Good evening, everybody.

It's six o'clock.

I'd like to call this meeting to order.

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

Please rise as you're able.

A time when the distance between a policy decision and a family's kitchen table grows dangerously short.

Ripple outward into the lives of residents who are stretching every dollar and delaying every expense just to make ends meet.

May the work we do here tonight reflect the weight of our duty as elected officials.

May we measure our success not by the ease of our decisions, but by the relief they bring to those who have the least margin for error.

Okay, Mr.

Johnson, would you please call roll?

Councilwoman Adams.

Councilman DeBarde Laban.

Here.

Councilman Grant.

Councilman Helsley?

Here.

Councilman Honeycutt.

Councilman Lloyd?

Here.

Councilwoman Parker.

Here.

And Councilman Thomas.

Eight members present, Mayor.

Okay, thank you.

Is there a motion on the minutes of the May 21st workshop?

Motion made to approve 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 May 26th regular meeting?

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Any questions or discussions?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Twelve J is a resolution honoring and recognizing Knoxville Community Media on the occasion of its 50th anniversary.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Um Council, does anyone want to speak to this?

Or do you want to vote?

We do have a speaker now.

Oh, is there a speaker?

Okay, sorry.

Jeff Talman is here to speak in favor.

Mr.

Talman, are you present?

Jeff Talman.

He is not present.

So that concludes the people signed up to speak to item 12J.

Councilmember, any discussion or comments?

Councilmember Thomas.

Yes, I would like to have my name added as a co-sponsor.

Okay.

Mr.

Johnson, would you please do that?

Any other questions or comments?

Councilmember Parker.

Um.

Yes, I would love to say a few words.

Um, I've had the privilege of serving on the board of directors for Knoxville Community Media in my role as a city council member for the last several years.

Um, and it has been a wonderful experience.

Um learning more about the work that Knoxville Community Media does uh and has done over the last 50 years and the direction uh that KCM is headed into the future, and it is an exciting direction, uh maintaining a commitment to giving residents uh in our community uh a space where their voice can be heard, a space where we can uh exercise our First Amendment rights, a space where uh our local citizens are able to learn more about their local government uh and get more involved.

And this resolution tonight is an effort to not only uh recognize that work but reinforce the importance of Knoxville Community Media as we move into the next 50 years of this organization.

So I hope my colleagues will join me tonight in approving this resolution, and uh we will present it to uh the staff of Knoxville Community Media.

Okay, thank you so much.

Any other comments?

Councilmember Thomas.

Yes, the news media is often called uh fourth branch of government for good reason, and it surely is.

So we need to do what we can to support and protect it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Ms.

Parker, did you potentially have a correction to make re amendment?

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you so much.

Um, and because we are presenting uh this resolution tonight rather than dropping it in the mail uh to Knoxville Community Media, we have have to follow a small technicality, um, and amend this resolution to add the following language.

Um I'm gonna move to strike out section four of the resolution and add the following as a new section.

The city recorder is directed to prepare an appropriate copy of this resolution, this fancy thing here, for presentation with this final clause omitted from such copy and to renumber the sections accordingly.

Okay, that's a motion to make that amendment has been made.

There's a second.

Any questions or discussions seeing none?

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

Any opposed?

The amendment carries.

Now, shall we vote on the um resolution?

All those in favor, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries unanimously.

Um thank you so much.

And shall we pause briefly to to deliver it to is there are there some folks here from Knoxville Community Media?

Amos.

Uh please, council.

I think maybe we'll have a photo, quick photo with uh delivering this proclamation to Amos Oaks.

Yeah, if you want to just state your name and you know, state who you are, turn the microphone on and then uh there you go.

There we go.

Amos Oaks, Knoxville Community Media, uh 800 South Gay Street.

Thank you all so much for this uh little recognition.

It's great.

Thank you, Amelia, for all you do on the board.

Thank you for uh what you do.

You all do a whole lot, and we're happy that we can provide the transparency through uh cable and archiving.

So thank you.

And to my staff.

Okay.

Moving moving along.

Thank you, Knoxville Community Media, and uh hello to the people who follow our meetings, thanks to their efforts in streaming live, or at least streaming eventually on your website and also on cable.

Um moving right along.

Is there a motion on the consent agenda?

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 for my mayor's report.

I want to start first by thanking everyone who came out to our first kitorific of the season last week at Shahawi Park.

There were hundreds of families and lots of smiling faces, and it was a great way to kick off the summer season.

I want to thank our special events teams and all the partners who helped make this free series possible.

This week, tomorrow, we'll be at Covenant Health Park from 10 to 1 on Wednesday tomorrow, and we will be set up on the concourse.

So it is rain or time.

So hope to see you out there.

Later tomorrow night, we also have more to celebrate.

The Knoxville Fire Department will be holding a promotional ceremony.

It's a big one, promoting two dozen firefighters to the ranks of captain and master firefighter.

The ceremony, that's a that's a bigger than usual ceremony.

So we moved it to the bijou, and that's a you know, great venue for many reasons, but it'll be a special place to celebrate these promotions.

So that's tomorrow at the Bijou at six o'clock, and everyone is invited to attend.

More celebrations coming.

Um next Friday.

I want to encourage everyone to come out and take part in the Juneteenth parade.

That the step off is at 10 a.m.

from the Chilhawi Park Midway, and the city will be participating in the parade, and we will be walking alongside one of our cat buses.

Uh, we will have some candy to hand out and live music and council members.

Uh, we welcome all of you to march along with us and bring as many people as you can to either march or watch the parade as it passes by.

I sort of enjoy doing both, but um, but you can if you're marching at the beginning of the parade, you can watch the rest of it as it comes in.

So I hope you can join us again.

That's Friday, June 19th.

Step off is at 10 a.m.

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 respecting these rules.

That concludes my mayor's report.

Now, are there any reports of committees or council members serving on committees or boards?

Uh Councilmember Lloyd.

Yes, I have a uh a report on the golf course advisory board meeting that was on June the 4th.

It was uh well attended and a bit lively at times for a golf for a golf committee.

Okay, um, part of the course.

Or for the course.

Um, Justin Smedley spoke about uh the data for Knoxville Municipal as opposed to the national averages on round counts, revenues, and earnings.

He then talked about the new irrigation pump and the and the uh new equipment.

Brent Maple spoke about the course usage and the wear and tear from due to the increased number of players and the maintenance that they're taken care of in the wooded areas along the sides of the course.

Rusty Howell spoke about uh spoke to the members about the round count and revenues as well for Whittles uh Whittle Springs course.

He mentioned the new furniture they had and that they were getting new carts and the parking lot work that we have appropriated the money for.

Um Brad spoke about the winter damages to the greens and that the recent rains had really helped improve those conditions.

He also stated that now they only use pond water for irrigation, and that's saving the city a lot of money.

So we like it when somebody does the smart thing.

Uh both managers talked about community involvement, such as the Sneeds Tour fundraisers, kids play free, and youths on the courses.

They spoke about multiple capital upgrades and um recommendations that were discussed.

That would be irrigation, draining, lot paving, storage bins, and the errant golf balls that are being hit outside the of the course on both facilities.

There was a lot longer conversation amongst the members about the planned widening of Shaw Road and the need to pave the parking lot.

And presently we need to patch some potholes at uh Knoxville Municipal on the pedestrian walkway between the parking lot and the building.

Uh Miss Sealy gave an update on the painted pathway for students that's a shortcut through the Whittle Springs course from the local middle school.

In conclusion, it looks like both courses they seem to be doing very well, and they're fulfilling the needs of or the recreational needs of the people in the area.

That concludes my report.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Lloyd.

Any other um council members wanting to update us on committees?

Okay.

Um general council member announcements.

Uh councilmember Adams.

Thank you.

Um I wanted to uh mention two things that are happening uh in district one.

Uh, the first is So No Pride is happening on June 20th on Severe Avenue.

