I'm so sorry.

I would like to recognize our chaplain of the day, Pastor Steve Young of Armore, Terrace Baptist Church.

If you will please come to the podium and lead us in prayer.

Is he here at this time?

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chairwoman.

Thank you to the council members.

Let us go to the Lord in prayer.

Oh Lord, our Lord, how excellent is your name in all the earth.

We bow before your presence.

We come to you this afternoon as humbly as we know how, acknowledging that you are the Alpha and the Omega.

You are the beginning and the ending.

You are the first and the last.

Everything that is was made by you and made for you.

And without you, nothing was made that was made.

You are God.

With that in mind, dear Father, we are reminded that you are the originator of human government, legislative order, legislative law and justice, we recognize the fearsome responsibility shouldered by these, your ministers in the earth, these appointed men and women who make up this August body.

We affirm that they are here in service by your divine decree and your sovereign will.

Bless them with wisdom, knowledge, insight, discernment, and understanding.

May these your legislators be emboldened to stand for right, truth and justice.

May they bring by their legislation joy to the righteous and strike terror to the evildoers.

May they by their good laws convict the guilty and protect the innocent.

Sin is a reproach to any people, but righteousness exalts a nation, a state, and even a city.

Grant them the grace to have done it without bribe, without deceit, without inducement, without an unbalanced scale, far from evil and temptation.

May they hear, O Lord, well done, servant, well done.

And we all say Amen.

Amen.

Please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you.

You may be seated.

Thank you for that beautiful prayer.

Councilwoman Dr.

Easter Thomas, you are recognized at this time.

Thank you, Chair.

And good evening to the City of Memphis who's joined us today.

I just want to say thank you to Pastor Steve Young and First Lady Tammy Young for joining us today.

And just to read this into the record.

Be it hereby known that Pastor Steve Young, in recognition of a life of exemplary qualities, outstanding service to the city, meritorious involvement in humanitarian affairs, and demonstrated concern for governmental process, has been appointed chaplain of the day of the Memphis City Council and is hereby entitled to all of the honors, rights, privileges, and prerogatives appertaining to the office and to display of this certificate given under this seal, 21st day of July.

Janice Warren, Washington Chair, and myself, Michael and Easter Thomas, thank you.

And again, this is Pastor Steve Young from Oddmore Terrace Baptist Church in Fraser in the lovely District 7th.

So we are so glad to have you here with us today.

Thank you.

So we're gonna get a picture too.

Thank you, Chair.

We would like to acknowledge that we have former chair Kim Conrad in the back.

Councilman, we're so glad to have you.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call the roll.

Thank you.

Council members Canale, Carlisle, Cooper Sutton, Easter Thomas, Ford, Green, Logan, Smiley, Spinoza, Walker, Warren, White.

Chairwoman Swearinger Washington.

Present.

Thank you.

I believe Ford Canale has read the minutes.

We didn't do anything.

What are we gonna do?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I've reviewed the meeting minutes from the July 7th, 2026 meeting.

Find them to be in order and I move for their adoption.

All right, it has been moved by Councilman Ford Canale.

Second by Councilwoman Green, Madam Comptroller, if you will please prepare the screen for the vote.

Councilmember Carlisle uh did not vote.

Easter Thomas, yes, Ford, yes, Green, yes, Smiley, yes, Spinoza, yes, Walker, yes, Warren, yes, white, yes.

Chairwoman, would you like to vote on the minutes?

My screen is not.

Yes, we are having some difficulties, but I'm moving forward.

Thank you.

The minutes did pass, ma'am.

All right.

That item passes.

Welcome to the July 21st, 2026 regular meeting of the Memphis City Council.

Meetings of the council shall be conducted in an orderly manner to ensure that the public has the full opportunity to be heard and the deliberate process of the council is retained at all times.

Our council staff member has meeting agendas available up front, as well as comment request cards for members of the public wishing to be heard on that specific item.

Brianna, would you raise your hand so they can know who you are?

Thank you.

All those wishing to speak on an item must turn in their comment card to the staff before the item is called.

If you are not here to speak on a specific item, you can note your request to give general comments at the end of the meeting.

As chair, I will recognize citizens that properly registered to speak by submitting a completed comment request card to council staff.

I would also like to ask that we hold a moment of silence in memory of the late Henry Hooper, who was a devoted Memphian, decorated veteran, and former Memphis City Councilman, who has gone to be with the Lord.

We extend our deepest condolences to his beautiful family, his friends, and all the citizens whose lives he touched.

Item number 15 has been held until Tuesday, September 15th, 2026.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call item number one.

Item number one is a resolution recognizing and honoring Lemoyne Owen College in celebration of his fifth annual 807 Giving Day.

This resolution is sponsored by the Memphis City Council.

Councilwoman White, you are recognized at this time.

And I'm going to brief uh be I'm going to shorten if that's okay with everyone.

But whereas it is fitting that the Memphis City Council recognize and honor institutions of higher education.

And actually, don't we have some a representative from Lemoyne Owen here?

I thought we did.

Thank you so much for joining us today.

Yes.

We're as, well, I won't start over.

