could come to the podium, and state your name and address for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes to address counsel.

My name is Chris Watson.

I live at 2239 Lawson Avenue, Knoxville.

Thank you, mayor.

Thank you, Council.

I'm speaking on behalf of myself, the customers I serve, smokers and non-smokers, and other service industry workers that can't be here tonight.

I'm a born and raised Knoxvillean, musician, and bartender.

I work at Knoxville's longest running smoking bar, a local institution.

I also support and volunteer with community health programs and mutual aid projects.

While I understand the stated intention and goals of this proposed ordinance, I urge you to vote against it, banning tobacco and vapor use in age-restricted venues.

I believe in science and understand the harms associated with smoking and vape use intimately.

My father died from lung cancer at 51 years old.

However, I believe personal choice is the primary concern here.

We can't legislate our way, forcing people to make healthier personal decisions.

This proposal strips private business owners of their right to decide how to operate.

Small business owners bear the compliance costs and the risk of these rules.

The concern becomes in which other part of our private lives will the government intervene.

Second, this ordinance removes the ability of consenting adults to make their own decisions about where to spend time and money.

Patrons who prefer smoking friendly venues do so knowingly.

Most seek it out, even from out of state visitors.

For non-smoking customers, there are ample alternatives.

Smoke free restaurants, bars, and entertainment venues already exist and will continue to coexist with businesses that cater to other preferences.

Workers and employers do acknowledge risks.

No one is being forced to work in a smoking environment.

Businesses that permit on-site tobacco or vape use are already complying with existing regulations and provide ventilation and notice to customers.

The financial consequences of this narrow ban would fall disproportionately on a handful of local businesses and their employees.

Reduced patronage could lead to lower revenues, lost hours, layoffs, and closures.

We can't afford to lose the spaces to sustain businesses, communities, and jobs.

These losses ripple through the local economy and reduce taxes to support city services.

These aren't big box corporate businesses.

We're the local neighborhood watering holes that provide a space for our customers.

Not only do we generate tax revenue for the city, we create and maintain unique establishments that make Knoxville what it is.

I believe council should prioritize urgent public health challenges that have a broader impact across our city, like expanding access to affordable housing and making health care affordable and accessible for all.

For these reasons, to defend private business autonomy, preserve adult choice, acknowledge informed worker and patron decision making, and to avoid concentrated economic harm while focusing our resources on larger public health priorities.

I respectfully ask you to reject this ordinance.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The Mr.

Forge, I don't know if you had something you wanted to deliver a petition or something.

If you do, you can bring that up to bring that up to the city recorder here.

Um, meantime, the third and final speaker uh signed up to speak in opposition to this is Paul Smith.

Mr.

Smith, if you could come to the podium, thank you.

Uh, state your name and address for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes to address counsel.

Yes, it's Paul Smith, 2201, Bishop's Bridge Road, Knoxville.

Members of City Council, I uh I own one of the few small Knoxville bars that allow smoking.

Just one more bar and grill just outside in West Knoxville.

Around 12 businesses are being told they might have to ban smoking, which they allowed since opening.

80% of my patrons are smokers.

My business is situated in a shopping center, which means I cannot create a patio area or allow smokers to step outside the front door to light up.

I have invested so far in two smoke filtration devices and plan to install more to make all of my patrons feel comfortable.

Small bars allowing allow smoke based on personal freedom of choice.

Having worked in bars and restaurants since I was 18, so 20 years or so, I have never had employees or patrons complain about the smoky atmosphere because they want it.

Hundreds of restaurants, bars, and breweries in Knoxville don't allow smoking, which offers employees and patrons many opportunities to work in and enjoy a smoke-free area.

Among the 12 small businesses that allow smoking in Knoxville, only a few offer live music options.

More than 40 non-smoking venues in Knoxville host live music every week, which provides ample opportunities for musicians who want or need to avoid smoke to find work.

Before booking a new act myself, I always advise all the people that my bar does allow smoking.

So if they want to back out, there is no repercussions necessary.

Only two bands have turned me down due to health concerns.

The rest say they choose to play at my establishment, not because they are desperate for a gig, but because they do enjoy the atmosphere and camaraderie, camaraderie they find there.