That is from 12 p.m.

until 6 p.m.

And like last year, the road is going to be closed, Sevier Avenue.

A portion of it is going to be closed from Davenport to Dixie, just makes it a lot more fun, a lot easier to move about for the festival.

The other event is on Friday, June 26th, and this is the next meet and greet of council that we've been hosting uh since January.

And this one will happen at the old Sevier Market at 906 Sevier Avenue from 8:30 until from 8 30 a.m.

until 10 a.m.

And it is uh who can make it gets there, uh, but it is just uh uh an opportunity for the public to talk to different council members and just spend time together.

So encourage everyone to come out on June 26th Friday at Old Sevier Market.

Thank you.

Councilmember Grant.

Yes.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, just one announcement uh the kitorific fund in the park.

Um had the opportunity to attend last week's at Chihuahua Park.

Um definitely a great event.

I do want to give a shout out to special events, parks and rec.

Um, they did a great job just in terms of coordinating, um, law enforcement was there.

Our public service department was there showing kids how to utilize some of the equipment.

So it was a different experience being on the ground and getting to see all the moving pieces.

Um but tomorrow's is going to be held at Covenant Health Park, 500 East Jackson Avenue.

Um, it's going to be from 10 a.m.

to 1 p.m.

Uh free crash, free activities, free ice cream.

Um they told me two per person.

I went back three times.

Um so there is a limit.

But uh no.

If you have some time, hopefully the weather um holds off, but I think it's a great event.

If you do have some younger kids and even older kids, if you're looking to get them busy tomorrow, I think the kiterific fund uh in a park is a great thing that we're doing.

So appreciate you, Mayor, for that.

But I wanted to give a shout out to special events in our parks and record they did a great job uh last week as well.

Thank you.

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

9C is a resolution confirming the reappointments of Cynthia delete and Sadio Williams to the police advisory and review committee.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

9D is resolution confirming the reappointment of Lisa Sorensen and the appointment of Megan Hatcher Rhodes and Taylor Thompson to the design review board.

Motion made to approve and second it.

Any questions or discussion?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

I believe Miss Thompson and Ms.

Rhodes are here.

So if you would raise your hands so we can recognize you.

Thank you for your willingness to serve.

We appreciate it.

Next item, please.

9E is a resolution approving the reappoint the appointments of Marcus Chady, Karen Hawthorne, and Alison Page, the Metropolitan Knoxville Airport Authority.

Motion made to approve and second it.

Any questions or discussion?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

9F is a resolution.

Resolution appointing Jonathan Fortner to serve as a second district representative to the Knoxville Golf Course Advisory Committee for a term expiring December 18, 2029.

Motion made to approve and also has been seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

9G is the resolution reappointing Gloria Deathridge to serve as the at-large CDA representative to the City of Knoxville Public Property Naming Committee.

Motion made to approve and second it.

Any questions or discussion?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Eleven I is a resolution approving an appeal by filed by David Hamilton, thereby overturning the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals to app hold a determination by the zoning administrator that the care cut's proposed services qualify as a religious land use and are exempt from the zoning code requirements for special use approval for the proposed use of for property located at 5200 Clinton Highway CH1 Zoning District 5th District.

Okay, council members.

Um we will conduct this as we do all our appeals.

First, I'd like to call on the appellant to come to the podium.

Um, and you have up to 15 minutes to present your case.

You may use uh as many speakers during that 15 minutes as you wish.

Just ask that you identify each person who speaks, and following your 15 minutes, the appellee uh will have up to 15 minutes to um state their case as well.

So we'll get the timer going and Mr.

Johnson, are you ready?

Okay, go ahead.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Um mayor.

I'm an attorney.

I'm David Hamilton.

I'm at 1810 Merchant Drive here in Knoxville.

My office and my home are propped within three quarters of a mile of 5200 Clinton Highway, which is the address of the uh unit.

I asked to reserve uh the remain of the uh two or three minutes at the end of my time uh for response to any.

There's a rebuttal time after the 15 minutes uh for the other.

You'll have uh two minutes.

All right, thank you very much.

I appreciate that.

Now is your fifteen minutes.

Are you so?

Now you're using okay?

Yes, thank you.

The uh a little background, not too much, because most of you have been here.

Clinton Highway.

That bank building is on Clinton Highway at a very auto-centric location without sufficient sidewalks.

Everybody is already aware of some of these things.

But that application was pending and entered into in January, I think the 8th.

A few days later, after it had already been approved by the Planning Commission, but during the appeal period.

Can we do this?

And the zoning administrator took it on himself to approve that.

First, I have no record that there was no there was a proper payment for the petition before the zoning administrator.

That's a fundamental here in Knoxville.

If you're going to make an appeal, you're going to ask for a permit, you've got to file and pay your bill.

Second, yeah.

Was actually in direct violation of our existing ordinances.

The to obtain jurisdiction for the zoning administrator, all of his jurisdiction is derived from the ordinance that is uh what we would call our municipal code.

Article 16.2 C is the authority for that.

At that same point, it says that the Knoxville Knox County Planning Commission will take formal action on special use applications.

This application was a religious application, a form of special use.2G, they had to seek a withdrawal of their existing petition and file another one.

Now these details actually matter because what you're looking at is how a political end run could be made uh on a potential adverse decision down the road because they already knew they were a potential risk.

The Knoxville Ordinance removes from the zoning administrator any authority to consider any special use application, and I'm uh quoting Article 15.1A and Table 15-1, which reflects the authority that is being granted to the zoning administrator.

You have an event where someone is going behind the process that was actually occurring without the authority to actually review or approve anything that was being sought, and the zoning administrator took it on himself to approve the application.

There was no delegation of authority for consideration for religious usage inside the ordinance, so you have to uphold your own laws.

This is what you all passed, and as the uh body reviewing your own ordinances, if you wish to change them, please change them.

But until you do, this is a law we're supposed to be dealing with.

Without the proper application fee, obviously, the administrator didn't have any authority to do anything, but of course, he didn't have the authority even to do what he did because it was not granted inside the application.

The design standards, it's still a problem, it's going to be a problem.

Why?

We already have had injuries, pedestrians been hit on either merchant drive in Clinton.

Believe there was a recent fatality.

Is all about limitations on religious expression beyond that being exercised against all businesses or other assemblies.

So when they're talking about the Tennessee R L U IPA, we can't do anything simple.

And you look at that religious exemption statute, you see fundamentally that the government is not to impose new restrictions or more restrictions.

Can there be restrictions?

Absolutely.

There's actually a requirement inside the code for whenever there's a temporary event.

A religious temporary event needs a permit, right?

That is a form of restriction, but it's no more onerous than any other temporary assembly permit requirement.

There's no substantial burden.

Provides for religious individual religious freedom.

This is not organizational religious freedom.

Care cuts is a corporation, it is a non-religious corporation, which is now trying to cloak itself with religion.

This board or anyone took advantage of the potential of investigating the underlying grants that had been received by this organization because as a religious organization that clothed itself as non-religious, that becomes a fiscal problem and potentially something more serious.

But nonetheless, care cuts itself in its election on the state of Tennessee's website as a corporation elected to not be a religious organization.

The membership may have religious views, but that doesn't make the organization religious.

And there is a difference.

Churches generally apply underneath as a religious organization because of the tax consequences and other consequences, the zoning administrator exceeded his authority in granting the request, because he never considered what does it mean when a non-religious organization applies for a religious exemption?

Have you even thought about that?

What is the implications?

Right now, Clinton Highway and it's the quarter around 5200 Clinton Highway has a documented history of serious vehicle pedestrian conflicts and remains one of the highest risk corridors in the city of Knoxville.

Right now we have outdoor assembly tents and other structures assembled at that facility, operating under a religious exemption, when they were supposed to get a permit to have a tent.

Is supposed to do an inspection of that facility to make sure it complies with the safety requirements that the city has determined necessary for these large gathering temporary structures.