Um, honor institutions of higher education whose longstanding commitment to academic excellence, leadership, development, and community service has positively impacted generations of students and strengthened the city of Memphis.

And we're as the Memphis City Council has on numerous occasions recognized Lemoyne Owen College for its unwavering commitment to providing a transformative educational experience and preparing students for lives of leadership, scholarship, service, and success.

And whereas established in 2021, the annual 807 Giving Day was created to honor the college's historic address at 807 Walker Avenue.

The name 807 serves as both a tribute to the institution's rich history and a meaningful reminder that every gift, regardless of size, makes a lasting impact on the lives of its students.

And whereas the week-long celebration held on the historic campus of Lemoyne Owen College includes worship on Walk on Walker on Sunday, the Magic Monday mixer for alumni and friends, and culminates with the live-streamed 807 Giving Day Telethon on Friday, August 7th, 2026.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Memphis City Council hereby recognizes and honors Lemoyne Owen College on the occasion of its 807 Giving Day.

Thank you so much for being here.

We know how important Lemoine Owen College is to Memphis and our community.

So thank you so much for being here and us celebrating and acknowledging 807 Giving Day, August 7th to 2026.

Yes, thank you so much, Dr.

Nichols.

Would you like to say a word?

I simply want to uh thank the City Council, all of the representatives.

I would like to acknowledge our faculty who is also a councilwoman, as well as all of you for your support.

On behalf of President Davis, the college, many of us are out at a UNCF conference in Atlanta.

So I stand here on the shoulders of all that came before me just to say thank you.

I say this about my institution that you cannot get to transformational leadership in the city of Memphis in the county of Shelby or the state of Tennessee without crossing the sacred grounds of the Lemoyne Own College.

And by your support, you not only help us to continue this work, but you ensure that your tax base is secure because most of the students from Lemoine One College stay in Memphis and Shelby County to give back to their city.

So thank you for your continued support.

Thank you so much.

Please allow us about five minutes to be able to reprogram so that we can get our screens up.

Just give us a few minutes.

We need to get out.

Let me say you all have just been a perfect audience.

We will start with our consent agenda, items three and four.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call the consent agenda, items three and four.

Thank you.

Item number three is a joint ordinance to amend the Memphis and Shelby County Unified Development Code adopted by the City of Memphis on August 10th, 2010, and by Shelby County on August 9th, 2010, to establish a procedure for replacing the zoning map.

Up for first reading, this ordinance is sponsored by the Division of Planning and Development.

The case number is ZTA twenty six zero two.

The ordinance number is five nine seven nine.

Item number four is a resolution approving supplemental agreement number one for Selfville Memphis East Homes Road and accepting bond as security.

Councilman Spinoza, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Without objection, I'd like to hold or pull item number three off the consent agenda.

Um we need to need to read that in committee.

It's been moved by Councilman Spinoza and second by Council Woman Walker.

To hold it.

Yeah, just hold it and bring it back to committee for an actual just first reading for us.

You know, it has to do with the zoning maps and the changes, and we've come this far.

I just want to be transparent with it, and Director Ragsdale agrees, so there's no controversy or anything.

I applaud your transparency.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call the MLGW Fiscal Consent.

Item number six is a resolution approving the increase to contract number one two five one two master paving program sections one and three with Lehman Roberts Company to increase the current contract in the funded amount of five million dollars.

Item number seven is a resolution awarding contract number one two five nine five LNG storage tank painting to Viking Painting LLC in the funded amount of three million one hundred and sixty-seven thousand five hundred and sixty dollars.

There is a request for same night minutes for this item number seven.

Item number eight is a resolution approving the ratification increase and renewal to contract number one two three nine zero project portfolio management software two acquisition with work otter inc to ratify increase the contract amount and renew the current contract in the funded amount of 196,859.

Item number nine is a resolution awarding contract number one two six three eight North Service Center Building Five Roof Replacement to be for applied Inc.

in the funded amount of five hundred fifty-eight thousand two hundred forty-two dollars and thirty cents and item number ten is a resolution ratifying the award of contract number one two six five four Samsara telematics to Samsara Inc.

in the funded not to exceed amount of four million six hundred forty-five thousand four hundred sixty-two dollars and eighty cents.

Madam Chair, that concludes your MLGW fiscal consent items.

Councilwoman Walker, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The committee met and there was a favorable recommendation, and I so move.

All right.

Move it electronically.

Move it electronically.

Councilwoman Walker.

It has been moved by Councilwoman Walker, second by Councilman Spinoza.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please prepare the screen for the vote.

Canale, yes, Easter Thomas, yes, green, yes.

Please show council member Ford as voting yes on this item.

Spinoza, yes, walker, yes, Warren, yes, chairwoman Swearin' Washington, yes.

That item passes.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please go to the regular agenda and call number item number eleven.

Item number 11 is an ordinance to amend chapter 25 pension and retirement system of the city of Memphis, Tennessee, up for third and final reading.

Ordinance number 5974 is sponsored by the administration.

Councilwoman White, you're recognized.

Thank you, Chair Chairwoman.