The proposed legislation will only affect businesses within city limits, meaning that a bar a couple miles down the road from me could continue to allow smoking because they are in the county, which would pull and divert my business to others and hurt me to survive.

It would also require costly changes on our part regarding interior infrastructure that we just can't afford right now.

How is it fair to create such a disparity between small businesses based on where they lie according to city limits?

There are a number of pressing issues in our city that need resolution before we consider measures that will harm small local businesses.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Council that concludes.

People signed up to speak on this item.

Councilmember Helsley.

Thank you, Mayor.

Before us is a pro-health, no cost ordinance to act on a state law change that returns autonomy to our local government.

The 2007 statewide non-smoker protection act removed indoor smoking from any workplace for almost everyone.

Almost all of us are guaranteed a smoke-free workplace.

The 21 plus venues are outliers.

We have an opportunity for leadership to support community health outcomes by closing a loophole on workplace protections.

We can expand the same protections given to everyone else in 2007.

I remember when those changes happened at my work.

This is a common sense change observed by over 1,300 cities, whole states, and entire countries.

Cities across Kentucky, Ohio, South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Louisiana all limit smoking in all venues.

I think that's just the southern states, by the way.

Sorry.

Business is better, their clientele increased.

College cities with young workers and patrons commonly have smoke-free businesses across the board.

From Athens, Georgia to Bloomington, Indiana, and beyond.

This ordinance is not a smoking ban.

It does not prohibit smoking on patios of public businesses.

This will not impact retail establishments that sell tobacco, cigar, or vape products.

There is an important point though I'd like to address.

In 2007, just about every workplace went straight smoke free across the state.

That TVA employees, construction workers, law offices, grocery store workers, you name it, pick any employee group.

Almost all workplaces are smoke-free, but the 21 plus venues.

From the guy washing dishes, the bartender to the delivery guy to the musician at a gig or the person working on repairs after hours.

Even KPD city cadets visit back to back-to-back bars doing beer inspections.

Knox County employees visit them as well.

Exposure to secondhand smoke for an entire work shift day after day may seem harmless, everything seems harmless until you get a diagnosis.

Secondhand smoke causes many preventable illnesses and deaths.

That's why we've banned smoking in virtually every other workplace.

There shouldn't be a different standard for some employee groups.

No job is more important than another.

No employees' health is less valuable than another.

And overall, these employees are often younger and under or uninsured.

I'm proud to bring forth this legislation for a variety of reasons.

Most simply it's a public health issue.

Some things are the right thing to do.

Going outside to smoke is the right thing to do.

As a former smoker and two-time quitter, I did share of my smoking outside.

A lot of it.

I feel strongly about this.

Protecting people is simple and easy.

You step outside, you have your cigarette, and the collective public health is better for it.

The dangers of secondhand smoke don't need to be belabored here.

We've heard them for years, all the way back to the 1960s.

There's been a lot of impact to curb secondhand smoke, but our doctors and caregivers tell us it's just not enough.

The guy with asthma, the child who lost a family member to cancer, the longtime bar employee that gets emphysema.

It's as easy as taking a cigarette outside.

That's the standard in every other workplace in thousands of cities across this most states.

16 organizations and countless physicians and health care practitioners requested this ordinance change, just to name a few: the American Heart Association, Metro Drug Coalition, Musicians for a for a smoke-free, I think Knoxville or whatever, Prevention Alliance of Tennessee, Knox Music Coalition, Arts and Alliance Arts and Culture Alliance, sorry, American Cancer Society, Knoxville, Knox County Community Health Council, and the American Long Association of Tennessee.

This ordinance is about everyone in and around existing or future businesses, not any specific venue, it's a nonpartisan issue.

Cancer, asthma, emphysema, and other diseases do not care how you vote.

This ordinance is unequivocally not anti-business.

It's supported by decades of data pointing to increased customer base and cleaner air for everyone.

Lost productivity from cigarette smoking cost us over $92 billion a year.

Employees in smoking establishments get sick twice as often and have higher health care costs.

The EPA estimates that smoking establishments pay about $200 per 1,000 square feet more in cleaning and maintenance cost, and on top of that, insurance premiums are higher.

This is sound pro business, public health policy.