You have to submit a special events application with the City of Knoxville special events that has not been done.

But the refusal rates right now for those that are drug addicted and homeless to receive treatment published is between 70 and 90 percent, and 50 percent of that population will self-disenroll.

Respectfully, City of Knoxville needs to protect its own statutory mechanism.

If you're not going to do that, you need to change it.

Number one.

Number two, need to start treating care cuts like you would any other activity.

In other words, do not turn a blind eye and look away when they're putting up obviously event facilities that have not been permitted or allowed.

I listened to the people who like to quote what would Jesus do.

Except I'm a real Christian.

I read a little bit more.

Second Thessalonians chapter 3, paragraph 10, talking specifically about those who were otherwise able to work but unwilling and demanding to be fed by the Christian community because of the direction from Jesus to not turn away.

That is a quote.

Why?

Because Jesus was all about personal responsibility.

At each and every point when he chastised any violator of and sin of God's word and law, he gave both sides of that.

He whipped the money lenders, he told the adulteress to sin no more, and his main apostle said, do not allow the abuse of Christianity to result in Christians doing without, or those who will not work, feed off of them.

Read that entire chapter.

That's what it's about, the whole thing.

What we're dealing with today has been happening for thousands of years and will continue to some degree.

City of Knoxville needs to uphold its own law and reverse the zoning administrator simply because a zoning administrator never held the authority to make the decision that was set up.

Thank you very much for the opportunity.

Thank you.

Please state your name and address for the record, and you'll have up to 15 minutes for yourself or any other speakers to address counsel.

Thank you.

Ben Mullins, 550 West Main Street, here for Care Cuts.

We've been here before on the special use application, and we're not here to relitigate that special use application, which this uh this board voted to approve.

Uh so the issues with regard to the location, the zoning, the health and safety, that's not what we're here to discuss today.

We're here to discuss the zoning administrator's uh decision to recognize that care cuts is uh has sincere religious beliefs and the application of the special use process uh would inhibit or curtail those beliefs, and that's what the statute requires under uh 4-1-407.

It is not prospective, it is an reaction to a rule of general applicability, in this case a zoning ordinance, that has the effect of uh inhibiting or curtailing a sincerely held religious belief, and I want to wait into that a little bit.

First, let me um address the zoning administrators' authority.

Mr.

Hamilton quoted from uh Articles 16 and Articles 15, he did not quote from Article 14, which sets out the authority of the zoning administrator.

And I hope everybody had a chance to review the the letter that I sent earlier today.

But that authority is set out in Article 14.4 of the city zoning ordinance where the city the zoning administrators' powers include the ability to make final decisions on zoning interpretations and requests for reasonable accommodations, and that is what occurred here.

That dovetails with the statutory authority of 137207 or 13, yeah, 137207, where the BZA has the authority to hear and decide appeals, whereas alleged by the appellant that there's an error in any order requirement, permit decision or refusal made by a municipal building commissioner or any other administrative official carrying out enforcement of any provision of the ordinance, which is why this went through the Board of Zoning Appeals to challenge Mr.

Aaron's interpretation first and why it's now here before you.

They set forth all of their findings in a very detailed uh letter with attachments to it, and that is in your packet.

So that authority is squarely within your existing zoning ordinance.

I think Mr.

Hamilton is trying to conflate the special use process with a zoning official's ability to make interpretations and reasonable accommodations.

The zoning uh uh ordinance gives them authority on issues on for reasonable accommodations for ADA and Fair Housing Act, and all other types of state and federal laws which aren't expressly captured or articulated in the zoning ordinance.

So this is completely proper.

The zoning administrator had that authority.

So now we get to this issue is does is care cuts a religious organization.

Mr.

Hamilton's argument focuses on the fact that 10 years ago when they filed for their nonprofit status with the Secretary of State, they did not check a box that said that they're a religious organization.

They should have, because you can look at the work that they're doing, you can look at their bylaws, which call them out as a mission-based operation.

You can look at uh everything that they are about and see that they are a crisis-centered religious organization.

Checking the box doesn't matter, but you don't have to take my word for it.

We can look at what the United States Supreme Court has ruled on issues.

And some of these cases, anything in the United States Supreme Court could be controversial, but corporations have First Amendment rights, and that is clear in the law.

We don't always like that, and like in the case of Citizens United, uh, which they had First Amendment rights for freedom of speech on campaign contributions.

That was a 2010 case, but later in 2014, there was a case involving Hobby Lobby.

Hobby Lobby is a for-profit corporation.

They're not a nonprofit.

They their operations aren't even religiously centered.

But the Supreme Court, in applying the federal uh religious land use uh statute, said that because that corporation is closely held, and the individuals that ran that corporation had sincere religious beliefs that were being inhibited or curtailed in that case, or entitled to protection to an exemption from a rule of general applicability.

That was the affordable care act.

That was what the Supreme Court said.

Again, politics aside, it recognizes that corporations, even for-profit corporations, can have religious beliefs that can be inhibited or curtailed, and that makes them eligible for a religious exemption, which is what occurred here.

And that statute talks about the reasonable uh the religious accommodation should be an unreasonable accommodation.

Special use uh process, which is final by the way.

Um what happened here in this case is they applied for the special use application.

Uh they had issues that you know we talked about this when we went through uh the that appeal that all of the services they are providing would be allowed by right in that zone, but because they are targeting a uh an unhoused population, they have to go through the special use process.

That was going to be appealed.

So they sought legal advice, which is what they should do, and they applied for a religious exemption, see if they qualified under a separate avenue to obtain that approval.

Uh, and that's why that went through the BZA process, not the special use process.

That special use was upheld here.

There was a lawsuit filed on it.

That lawsuit has now been voluntarily dismissed.

We can proceed without even this religious exemption.

But Mr.

Hamilton wanted to proceed with arguing anyway, and I think it's important to recognize and uphold the fact that the zoning administrator does have this authority, and which is why I'm here arguing the point tonight.

Um reasonable accommodation is to say it does this this organization at this location based upon the current operations.

Again, it's a very fact-intensive case-by-case analysis, applies for this uh exemption.

It doesn't mean that care cuts can go anywhere they want to and not operate within the zoning ordinance.

If they were to want to locate a different location, they would still have to either apply for a religious exemption for that location and demonstrate what their operations are, or go through the zoning process.

But the accommodation is you're exempt from the zoning process at this location for this operations.

That's all.

They still have to comply with the building code, they still have to get building permits.

In fact, they have a building permit.

If there are issues that Mr.

Hamilton talked about about the tents and things that are happening that shouldn't be happening, there is a codes enforcement procedure for that, and he should call codes enforcement and and look into that.

That has nothing to do with whether or not they're exempt from the zoning ordinance, the conversation that we are having here tonight.

Um I think I've covered everything.

I mean, uh, you know, the information in their website.

I mean, they they provide all of these services to the homeless and unhoused, but they also provide Bible studies, worship services, prayer groups.

I don't have to get into an ecclesiastical debate on whether that's Christian or not, or whether First Thessalonians comports with Matthew 5 or what context that has.

That's not what we're here deciding.

In fact, I don't think you should decide whether someone's religious beliefs are sincere.

You look at what they are doing and determine whether that is a sincere belief, whether you agree with it or not, whether you agree with their interpretation of the Bible or not, and then they're entitled to an exemption.

Uh so I would ask that you upheld uh the zoning administrators' authority.

I know Mr.

Ahrons is here, and uh Miss McGraw's Hillary is here with the City Law Department.

Uh, and I'm I'm sure they can answer questions if you want to ask their opinions on this as well, but please deny the appeal and uphold the exemption.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Hamilton, you um may have up to two minutes for rebuttal.

I thought it said three when I stepped up here.

Um it's two.

I appreciate Ben Bowens.

He's been a friend for many years.

We can agree on many things, we can disagree.

He remains my friend.

On this one, his citation to Article 14 ignores that the uh ordinance continues in this unique case, and he actually said it.