Lexington, Louisville, Atlanta and New Orleans paved the way and show us how you can have dive bars and take the cigarettes outside.

Several local bar owners have told the media or individuals that this will be good for their business that many turn away when they find out that smoking is permitted indoors.

This is a reasonable step forward for Knoxville.

This is common sense policy that helps people.

It's not only good policy, but it's the right thing to do.

This ordinance does not prohibit smoking, nor is it a moral judgment against those who choose to smoke.

It simply recognizes that one person's choice to smoke indoors directly affects the health and working conditions of others sharing the same space.

And if someone would like to smoke, they can simply step outside.

Smoke-free indoor environments are increasingly a basic quality of life expectation.

Most other cities have already adopted comprehensive indoor smoking bans with bipartisan support.

In fact, smoke-free indoor laws are now the norm across the country.

Knoxville is the outlier.

I thank my colleagues for the time to speak on this.

I hope you will join me in supporting this public health measure, and I also want to thank the community members and health care professionals for their support as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember DeBartlebin.

Debbie, thank you for your comments.

I'll be voted against the ordinance.

I'm glad that we get to speak.

So I will be voted against the ordinance, and I'll hear a few thoughts on why.

Is a good law on the books that allows patrons over 21 years of age and private business owners to make choices.

It successfully eliminated smoking in all workplaces, like offices, and in places like Cracker Barrel, Waffle House, and most city bars.

In yesterday's Knox News, their article, they were able to identify 10 at 21 and over bars that still allow smoking, and that was what they identified, and only one of which has regular live music.

Second reason, whether there are 10 or 14 of these establishments within city limits, the arguments for the ban rely on many false tropes.

False tropes are narrative devices or plot points that are misleading, overused to the point of cliche, or based on misconceptions designed to set up a specific expectation.

And again, I'll read from yesterday's uh Knox News.

Why ban smoking?

Advocates say it's a public health and workers' rights issue.

Lack smoking regulations prevent performers and service workers from finding jobs, they say.

Quote: As a musician with asthma, smoking significantly impacts where I'm able to get work.

Indoor smoking is an outdated, unfashionable, and disgusting public health risk that needs to be thrown out once and for all.

Because with only really one truly indoor smoking venue that regularly offers live music, it does not affect the majority of musicians.

That same venue, the Press Pub also has a sister music venue that is smoke-free next door called Scruffy City Hall.

There's also a reason why several bartenders and servers who actually do work in these venues have emailed us, they've spoken actively against this smoking ban.

They choose to work in these places, and they enjoy working in these places.

So the reason reasoning in favor of this ban is full of false tropes.

Thirdly, the balance between personal liberty and public health should be taken seriously and reserved for serious issues that actually have significant impact.

Like the measures required during the pandemic that we all experienced.

And I'm going to read that again.

The balance between personal liberty and public health should be taken seriously and reserved for serious issues that actually have significant impact.

I believe that this ban is a token jester, and that token gestures erode the people's trust in this body to make meaningful judgments on behalf of our city.

Fourth, I have a guiding principle.

I moved to Knoxville from that city on the other side of the plateau, so I didn't have to follow the dress code.

This ordinance originated with lobbyists in Nashville, where there are actually are many.

We just heard 56 smoking venues that have live music, and where musicians actually make their full-time living off that music and not just play the occasional gig.

Knox will, that's not our experience.

And so again, that principle is don't Nashville or Knoxville.

Fifth and finally, the few smoking establishments we have are third places.

As third places, they provide real community for a small number of Knoxvilleans.

I believe the mental health benefits of these communities are significant.

Some may believe that, again, I quote, indoor smoking is an outdated, unfashionable and discussing health risks that needs to be thrown out once and for all.

I beg to differ.

Yesterday afternoon I made a visit to Marie's old town in the fourth district, Full Town Tavern.

At one o'clock, there were seven regulars inside.

They're in their 70s and 80s.

Four of them were drinking $2 light beers, three were drinking sodas.

No one was drinking liquor because Murray chooses not to serve liquor.

She gladly points people down to the corner lounge down the street if they want liquor, and she does the same if they don't want to enter a smoking bar.

Marie tells me that this first wave of regulars sits and talks together until around 3 p.m.

each day and then heads home.

I believe that this daily experience enriches their lives and supports their mental health.

I stand with Marie and the seven beautiful souls.

Excuse me, I saw her serve yesterday.

Again, I believe that the 2007 non-smokers protection act is a good law on the books, allowing patrons over 21 years of age and private business owners to make choices.

It's a solid balance between personal liberty and public health.

And so I beseech my colleagues to vote against this ordinance.

Thank you.

Okay.

Council uh member Grant and then Vice Mayor Fiugan.

I think this is one of those issues.

That's somewhat of a no-brainer when it comes to public health.

You have workers and customers who should be able to enjoy a night out without being forced to inhale smoke or anything of that matter.

Um we know the long-term health impacts are real, and you do have cities across the country who you know who have already adopted and moved in this direction with success.

At the end of the day, protecting public health should always matter, especially for employees who spend hours every day in these environments.

At the same time, I also have to think about small business owners, especially neighborhood bars, establishments that have operated in certain ways for years.

Many of these businesses are already dealing with rising costs, staffing shortages, inflation, and economic uncertainty.

Change like this can impact customer habits, staffing, overall revenue, and that reality matters too, and we cannot ignore the concerns that we already have with small local business owners who help keep the Knoxville economy moving.

I also believe that adults should have the freedom to make personal choices, including the choice to smoke.

This ordinance is not about attacking smokers or acting as if the government should control any personal decisions people make.

Okay, motion to amend uh the effective date to January 1st of 2027 has been made.

Is there a second to that motion to amend?

Okay, motion to amend has been made and seconded about the date change.

Is there any discussion?

Several people's lights are on.

Do you want to discuss the amendment?

Yes.

Okay.

Uh Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

Um, one of the questions I was gonna ask, I mean, I I agree with everything Mr.

Grant said.

Uh Councilmember Grant said, because as a daughter of an entrepreneur, um, I understand how your whole life and financial world is tied into your business.

I also understand the other side of the health risk and people who work there.

I do think asking people to change their business model rather quickly in ninety days is an undue hardship if you want to meet the greater good of actually having this work.

I understand some of it's ripping off the band-aid, but um trying to change your business model um may take some adjustment and getting customers used to the idea.

So um I understand it's as simple as step outside and smoke.

I was raised by two smokers, sister smoked, only person in the household that did not.

Um they learned to step outside, so it can be done.

Um so I'm not making a judgment on that, but I I will support your motion to extend the adoption time to allow for a little more time to plan, and if um changes to infrastructure have to be made, um, it gives some people the time to figure that out.

Thank you.

Councilmember Honeycutt.

Thank you.

Uh a lot of great discussion here tonight among you know all of our council members and the community.

Uh thank you for coming out and and expressing your opinions for both sides.

That really does help inform the greater conversation about Knoxville.

Uh you know, I'm not gonna lie, this is a hard one for me.

Uh I am a big believer in personal freedoms and I'm a local business owner.

So I understand, you know, the hardships of trying to run your own business.

Uh it is, you know, in looking at both sides uh to to this particular argument, you know, I do think it is also interesting for both sides that, you know, this by my calculations only affects about two percent of the restaurants uh and bars in this city.

So 98% it does not.

But you know, we do come together as a community uh to agree from time to time to give up certain personal freedoms for the greater good.

Uh, you know, I, for instance, can drink alcohol, but I cannot drink and drive because drinking and driving uh you know, could harm not just myself but other people.

And so I think that you know, in this instance, um, because it is a narrow proposal and only affects a couple businesses, uh, it also you know does not affect tobacco-driven businesses like uh cigar bars and uh vape shops, and uh I've also looked at like our comp sorry, our competitive uh competitor communities, the communities we compete against for businesses and tourism, so like Greenville, South Carolina, Lexington, Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, they all adopted this many, many years ago.

So for those reasons, I will be supporting this ordinance today, but I totally agree in giving the business uh culture an opportunity, a much longer runway to adapt and and and make their businesses profitable going forward.

So I agree with the extension.

Thank you.

Councilmember Adams and then Council Member Parker.

Uh thank you.

And uh I appreciate the comments from Councilman Grant and the idea of the extension.