There was a choice that could have been made.

Go down the special use angle, go down the religious angle.

Here, he's trying to do both sides simultaneously, and once you go down the special use, the ordinance itself removes from the zoning administrator any authority to touch it, right?

That is important, otherwise you'll have this same kind of thing happen where uh they decide mid-scape mid uh on their project and they want to change their approach because they see additional risks over 10 years.

Care cuts had the ample time to revise.

Nobody is looking at the financial implications of a non-religious nonprofit providing services compared to what when governments fund it, what happens next?

Reasonable accommodation means reasonable accommodation, not outright ignoring uh the your own statutory mechanism, I do believe that care cuts by uh going to the zoning administrator directly, failed to follow the rules that the attorney had already identified and even enunciated in front of you.

Respectfully, I request that the resolution be approved.

Thank you.

Council members, that concludes the formal part where the appellate and pellets speak.

You may discuss this at your leisure.

Any discussion?

Councilmember Parker.

Um well, I do think it is an interesting case.

Um and appreciate the discussion.

Um this is a topic that I've looked into somewhat because we need more shelter space, and I've been trying to understand it to see what other organizations in our community might um qualify for this exemption, and I'm no expert on it, um, but had looked into it, and and I I thought the case in Nashville would be mentioned, but it it makes sense that it wasn't because we're just focused on the really the role of the um of Mr.

Aaron's in this um process.

Um the only argument that really stood out to me is how you define a religious organization, uh, and I did find it concerning that uh when registering as a nonprofit, um, you know, the religious aspect of the work was not highlighted or not registered as a religious nonprofit, um, which you can do, and and and several organizations who provide these services in our community are registered that way.

Um but I did find the arguments about hobby lobby compelling, and um while these are court decisions that I um do not necessarily agree with, I do believe that is the accurate way to interpret the law and to interpret uh what care cuts options are in this situation.

Um I do believe that they qualify for the religious exemption.

I understand the process for the administrator to lead a process of accommodations.

But I also understand the concern of the community because this is uh not a process that we see very often, and as transparent as processes can be, the better for our community.

So I'm I'm somewhat glad that this was brought before city council tonight so that there can be more clarity in the community of how this has moved forward, um, and why certain decisions are made.

But I do see the the religious exemption as appropriate, and and do not plan to support the appeal.

Council uh Vice Mayor Fugit.

Thank you.

Um, Mr.

Swanson, could you um, yeah, um help me go through the process.

So as I understand it, Mr.

Aaron's the zoning administrator has the authority to make the decision and consults with the attorneys in the city law department.

So that that decision can be made with sound legal standing, it's not just someone without getting some expertise on the law in this situation.

Is that correct?

That is correct.

That was done, and Christina McGrans is our land use expert.

She worked very hard on this case and provided information.

I think that has been provided to you uh outside of this hearing.

But it was with the law department's uh full blessing that an interpretation of it was worthy of a religious exemption was given.

That's accurate.

Okay, thank you.

Um, I I just want that that this was not uh a city employee without access to adequate legal representation and opinion when when making this kind of decision, uh, maybe not representation but opinion.

I like to think that our employees are always entitled to accurate legal representation.

I understand that, but I just am for the record letting our citizens know that we have a law department that does this very function for many departments within the city, so that our staff can make those kind of decisions that border on legal.

Um, and that's all just because it we're talking about the authority to do it.

I'm sure that is also uh looked at by the law department that the city employee had the authority to make such decision.

Is that correct?

I see a head nod, so I'm gonna say that's correct.

All right, thank you.

Any further questions or discussion?

Okay, a motion.

Uh I move to deny the appeal.

Second.

Okay, motions been made to deny the appeal, it's been made and seconded.

Is there any further questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor of denying the appeal, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, motion carries seven zero with one abstention.

Okay.

Moving on to the next item, please.

12K is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with Adams contracting LLC in an amount not to exceed 465,028.50 cents for the North Cherry Water Quality Improvements Project 6th 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.

12 L's resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with Ardura Group Incorporated to provide professional services for the stormwater program funding feasibility study in an amounts not to exceed $198,000.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor please say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12 M is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with Ardura Group to provide staff augmentation services on an as needed basis in an amount not to exceed 49,500.

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 a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with Purdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins, and Mott, LLP, to provide collection services for outstanding fines and fees from adjudicated cases in the Knoxville municipal court.

Motion made to approve and seconded.

Council member, I just want to let you know that the honorable judge cavanus is present.

Should you have any questions for him?

Any for a council member Grant?

Yes, Mayor.

Oh, we have a speaker.

I'm sorry.

Um Rick Roach signed up to speak in opposition to item 12 and Mr.

Roach, are you present?

Rick Roach.

Rick Roach.

Okay, he's not here.

We'll move on to council's discussion.

Um Councilmember DeBarde Laban.

Oh.

Who did you think was?

For microscope.

Uh Ms.

Parker.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I had some questions and concerns that I shared with the judge yesterday about this item.

And we did receive a thorough response uh this afternoon, which I'm very appreciative of.

Um, since being on council, I've been a real stickler for contracts that come before us having the language um in it that we need to ensure uh our expectations are met moving forward.

Um, and uh I had some concerns about this contract because of um just any potential unintended consequences that could come from it.

Um was kind of assured that that was the intention behind this effort, but it's not the language is not in the contract.

So for me, uh I would rather see an updated contract that we could discuss uh rather than move forward with this item tonight.

Councilmember Debar de Laban and then Grant.

Um yeah, I have two thoughts and a question.

Um so one thought is uh I have had the opportunity to sit in this municipal court, and uh I had an amazing experience to see how humane Judge Cavendis made it feel when people are going through a tough time.

And I appreciate that.

Um I had to go fight a party ticket, which I wouldn't, um, because I was parked legally, but someone misread the sign.

Uh, but the way that he treated people in that court was impressive.

And so when this came to us in this forum from him, I first started from a place of trust.

Um, and then I appreciate the correspondence of us helping us understand the relationship between the city and this contract, and um especially as this concerns non-driving offenses, which is typically parking.

And in my personal experience, this is anecdotal, but in my personal experience, it's not people who are economically struggling that park illegally, it's the entitled who park illegally in our city.

And I think there's a there's a goodly number of entitled people who um know they don't have to pay a ticket, so they will park illegally.

And so I hope that this will help correct that.

And my question, which I'm curious for clarification on the public, is would this start with tickets going forward, or would it be retroactive in some sense for tickets that are currently outstanding?

Judge Cavanas, you could come to the podium and for the record, just say who you are.

We're glad to have you here with us today.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you, uh Vice Mayor, Council members.

My name's Tyler Cavanus I'm the municipal court judge for the city of Knoxville.

To answer your question uh directly I would say that that's not been that has not been officially decided.

Certainly it will be implemented moving forward.

I do expect that there will be some amount of retroactivity although not very far um because the thought behind this is um you know that this there should be a proportional response to things certainly parking tickets are not um the type of thing that that deserve a a you know significant response uh at least related to some other things um and we're also I'll say that as a policy matter although we have not strictly yet defined what that threshold would be um I can certainly tell you that the citizen who has received you know a couple of parking tickets here or there that's not we're not going to be expending effort or energy to collect on those parking tickets the the folks that are being that that will uh receive some hassling over this are the ones who are consistently disregarding uh the same rules that apply to everybody else and and ultimately what that threshold may be whether it's you know five parking tickets in a year or 10 parking tickets in a year or or what that exact number will be that's the idea uh behind how that enforcement uh would take place and and keeping in mind also that anyone who would be um I suppose subject to the terms of this this collections contract um these are folks who have at no point engaged with the court process they've not appealed their parking tickets they've not um uh contacted the court to say that they're experiencing any sort of financial difficulty um these are folks who have just received parking tickets and let those accumulate and so um this would apply to both parking tickets but also any sort of um of cases or judgments that would be ultimately referred to Purdue Brandon um the intention and the design of this process is that if those folks uh do in fact get directed back to the court and engage with the court process they're going to have the same options that would be available uh to anyone else uh ultimately we we do consistently uh make payment arrangements based on uh individuals' ability to pay uh we will give them time to uh uh to make those arrangements to satisfy judgment uh and when it's appropriate uh individuals have every right to appear before the court and provide information about their personal and financial circumstances and ultimately seek relief uh from the costs and fines based on their indigency and so um even if your account is ultimately referred to a collections to two Purdue Brandon for collections uh if you contact the court and you choose to engage with our processes those are still available to you.