I only want uh just to share in dialogue, because I got um some comments today about this idea from a constituent and in thinking about it, um one of my concerns, understanding the business um concern that you expressed is thinking about the population of the city and what happens in the next 90 days, which is we have a number of persons who will be returning to the city to the university, um, and persons who have never been here before, who are coming to the university, who will have their first experience um in our bars and restaurants, et cetera.

Um, so if we do enact this and it happens in the next 90 days, we're kind of starting from a clean slate from that perspective, um, as opposed to having those populations come experience one scenario for six months or four months and then starting in January.

That's my only kind of comment back to that starting period is thinking about how our city changes in that period of time and would it be easier for some of them to actually start with uh with a university that's starting on that 90 day schedule.

Councilmember Parker.

Thank you, Mayor.

I am not in favor of this ordinance, um, and so I'm not in favor of the delayed implementation, and I appreciate the comments shared by Councilmember DeBartelatum and agreed with what he shared.

When this issue came on our agenda, I researched other cities and what other cities have done, and found that ours was a more restrictive ordinance that was being brought forward.

Um it includes retail vapor stores, but it doesn't include vape lounges as an exemption, for instance.

And we know there's a uh thriving business in North Knoxville that is recently established with that very purpose.

Um, as has been mentioned, we also have uh long established uh bars uh like Marie's uh um where you might go in in the afternoon and and find Marie uh working there, one employee, these are not uh uh large establishments, so any sort of exemption for um for bars that did not have employees, um hookah bars, hookah bars, um, in my experience uh over the last 20 years have been an opportunity to have a cultural experience that that now is being uh taken away.

And then there's the hemp-derived cannabinoid businesses uh that are new to our state.

Uh, Nashville includes an exemption for those, and our ordinance does not.

Uh, so I'm not sure um this has all come before us so quickly.

I don't understand uh why you know this is a more strict ordinance uh in comparison to other cities.

Uh, but at the same time, what but public forum speakers said in terms of uh the exemptions and the reasoning behind the uh ordinance conflict with each other.

Um it doesn't really make sense to have an exemption for cigar bars and retail stores if the concern is is a public health concern.

Um so I I agree with my colleague that the arguments um uh have not been convincing as to why this is needed.

Um there is no proposal on the floor to um you know send this to a workshop so we can have a better understanding.

We've had different numbers even tonight shared about how many businesses would be impacted.

Um, concerned that we are um uh willing to make a decision tonight that could have some negative impacts, and I agree not only on the businesses, but on some folks' sense of community, and these are hard times.

Um, I tell you, when this ordinance came forward, I was trying to think about how we as a city could respond to the voter disenfranchisement that we're seeing at the state level, and just feeling under attack constantly.

And then this comes forward, and it's you know, a handful of businesses that would be impacted, but a handful of businesses that provide a refuge for some folks in this city to build community and to get away from the madness that is this state.

And it just breaks my heart that this is what we are focusing on right now, uh, with all that's going on in our state and in our world.

Um without some sort of amendments to this ordinance that would make it a bit more targeted and not um not try to eliminate all 21 and uh establishments other than cigar bars and and these retail tobacco stores that are protected by Tennessee state law.

Um I I'm not in support of it.

So I wish the conversation was about amending the ordinance and not just taking it as is, if this has the support for it to move forward.

Thank you, Councilmember Lloyd.

Uh yes, as we very well know, second-hand smoke has been um a proven issue for probably five decades at least.

Uh I personally have lost many, many friends and some relatives to various health issues that connected with smoking.

In the last couple of days, I've received literally a book of emails, almost overwhelmingly in favor of this.

Um, I think if if we pass this ordinance and we rescue, perhaps rescues were not the right word, but rescue one person, one young person from cancer in 20 years.

I think it's worth the issue the uh the effort.

So I will definitely be voting in favor of it.

Thank you.

Uh council members.

The motion before you is to amend the original motion to uh the effective date of January 1st, 2027.

Is there any further question or discussion on the motion to amend?

Seeing none, all those in favor of this amendment please say aye.

Any opposed?

Opposed.

Motion to amend the date carries seven, two.

Now back to the original motion as amended.

Any further discussion on the motion as amended?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries seven, two.

Thank you.

That is first reading.

Okay.

13P is an ordinance approving the request of MACCO affordable housing for an amendment to the east city sector plan from other open space to medium density residential for property located at 4524, 4528, and 4534 in Nora Road, leaving all specials purpose land use classifications unchanged, fourth district.

Second.

Motion made to approve.

Yes, and second, it's been motion that's been made and seconded.

Yeah.

What's the question?

Okay.

Um, council members.

This motion has been made and seconded.

We do have two people signed up to speak in favor uh and or available for questions.

Uh Benjamin Mullins.

Did you want to uh just give an overview of this or did you want to just make sure council knows you're available to to answer questions?

You have a please state your name and address for the record.

You have up to three minutes to address council.

Thank you.

Uh Ben Mullins, 550 West Main Street here for for the applicant.

I think most of you are familiar with this project, you've had an opportunity to talk to uh several of us uh about it and visit the property.

You know, it is uh a sector plan, one-year plan amendment from OS to NBR and a zoning from RN1 to RN5 on Nora Road uh for some uh yeah, some low-income tax credit affordable housing, approximately 180 units, uh, which includes 60 mainstream vouchers for ADA permitted supportive housing.

Um, you know, it's a uh part of the the city that is uh underutilized.

Um, there are some environmental uh constraints with it.

Uh there's some hillside issues there, although it does look like about 11 acres of that property had been disturbed back in the 1980s for a borrow pit for the expansion for 640.

That would be exempt from the hillside.

We're still working on our final building footprint.

We think we may need to use, you know, six, seven acres of it for the footprint and the balance of it.

We're committed to putting to a conservation easement.

It reminds me of a similar project we had on merchants where we were able to develop the front part of the the property for some affordable housing and the back part of it.

I think we're able to reserve as a conservation easement.

I think there's an opportunity to do that here, and we're certainly very supportive of that.

Uh, you know, I know Nora Road's a narrow road as well, and that's gonna need to be uh addressed during permitting as to what improvements may need to be had there.

Uh I've got the uh the proprietor of of Matt Cohere can answer questions.

He has been engaged with uh the neighborhood specifically the Baptist Church as an area.

They had some questions and concerns, and he's working with them, so he makes sure that gets addressed in the permitting as as well.

So I think this makes a lot of sense.

There's a lot of benefits to this.

I think this is a good location to put something like this.

I think it's uh uh remarkable uh to note that this is you know affordable housing project.

Yeah, we've through this entire project.

We've had zero comments in opposition, no one speaking any of these meetings in opposition.

So I think that speaks to uh the both the need and the appropriate location for this.

So all that said, we're happy to answer any questions and and continue this conversation, but ask that you approve both the sector plan, the one-year plan amendment, and the rezoning for planning commission's recommendations.

Thank you all very much.

Thank you, Mr.

Mullins.

Um, Mr.

Abhishek Mateur, would you like to uh speak to council?

Okay, he just wanted to let council know he's available for questions.

He's the property owner represented by Mr.

Mullins.

That concludes the people signed up to speak on item 12p.

Uh, council member Parker.

Uh thanks, Mayor.

I'm in support of this project.

Um I and I appreciate the conversation that took place at the planning commission and helped my understanding a bit as well.

Um, and and I did have opportunity to visit the project um and get a better understanding of the property.

And uh this is an area where there is already um an area kind of leveled out for development along this ridge.

Um my only question was around the road improvements that I agree are needed, and uh was maybe engineering.

I'm not sure who could speak to during that permitting process.

Uh uh what what discussions take place regarding road infrastructure?

So with a with a uh project this size, there'll be a traffic impact analysis required, and that traffic impact analysis will identify any deficiencies or you think needs to be brought up to to the specific any current specifications.

And then if the deficiencies are discovered, who would be responsible for addressing them?

Um the developer.

Yes.

We don't have a lot of extra funds to do the many, many pressing needs, so uh those would be on the developer.

Okay.

Um this is something that the developer is aware of and committed to yes, that traffic impact uh studies is in that process.

So perfect.

All right, those are all the questions I have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Vice Mayor Fugit.

Thank you.

I would like to amend the motion to include um 12 P Q and R.

Okay.