Okay council member Grant.

Thank you mayor um and thank you judge um every time I see you I gotta thank you for swearing me in.

My pleasure sir but um no I appreciate you know counsel the barbellyman's uh words and experience I actually got a ticket myself um I was leaving while I was parking and there was a delay between me using the at the ticket enforcer I guess seeing it on his end right so I said one time for myself on the at and I guess it didn't show on his end in between me getting out of my car but I was able to get that resolved.

Um for me I I understand the need for accountability um you know and I but I I do believe that this process and how you know this contract is has has come about um for for myself, one learning about it last week when the when the agenda was created.

There's no secret that downtown hosts majority of the the parking that that we you know we're referencing so um it has its challenges.

I know we've just implemented this this parking last year, the new parking model last year.

Um and then you know, being a district six representative, um, I've gotten a number of complaints uh just about the parking system.

And I know it's not perfect, I know we're still learning it.

Um, but it makes me question the rate that we're doing this, right?

This this new system was implemented around, you know, March of April of last year.

Um so we're a year in.

Um a lot of things are happening downtown that's going on right downtown is growing.

Um so there's a lot of changes being made.

Um I just think we should be more cautious about unintended consequences, right?

When I look at parking tickets, um whether I can afford it, whether my neighbor can afford it, whether any constentiant can afford a parking ticket.

Um, it does cause strain to a lot of people, right?

I've seen parking tickets go to collections and affects people's credit or driver's license or whatever it may be.

Um, and so while we're saying we're not gonna be using this for that, right?

I mean, there's gonna be a limit in terms of a person is taking advantage uh of our parking model.

Of course, there's you know, we want some type of enforcement.

I would like to see that language.

I think we we have these contracts.

They they start with good intentions, um, and then later down the line, you know, when a contract is already executed and the language is already put into place, we're back trailing.

Um I can't support this with how it is.

Um, want to ask my constituents to postpone this this contract um so we can have that conversation, so we can really pick into the details because I see it being an issue because there's already conversations and issues now about parking.

Um factors in, right?

At some point downtown is not gonna be affordable for certain group of folks.

Parking is going to be a financial barrier for people to come and visit downtown.

Um, and so all of these things I you know I'm I'm thinking about.

Um, and so I'm asking for a postponement.

Um, I would like four weeks if that's possible, uh, to really really make updates to this contract, um, and just be able to have the opportunity to get this in writing in terms of how we're gonna exercise it, how we're gonna execute it, and then make sure that we're not allowing this company to then take advantage.

I know this isn't costing the city anything, um, but when you look at adding a 20% penalty to unpaid debt to cover their costs, um, you know, I don't I don't know this company, right?

Uh we don't want them taking advantage of citizens because now we're putting the financial pressure on those visitors downtown.

So um I appreciate the amount of effort you put in.

I appreciate the amount of effort that's gone into trying to do this, but we just implemented the new parking system.

People are still learning it, and now here we are, we're getting ready to enforce um additional penalties.

We don't know, right?

If I got a ticket yesterday, does it affect me?

If I get a ticket tomorrow, does it go in effect?

We still haven't clarified that.

Um, those things need to be nailed to the ground before we move forward.

Mr.

Grant, are you making a motion?

I'm making a motion to postpone for four weeks.

Second, second.

Okay, the motion uh to postpone for four weeks.

I guess that's July 7th.

Yeah.

Um, it's been made and seconded.

So now the motion on the floor is to postpone for four weeks, I'm speaking to that.

Vice Mayor Fuchin.

Thank you.

So um about postponing.

I I'd like a little more clarity on what this contract actually is doing and have a little discussion before I can decide whether I think we should postpone this because is anything significant going to change in four weeks that would change my opinion.

So let me ask you a few questions, if I may, because this will help me decide whether I want to vote to postpone.

Um if I recall, a few you've been uh judged by this long as I've been a council person.

Uh not quite, but a minute.

A minute.

I'm sorry, wrong election.

They all run together after a while.

Um sorry about that.

I'm trying to shave a few years off my age, Amelia.

So um in all seriousness, I believe when you first took office, you talked about an extremely large amount of unowed court fines that you were trying to work through because the city had fine people for things and there was no follow-up for people to pay, which then creates a disincentive to ever pay.

Is that correct?

Am I am I misremembering or is that correct?

That's correct.

Okay.

So I'm assuming that at this point, and I didn't read every word in the contract, but what triggers the collection action?

Your office telling them that these are worth going after, or do they just get a list and start going after them?

I believe based on what you said, it would be triggered by your office saying we believe these have been delinquent long enough and have been given other opportunities to pay that we've exhausted what our staff can do, and it is now time to send it to someone else to help us to help ease the burden of your staff doing that.

Is that correct?

That is correct, and if I could speak to that, I could probably ask please thank you.

And so um parking tickets and non-parking tickets are are addressed differently under state law uh with respect to collections.

Um there's a state statute that just broadly authorizes municipalities and municipal courts to engage a collections company or collection agency uh for the use of collecting on judgments.

Um the statute authorizes an additional fee to be imposed up to 40 percent.

That's of course not being done here.

Um, but then the statute on parking tickets specifically uh requires that at least 60 days has elapsed and that notice be provided to the person before a collection effort could be made.

So from a state statute standpoint, there is there are some some specific guidelines, and certainly our office would at a minimum comply with with that related to the parking tickets.

Um, generally speaking, and this I truthfully I don't know the answer.

I would I would have to um have some legal counsel myself related to uh the contract.

Um I think that council member grant's questions are certainly all uh relevant operational questions, but my at least I suppose my position would be that those are in fact operational questions that truthfully I'm not sure how much of that we can or can or or perhaps should include in a contract, and and I'd say that truly not knowing because the um the conversations we've all had with Purdue Brandon, and part of why we we select part of not the entire reason, but part of why we selected Purdy Brandon in the first place is they've been working with the Knox County uh criminal court clerk's office uh for several years.

I'm not sure exactly, but I believe between three and five.

And so I've talked with uh court clerk Mike Hammond about their experience using this company, and also in my discussions at every step of the stay the way with the conversations with representatives from Purdue Brand or the Brandon, the message is you know, Knoxville Municipal Court, you get to set the parameters of how this works, and that is a big reason that gives me confidence to be able to stand up and say that this is in fact going to work consistently with what I want our mission as the court to be and what I believe the values of of the city and and this council are.

Um, and so uh just I guess suppose that's a long way to answer your question to say that the triggering effect, which cases would, which cases wouldn't, at what point are we going to cut off and say we're not going to attempt to collect an unpaid judgment from 20 years ago, which I can confidently stand here and say we're not going to do that.

Um, those are things that would be decided just as a process in my office with um while working with the law department as well, and certainly would be happy to have those conversations uh with any council members or solicit uh input on that process.

Thank you, Judge Cavanas.

Uh, council member Adams.

I just wanted to ask uh about what impact on the contract a postponement would have.

Uh I mean, if there's any concern about timing, that sort of thing.

So I think that um I I mentioned this difference between the parking uh citations and and non-parking citations.

While we certainly do have a growing number of accumulating parking citations, uh council member Grant is correct, this new system's been in effect for a year.

Um, you know, that number is still relatively small.

We don't want it to continue growing, but uh it is still relatively small.