Will you accept my amendment, Ms.

Hillsley?

Okay, motion has been made to consolidate items 13 P Q and R into one consolidated item.

That motion has been made and seconded.

Any questions or discussion on this motion to consolidate?

Seeing seeing none, let's just vote on that consolidation.

Then I'll call you for your substantive comments.

All those in favor of this consolidation, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion to consolidate carries now back to the consolidated motion.

Council member Grant.

Yeah, I just want to speak on this.

I had opportunity to visit the site as well.

And um, you know, there was a lot of drug activity in this particular area.

Um there was also a couple homicides in recent years.

Um just with having you know homeless people in things in this area.

So I think it's a real good thing.

Um that we had MACCO coming in just to be able to create more uh housing and housing for our seniors too.

I think that was really the big thing for me is the additional uh ADA units for for our seniors.

Thank you.

Councilmember Thomas.

Yes, one of the things that make me comfortable in uh supporting this is just the scale.

Uh I did walk the property with the developer.

He answered all my questions.

The footprint is going to be relatively small in regard to the full amount of property.

Uh most of the property will remain natural.

And then uh I think the developer's plans is to make um a significant amount of walking space for the residents, and which will of course be more or less natural area.

So the scale of of what's being built on and what's being left, um, I just thought it was a good balance, so I can support it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any further questions or comments?

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

13 S is an ordinance to change the base zoning classification of property located at 2018 Flegler Road from RN1 district to RN2 district.

Christy Gettelman applicant, 5th district.

Motion made to approve and second it.

Any questions or discussion?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

13 Z is an ordinance approving the request of Sean Smith for an ordinance for an amendment to the Northwest City Sector Plan from medium density residential to general commercial for property located at 4601 and 4605 Western Avenue, leaving all special purpose land use classifications unchanged.

And mayor I pulled these off of the consent agenda, and now I'd like to make a motion to combine all three items.

Okay.

Motion's been made to consolidate items Z AA and AB.

Has been made and seconded.

Does everyone understand the motion to consolidate?

Any questions or discussion on the motion to consolidate?

Seeing none, all those in favor of this motion, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion to consolidate carries.

Ms.

Parker.

Did you want to speak to the item?

I did.

I did not make a motion pertaining to this item.

Okay.

Well, it's a land use item.

So I think according to council's rules, we can discuss it before a motion is on the floor.

All right.

Um, okay.

Okay, go ahead, please.

You have five up to five minutes.

Okay.

I mean, it's an unfortunate rule.

I'll talk about that another day, but um I wanted to talk about this Western Avenue property, and I think maybe Director Brooks are you perhaps the only one here.

Um, I found the uh conversation at planning interesting for this piece of property because it's a small strip of property along Western Avenue being changed to highway commercial.

Uh the rest of the property along Western Avenue around this property is highway commercial, so it's uh just an extension, but uh I found the conversation interesting because the planning commission was acknowledging there's not much room for development.

So, but what I didn't get a good sense of is um approving this rezoning with the hillside protections in place, could still allow for uh a certain amount of blasting and a retainer wall put in if a development went in.

Is it are you are you able to speak to that at all?

Director Brooks, Amy Brooks, Knoxmarks County Planning.

Um yes, they would still have to comply with the hillside um section of the code.

I'm not sure, I can't speak to what the applicant wants to do with the property, but you are correct.

There was discussion about um there is access to the property.

There's a flatter portion where I think a residence has been historically.

Um but again, I I can't speak to what exactly they they plan on doing.

Um they would have to go through the proper permitting in order to do any kind of blasting, and then of course to build a retaining wall and get their access approved.

Who is our resident hillside protection expert in the city?

Who would that be?

Ms.

Parker, I don't know if we have a single one.

I think there's a lot of people who are familiar with it.

Do you have a particular question?

Just when an item like this one comes before us and we say, okay, it has hillside protections, but I want to know exactly what are they able to do, even with those hillside protections in place.

Who can I speak to about that?

I think Director Brooks would be our first stop.

We do run a slope analysis for any property that is located within the hillside protection area, and so uh then it, you know, in terms of permitting, um, you know, there are a number of people different people that touch this, but again, it depends on what they're going to do.