But where we really see the largest gap, I think operationally, and where this contract would would fill that gap uh is in the non-traffic violations, non-parking non-traffic.

And the reason for that, and I've I've uh explained this all in my letter, which which I know you all receive, so I won't go into all of it.

But um, there's essentially a state statute that provides a mechanism, and it's actually not optional.

The clerk's office is required to report uh non-payment or failures to appear on traffic related offenses to the department of safety.

The department of safety then sends a letter to the individual saying you have 30 days to resolve this with the court, otherwise your driver's license will be suspended.

And certainly not everyone, but for many people that letter does okay, you know, this is something I now there's a timeline, I need to deal with it.

And you know, if that person calls us or comes to court, we can then work with them based on their circumstances to address that.

Um for non-traffic uh cases, there's just not a similar statutory mechanism.

And so the unfortunate reality of of our procedure right now is that for those particular cases, we don't have an effective enforcement mechanism if someone simply decides they're not going to engage in the process.

So, and we see that largely in our animal ordinance citations.

Um, those are the category of cases that are cited second most frequently to the court after traffic-related offenses, and so uh it's unfortunately it's fairly common that you'll have someone who receives an animal ordinance citation, the uh neighbor, whoever it is who called about the case in the first place, they come to court, the animal control officer comes to court, and the defendant charged with the ordinance violation fails to appear.

And we hear it more often than I would like, that this is a legitimate concern that this person has on the the witness side of things, and what I tell them is okay, the the you know defendant has failed to appear, uh, they'll be found guilty by default.

That's the the legal mechanism.

You failed to appear, you failed to engage, uh, we're finding you guilty, and ultimately we're going to send notice to the person that there's been a judgment entered against them.

And unfortunately, that is really all we can do under our current process because we don't have a secondary, we don't have a then further enforcement mechanism to work with.

So that's that's really the driving factor factor for me uh behind this is to bring equity to that process.

I mean everyone's individual circumstances in terms of our case outcomes should be taken into account.

It individualized justice is an important goal that I think, particularly in the municipal court, being a more community focused community level court, we're able to achieve that and pursue that, but that does start with um an expectation that you will at least call us if you have concerns about your case.

And for those that don't engage, don't come to court, don't do anything.

Right now, we just don't have a mechanism to do anything about that, and that that is unfair, and so um I I believe that this contract will help um will help with that, and that's the intention behind it.

Certainly, uh these are monetary judgments.

There's no ignoring that there is a dollar sign in front of what we're talking about, but but that's not the main goal, and and as I said, we do have processes internally uh and within the judicial process to review your individual financial circumstances.

So, so to answer your question, um, a four-week postponement delays um what I hope is ultimately the implementation of this process.

There will be a lengthy process setting determining these guidelines, determining the processes, which cases will be referred, which won't, what will those letters look like, and I'm eager to begin that.

But I think the honest answer is if four weeks helps us uh get answers, I would prefer not to.

And if and if there are questions specifically related to parking, perhaps there's a way that we can separate those two things out.

But um I think that four weeks sets us back four weeks later in terms of implementation, but we can handle that truthfully, we can okay.

Uh council member, council member uh Parker and then Grant.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, in your communication with counsel, um, Judge Cavanus, you have indicated that the collections agency will not be um, I don't know if allowed is the uh the language, but perhaps it would be seen as a violation of our agreement if um if they were to attempt to uh recover this debt through litigation.

Um you've let us know that the collection agency would not be able to or would be asked, it's not a part of the contract, they would be asked to not turn the debt over to a debt collection or debt collection agency so that the debt doesn't appear on people's credit report.

So I'm uh struggling to understand what are the collection agencies' mechanisms for collecting this money.

Um just to uh to clarify two things.

Um contractually, they are not permitted to initiate a civil proceeding, and so that would be contractual that they they cannot do that.

Um, in terms of uh reporting to a credit bureau, um that's not in the contract, although I can I can relay to counsel that I had a conversation with the uh law partner who would be managing our account today, and he said, I mean, in unequivocal in unequivocal terms, he said they would not, and um that they don't do that in any of their accounts in Tennessee.

And so um your question gets at a uh it is a very reasonable conclusion, and if you'll permit me to be a little cute, they're gonna annoy the crap out of you, is what they're gonna do.

And um what they have, what they possess uh with their company that that we administratively just can't bear the burden of, um, they have tools available to them uh to uh on a large scale uh skip tracing or skip tracing databases, they can find a person's uh most up-to-date information, uh mailing information.

That's a common problem for us.

We don't have current contact information.

We can't contact you about coming to court.

I mean, presumably someone got pulled over, or we're talking about non-traffic cases, but someone received notice of a citation, then they move the next week, or or whatever it was.

They weren't at home when they received the citation.

We may not have good contact information to contact them in the first place, Purdue Brandon would have those databases.

Um, our process for obtaining owner vehicle owner information, and we have tried for a year to figure out a better way to do this, but it requires us to fill out a single page form on the Department of Revenues website and submit it electronically.

And when we're talking about hundreds of parking citations issued being or being issued a week, uh my staff can't do that because all we have when we get a parking ticket is a vehicle plate, uh, and we don't have an owner unless that person walks up and says, hey, this is my vehicle.

And so what Purdue Brandon provides administratively that we simply aren't set up for, um, is that there will be multiple contact attempts both via phone and via via uh letter is my understanding, and and as I say that I remember that they've talked about uh text messaging being an option if we choose to set that up.

Um but they're gonna bother you about it.

You ignored court, we're gonna bother you about that, but um there will also be the ability to have that account management electronically through Purdue Brandon's uh system and database.

Um they'll be able to keep track of those payments, direct those payments that are made ultimately back to where they they need to go.

So if my understanding is that the processes that we're talking about are very similar to what the criminal court clerk's office has used, and uh please don't quote me on that, at least as far as how they run their office, but that that is my understanding anyway.

Um, and they have seen a measurable um outcome in terms of uh both the judgments that have been satisfied, but also um, you know, people ultimately engaging with the process.

So if if I thought this was a mechanism that lacked effective uh that would not be an effective outcome, we wouldn't do it.

I mean, I I'm ultimately looking to meaningfully close this gap, and um, you know, based on positive uh impressions that I get from both the company but also um information I've received from our peer courts, uh I believe that this will be at least one additional mechanism that we'll have to affect that process or affect that goal.

Okay, and then I appreciate that answer.

And then the last few seconds that I have, I just wanted to point out a couple of things, and would you all mind if I take another 30 seconds actually?

Council member, um, there's another person with our light on, and also the motion on the floor is whether or not to postpone for four weeks.

So why don't I go to the next person with our light on if you still have questions about the motion or comments, we'll come back to you.

I apologize.

Sorry for taking your time.

Councilmember Grant?

Yeah, and I would ask, and I and I appreciate you for going more in detail, um, Vice Mayor Fuge, Councilwoman Adams, Councilwoman Parker, appreciate the questions because it definitely allowed you to kind of clarify some things.

Um I don't think I now don't think four weeks is necessary, but I I will still, you know, I would like at least two more weeks.

Two more weeks to be able to sit down with Mr.

Cavanis to really get an understanding of how this is gonna work from parking to non-traffic violations and the other things that we're gonna be having going on throughout the city that this will affect, um, but also give other council members an opportunity for the next two weeks to engage your constituents, your constituents they come, they visit downtown.

Um, and so I would ask to modify my postponement to two weeks, and ask for council members to to support this postponement.

Are there any objections to his modified motion from four weeks to two weeks?

Okay, without objection.

Then we'll just note that for the record, the motion on the floor is now to postpone for two weeks, not four weeks.

Uh council member Parker and then Adams.

Thank you.

Um I wanted to point out a couple of things.

One is um the request for proposal, state that the accounts will be turned over to the collection agency.

Um accounts with past due amounts six months or older, so not you know, anything within the six months.