Um, so there might be stormwater who might weigh in, um, there might be um folks from you know, transportation engineering who would get engaged.

It really just depends on exactly what they're planning on doing.

And is it the when does the slope analysis take place?

Um for a rezoning, we'll do that in the beginning, like when someone submits an application, or if they're just exploring development potential, we'll do it um if they request it.

But that's not included with uh the review of the rezoning.

It is so we have um as part of the case file a slope analysis that's included that goes to planning commission.

Okay, so let's talk about the slope analysis because numbers in a chart aren't gonna make sense to me.

But what does make sense to me is um essentially the conversation that took place at planning is their ability to uh you know blast into the side of this hill and put up a retaining wall.

Uh I know that you know there's certain percent of the hillside that would have to be protected, certain parts that wouldn't have to be, so based on the percentage of the hillside that would need to be protested, how likely is it that they would be able to blast into this hillside to increase their development area?

They are given as part of this analysis what's called a recommended disturbance budget.

Um, so that identifies uh an acreage or what percentage of the hillside they can disturb.

Again, without a plan, I you know, I don't know that we can speak to it.

And it actually wouldn't be our office who would determine what you know how that blasting would take place or you know what other um considerations would need to be um made before they received a permit.

Which office would that be?

That would be plans review and inspections where they would go next.

Okay, that's interesting.

I'm inclined to vote uh similar to Commissioner Midas who uh voted against us because of the potential for you know future developments to uh to to come into this area of only with the aid of large retaining walls, and that did make me think about development in that area and and needing to understand the implications of our votes.

Uh this one I'm not so clear on, so I think I'll err on the side of caution and abstain on this one.

Okay.

Um just a reminder there's no current motion on the floor.

Karen uh can councilmember Adams, sorry.

And then it's okay.

Um I uh am assuming since this was on consent that uh we'll have a motion to uh approve, but given the opportunity to talk about it, knowing we'll have a second reading, I just wanted to um raise a question because when I looked at the case, um, just the proximity to uh LDR, it was a big jump from RN1 to CH1.

That's a big jump.

Um so I I will defer to the District Ref who's more familiar with this area, but just wanted to um I guess wave a lightly colored yellow flag of um of that big jump in this particular rezoning.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Honeycutt and then Housley.

Thank you.

Just two quick questions for planning.

Uh obviously this was uh recommended for approval by planning.

Can you just speak briefly to why it was recommended for approval?

Yes, so this one um was recommended for approval.

We look at the surrounding um zoning, the surrounding plan.

Um what we found was there are no apparent errors or omissions.

Um we found that it was compatible with the surrounding development and was an extension of the uh commercial develop commercially zoned property that was already in the area there.

Um and notice that you know along Western Avenue it primarily includes commercial developments with some vacant land, but no residential developments have occurred um in the immediate vicinity.

Thank you.

And then just to clarify on councilwoman Parker's questions, uh my understanding is there are no, I mean I I appreciate the the concern, but there are no current plans for you know blasting or retaining walls or whatever, that has to be done later, and it's so it's speculative at this point what may or may not happen.

Correct.

I'm not aware of any plans.

So and that and those plans will have to go before plant permitting and be evaluated at a later date.

Yes, they would go to permit.

If they become real.

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

Councilmember Housley.

Oh, I'm sorry, I'm done.

No audit.

Okay.

Councilmember Lloyd.

Uh I took a look at this project uh yesterday and after uh after putting an eye on it, it I agree with uh with the um planning commission.

Uh I did not see a problem with this uh the with the um decision that they had put forth.

Uh Western Avenue has some issues.

We have some steep ridges there.

We have some retaining walls a little further to the west.

Um but without plans, anything different uh than what I see right now.

I'll I'll find that I'm in agreement with the uh um with planning, so I'd like to go ahead and make a motion that we approve this as is second.

Okay, motion to approve has been made and seconded.

Councilmember Houseley, do you have any your lights still on?

Okay, that's okay.

Um motion on the floors to approve.

Any further questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries eight zero with one abstention.

Next item, please.

Oh that's it.

Okay.

Mr.

Rick Roach, are you present?

Rick Roach.

I do not see him present, so uh without objection, this meeting is adjourned.