Um then per state law service will only include past due accounts which are no more than 10 years old.

And I appreciate that clarification of what our limitations are within state law.

Uh, but I would want that defined even more.

Uh what we've heard from you tonight sounds lovely.

If we are focused on those who have five violations in a year and are completely ignoring the court process, it's not necessarily someone who thought they had paid it or someone who lost the ticket or perhaps somehow never received it.

Um I would feel more comfortable with this.

I would feel more comfortable, honestly, if we took parking tickets out of the discussion and focused on other violations.

But if we are to include parking tickets, I want those services that we're asking for uh to be more defined.

Um, and for us to be focused on uh the agregious um uh violations.

Um my other concern are and and what I wanted to speak to in terms of why we should delay this, um, is to get some of that language in the contract.

And if the judge needs time to contract a contact attorney uh a contract attorney, I want the judge to have that time, but I want to have clarity of what policy I'm approving moving forward and this contract before us uh it uh gives too much discretion to the court, and it would it it allows us to not have a clear sense of what the implementation of this could look like.

So I want some some clarity just reflecting what conversation we had here tonight of focusing on those egregious uh violations.

Those are the ones that will be referred over, of the fact that this won't um be referred to a credit reporting agency.

There's important language missing that I think needs to be added before this moves forward.

Okay, um, motion on the floor is to postpone this item for two weeks.

Councilmember Adams.

Thank you.

Um I too appreciate the additional uh information that you've provided.

And I was hoping that you weren't going to continue a postponement.

I'm glad that you've you know narrowed that to two weeks.

And the the reason for me is because I keep looking at this and like there's no cost to the city with this the when I read my agenda packet, it says there's no cost to the city.

I'll comment afterwards.

Sorry, sorry.

Um that the um people who are uh going to be contacted have many other opportunities to work with the court to find uh some way to deal with that ticket or to deal with that citation.

So there are options there that they have not availed themselves to.

Uh and in terms of the complaints that I hear from uh from my constituents, it's it's not uh it's not about the collection process, it's about the the app in general, or it's about something not being done, like someone has made a violation.

They they've they violated some rule, and then the citizen is sitting there seeing nothing being done.

So I I feel like this addresses things from a lot of different angles in terms of closing the gap as it refers to um in the document, and uh doing so in a manner that still gives someone the ability to uh use the the court's opportunities that's not being taken away.

So I would support this uh as is I'm not sure that the postponement gets us a whole lot, um, but I'll keep listening.

Councilmember Parker.

Well, I just wanted to clarify, and I apologize for interrupting you because you're absolutely right that there are no financial costs to the city.

But what I have just been feeling is that there are other costs, and especially if this company has very few uh options available to it to collect on this debt, other than harassing people, the cost is public trust.

The cost is um uh uh having the um you know a community that that enjoys their city and that trusts their leadership and that doesn't feel like um you know their their circumstances are being ignored, which is why I would want to see a revision to this contract so that we are focusing on those that have had multiple violations that they've ignored, um, you know, rather than the potential that we have you know letters going out to all uncollected debt all the way back to 10 years, and um you know how what how that might impact the relationship between uh the leaders of the city and our residents.

So I think that there are costs.

I'm not I'm one of those people though who in economics was was with not just talking about the money but all of the other costs involved, and that's what I'm worried about in this situation.

Councilmember Lloyd.

Well, sir, um uh I'm really thrilled to to hear that this is going to affect animal control cases as well.

Um personally I have a neighborhood in my district uh they have animal owners that are repeat offenders and there appears to be absolutely nothing that they you know that can be done about it as it stands right now.

Uh pardon the pun, but I'm glad to see a little teeth put in this law.

And I'm ready to support it right now as it is.

Mayor could I uh sure Judge Cavanas very very small uh addition um I certainly recognize that we're talking about different things when when we talk about what's specifically in the contract and what's not I recognize that but um everything um I have been told through this RFP process and and everything that is my understanding and the reason that I'm standing here um asking to move forward on this is that we are not simply going to give names and case numbers to this company and then they will do as they will this will be a a um front-end heavy process in terms of the implementation so that we can set our directives and our expectations um specifically working on what will the letters say and and although I can't tell you exactly what I want them to say I I can assure you that I intend for our communications to say something along the lines of if you have uh concerns about your ability to pay or if you feel that you're experiencing financial difficulty contact the court not contact uh purdue brandon um and so again while we're talking about not specifically what's in the contract um my understanding of this process is that Purdue Brandon will be operating um under a set of written defined and I suppose to some degree negotiated although I believe that's probably the wrong word to say I just uh a collaborative process is is a better word that's what I meant to say and so there will be written guidelines that we can refer to and that will be my expectation of how Purdue Brandon operates and how this contract is um is carried out and how those services are provided so contractually that's a different question I certainly understand that but my expectations of their services and their interactions with the public um certainly I would we would have a problem and and we would have to address that if they are operating outside of those parameters.

Yeah I mean my my thing as I said um we can go ahead and vote it's the language you know um acting on things saying you're gonna do things after contracts is signed there's a poor history of that let me just say that language needs to be in there it's important for language to be in there and all I'm asking is for two more weeks to figure out what additional language we can put in this contract to make sure later on down the line if if you're no longer in this position right whatever the case may be we want to we want to make sure that we have it in writing um you know when I look at the costs and in and uh you know when I'm looking at the contract upon payment of total balance delinquent fines and fees owed to the Knoxville municipal court plus the 20% collection fee by debtor Purdue Brandon shall invoice the city and shall be paid 20% collection fee with the remaining balance to be retained by the city percent to the contract documents right and so when we say it's not costing the city anything true it's it's it can cost the citizens of Knoxville right?

They're the ones going to be paying the bonds.

They're gonna be the ones who's gonna be dealing with this collection agency with your oversight, which in trusting your oversight, we're going to make sure that this company doesn't take advantage.

Um, but I think there's a lot of more things, even to what you said, right, in terms of putting things in writing and being able to iron those things out before we say yes on a contract and then do those things after.

Um, I just can't agree with that.

So um, I'm gonna keep my motion for two weeks.

Um, I hope my constituents will support it.

Um, and I look hope to support whatever you have going on moving forward as well.

Okay, uh the motion on the floor is whether or not to postpone for two weeks.

All those in favor of postponing for two weeks, please say aye.

Any opposed?

I think we need a roll call vote.

Councilman Grant, Councilman Helsley, Councilman Lloyd?

No.

Councilman Parker?

Yes, Councilman Thomas, Councilman Adams?

No, Councilman DeBarta Laban?

Vice Mayor Fugit.

No.

Mayor, the vote is three in favor, five for yes, five opposed.

Okay, the motion to postpone fails.

Uh back to the original motion, which is whether or not to approve this uh agreement proposed by Judge Cavanus.

All those in favor of approving the agreement, please say aye.

Any opposed?

Is it five-three in favor?

Is that or do we need a roll call?

Six two.

That's it.

Grant and Parker.

Okay, two opposed.

Is that six?

Uh why don't we do a roll call?

Sure, yes, yeah.

Um, if you good.

Yes.

Councilman Grant.

Councilman Helsley, Councilman Lloyd, yeah.

Councilman Parker.

No.

Councilman Thomas.

Yes.

Councilman Adams.

Yes.

Councilman DeBarta Laban.

Mayor, the vote is seven and six in favor, two opposed.

Okay, motion carries.

Thank you, Judge Cavanas.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, thank you, Vice Mayor, thank you, Councilman.

And I certainly do uh welcome continued input.

You all have my number.

Um, please ask me any questions.

Happy to continue to engage.

Thank you all.

Okay, next item, please.

12-0 is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with true grip and lighting incorporated to provide the stage lighting and production equipment for the city's festival on the fourth in an amounts not to exceed $68,500 for the first year of the agreement with the option to extend the agreement to include festival and the fourth events in 2027 and 2028 under the same terms and conditions, except that the amount of the agreement may increase annually based on the consumer price inducts with a cap of 3.5%, six 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, 12 P is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute any and all documents necessary to award a total amounts not to exceed 75,000 dollars from the historic preservation facade improvement program to Paragon Development LP for the restoration and reuse of property located at 825 North Central Street, 4th District.

Motion made to approve and second it.

Any questions or discussion?

Seeing uh council member Thomas.

Uh yes, just briefly, um, as I had a conversation with Miss Um Justice as well.

Um, this is some of the things that we really actually need to do as far as removing blight, and this is actually kind of a critical place on uh Central Avenue.

It's between uh places that have actually been redeveloped and look nice, and this is kind of a gap there that uh nothing has been done.

So uh I think it's a small amount to invest from the city, uh, knowing that inevitably the tax base is gonna be increased on it.

So I fully support this and happy to see it happening.

Thank you.

Any further questions or discussion?

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

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

12 12 Q is a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with Knoxville Zoological Gardens Incorporated to lease property liquidated at 3500 Knoxville Zoo Drive in order to supervise, manage, and operate the zoo for an initial term of five years, sixth district.

Second motion made to approve and seconded.

Councilmember Parker.

Yeah, just a quick question.

I was not able to see the diagram in the contract very clearly, and just wanted to ask: have is the footprint that the zoo is managing on that property the same as under the previous contract.

Yes, it is.

Okay.

Just want to clarify that.

Thank you.

Any further questions or discussions?

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

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Okay.

Next item, please.

13.

13T as an ordinance amending chapter 7.5 of the Knoxville City Code, Article 2, Sections 7.5-63 and 7.5-76.

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.

Okay.

We'll now have um several people signed up for public forum.

I'll call them in the order that they're listed on my list here.

First is Chris Patterson.

Chris Patterson, are you present?

There is.

Mr.

Patterson, uh, you'll have up to three minutes to address council.

Uh thank you.

Chris Patterson, 197 Gran View Drive, Manorville.

I'm retired fire capital city.

I'll keep it real short.

I wanted to thank council members for listening to me speak last time.

Councilman Grant, thank you.

Councilman Bartolator, thank you.

Councilman Lloyd, thank you.

Councilman Parker.

Councilwoman Parker, I'm sorry, thank you.

I'm a little nervous up here.

But I appreciate y'all listening.

I'll be hanging out after the meeting if any other council members like to speak about what I've dealt with since I've been injured in the fire department.

Or I've had to deal with with insurance.

So for that, I give the rest of my time.

Thank you.

Next person signed up for public forum is Jeff Talman.

Mr.

Talman.

You have up to three minutes.

Thank you, Mayor.

Members of council.

Um, I had actually signed up for 12J, uh, and that had gotten moved up in the in the agenda.

Uh, and in my haste and advancing dementia, I missed that.

Could I ask your uh forgiveness and 60 seconds to address 12J before we have two minutes and 40 seconds?

Use it however you see fit.

Okay.

Well, I wanted to speak on uh behalf of uh public uh uh public community uh uh access media, a hugely important uh unfiltered media is vital to uh a uh engaged citizenry, so I appreciate your support.

Uh appreciate you, Councilwoman Parker, for your leadership there.

Uh but that's not why I came to speak uh tonight.

Um per the 75,000 going into the building there on Broadway, which you just recognized, uh Councilman Thomas.

Uh that investment gives uh good good results.

We know from the discussion about the bridge uh going to South Knoxville that there's gonna be activity that's gonna pay for the bridge.

So uh there's all sorts of development opportunities in the community, which I'm fully in favor of.

When I was here in January to uh congratulate uh this new council, I mentioned uh some of the development opportunities, and one of those which is screaming loudly in our community is Knoxville College.

There's efforts underway right now to revitalize Knoxville College, and anybody who's uh working on that, our friend Daisha Lundy, namely there's others, should do so with full knowledge of everything that's involved.

Uh we go back to the 2018 uh Madeline Rojero State of the City address when the proposal was made to acquire Knoxville College to move the safety building, the fire and police uh to the college.

That did not happen.

Um we have now a public investment of 70 million dollars uh at a new school across the street.

We're pushing a third of a billion dollars for investment at Western Heights, and right in the middle of it is right now the rotting carcass of Knoxville College.

It's unacceptable in this community.

So, what I'd like to do and and uh uh direct me to who to submit the open records, we guess request to, I would like to get full uh records and documentation correspondence between the city of Knoxville, previous administration, all departments, and with with Knoxville College.

Um if Ms.

Lundy is going to pull the rabbit out of the hat to revitalize the college, we need to be aware as a community what's all involved.

Liens, uh etc.

There was a recent story by uh Chronicle of Higher Ed that there's an 1,100 calls, 1,100 calls to frontline safety personnel to either put out a fire to haul a body out of the building or something.

That is a an enormous subsidy from this community and something that we need to deal with.

So uh anyway, I'll can submit that open records request.

Is that through the legal department?

Thank you, Mr.

Tomman.

I'll have someone uh that your time is up.

I'll have a staff person let you know about how to do that process as soon as public farm concludes.

Good.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

Uh next person signed up to speak at public forum is Newland Moorefield.

Newland Moorefield, are you present?

Okay.

Uh next person is Janet Neely.

Miss Neely.

It's my first time addressing city council.

Um, my name is Janet Neely, 37919.

Uh moved to Knoxville in 1982 as a Lakeshore student.

I was doing my internship there.

Um, then Pat Neal contacted my school and brought me here.

They drove me here from school.

I chose to live in Knoxville.

I've been in the disability community ever since 1982.

Um, speaking tonight about something that I found out recently that has gotten me interested to hear what the council might think about this.

Um, I've been friends with Stephanie Cook for well over 20 years, and she tries to think it's shorter because we're not that old, but that's too bad.

Um, I served on committees, saw her at events in other cities, states, things like that.

Um, so naturally I took an interest when I heard she was retiring and I had heard nothing about it.

Um, and I was interested to hear who her predecessor would be, who's gonna be taking over the office, who's gonna be serving this community that I've been here living with, living for, going to their homes, seeing them in hospital, seeing them at their worst time in their life, and in the best.

Anyway, Stephanie's always been there, and y'all don't have a anyway.

Let me just state on my thing.

Anyway, um, upon further investigation, I found information that was unsettling.

Very recently, a change happened.

The city's 2026 ADA study, I think it was presented in May.

Uh, this study made claims that the disability services office was not ever official, and that it was unnecessary.

This disability office was established in 2012.

Um, this statement was made by a gentleman I can't remember his name, but he also uh must not have a clue.

He couldn't have taken into consideration the nature of what actually that office provides to this city on a shoestring budget.

That office has begged for money for another staff person forever.

We got a part-time person, they pay her peanuts.

I want you to look at her salary and what they do.

She left.

Um, after it wasn't until after a meeting about this study with Miss Cook, and this is what I want you all to please look at.

Was that she began her paperwork for retirement?

She saw the writing on the wall.

She saw what was being done.

I'm saying it out loud.

This study appears to dissolve our disability services office.

There is no plan that I could find anywhere to continue it.

There's a there's verbiage about we have people with certificates and other places that can do this.

I am all for people getting certificates.

Please go get certificates.

Learn a little bit about what happens in a disability community.

I know you all know people with disabilities, you're probably caring for them, love them.

You're gonna have one.

And if this is how we treat us, this is our baseline of Knoxville.

Thank you, Miss.

Thank you.

Please look into how that happened, the process.

Next person signed up to speak is Vivian Scheipe.

Ms.

Scheipe.

Are you present?

Okay, she may have left.

Uh next person is Michael Jennings Rinkle.

Michael Jennings Rinkle.

Are you present?

Okay, I don't see him.

Uh last person signed up to speak is Rick Roach.

Mr.

Roach, are you present?

Okay.

Uh those folks uh do not appear to be present, so without objection, this meeting is adjourned.