The committee met in recommended approval and I so moved.

All right.

It has been moved by Councilwoman White.

Can I get a second?

Second by Councilman Spinoza.

There are no council in the queue to speak.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please prepare the screen for the vote.

Canale, yes, Easter, Thomas, yes.

Ford, yes, Green, yes, Spinoza, yes, Walker, yes, Warren, yes, White, yes, Chairwoman Swearing, Washington, yes.

That item passes.

Madam Comptroller, please call item number 12.

Item number 12 is an ordinance to amend City of Memphis Code of Ordinances, Chapter 33, Article 3, and corresponding chapter 1328 to increase the sewer fees up for third and final reading.

Ordinance number 5975 is sponsored by the administration.

Councilwoman White, you're recognized.

Thank you.

The committee met in recommended approval and I so move.

It's been moved by Councilwoman White.

Second by Councilman Warren.

There are no counsel in the queue to speak.

Madam Comptroller, please prepare the screen.

Canale, yes.

Easter Thomas, yes.

Ford, yes.

Smiley, yes.

Spinoza, yes.

Walker, yes.

White, yes.

Chairwoman Swearing Washington, yes.

That item passes.

Madam Comptroller, please call item number 13.

Item number 13 is a referendum ordinance to amend the charter of the city of Memphis, same being chapter 11 of the Acts of 1879 as amended, pursuant to provisions of Article 9 of the Constitution of the State of Tennessee, home rule amendment, so as to establish lobbyist registration and disclosure requirements and to submit the proposed referendum ordinance to the qualified voters of the city of Memphis at the next state general election.

Up for third and final reading, ordinance number 597 is sponsored by Councilman Carlisle.

Councilwoman White, you're recognized.

Thank you, Chairwoman.

I need for you all to check for me, but I believe this is the one we ended kind of on a uh probably not a resolved note.

So I would just say that it came down without recommendation.

For item number 13.

Councilwoman Easter Thomas, you're in the uh you're recognized.

I I think under the circumstances it comes down without a recommendation and the sponsor's not here, so I can't really speak to it.

Councilman Smiley.

I just want to move the hold until the sponsor can come speak to it.

I don't want to spend all day on an issue when the person who proposed it is not here to you know talk about the justification.

So I'll move to hold this matter.

Okay, can I get a second?

Until the next two council meetings.

What is that?

Okay.

No, you can't do it.

It has been moved.

What's the day?

I need to get a givea specific.

Just move it to the next meeting.

We'll move it to the next meeting and then we'll see what happens.

All right.

August 4th meeting.

Then move by Councilman Smiley.

Second by Councilman Spinoza for that item to be held until the next council meeting.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call item number 14.

Item number 14 is a referendum ordinance to amend the charter of the city of Memphis, same being chapter 11 of the Acts of 1879 as amended, pursuant to the provisions of Article 9, Section 9 of the Constitution of the State of Tennessee to authorize the creation by ordinance of uniform administrative procedures and systems for disposition of appeals that may affect the employment status of civil service employees.

Up for third and final reading, ordinance number 5978 is sponsored by Councilman Carlisle.

Councilman Smiley, you're recognized.

I'll move the whole distance to the August 4th meeting.

Uh let me speak to this one.

All right, Attorney Wade.

Uh originally there was some blanket um creation of authority for the council and the mayor to create a system, but I changed it to make it be an administrative procedures act, and I think it's compliant with the law.

I'm not sure how it's handled in the committee, but I've signed off on it if if y'all want to move it on.

Move the hold on to the August 4th meeting.

All right.

Got a motion to hold.

Second by Councilwoman Green, who will hold that item.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call item number 15.

15 is gonna be held too.

All right.

All right.

Starting with item number 16.

Madam Qui controller.

Item number 16 is an appointment.

Art Davis, Chief Financial Officer, and there is a request for same night minutes for this item.

Okay.

Councilwoman White, you're recognized.

Thank you, Chairwoman.

The committee met in recommended approval, and I still move.

It's been moved by Councilwoman White, second by Councilman Ford Canale.

Mr.

Davis, would you like to say something?

Mr.

Winter, you might as well be making your way down.

Yes, sir.

Art Davis, NRM CFO, Center of Memphis 125 North Maine.

I just want to say again, thank you for the uh confidence that the mayor has uh put in me and for your confidence in your vote uh support and the recommendation for the committee.

And I also want to uh remind everyone what I said that my goal is to bring transparency to the finance division as well as ensure that every uh public dollar that is received by the city is managed in the uh best way possible and uh I will support this council, the mayor, but most importantly, the citizens of Memphis.

Thank you.

All right.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please prepare the screen.

Canale, yes, Easter Thomas, yes, Ford, yes, Green, yes, Spinoza, yes, Walker, yes, Warren, yes, white, yes, chairwoman Swearing in Washington, yes.

That item passes.

Congratulations.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call item number 17.

Item number 17 is also an appointment.

Chris Winton, Chief Administrative Officer.

There is a request for same night minutes for this item also.

All right.

We would love to hear from you.

Thank you, madam.

Council, uh, it is truly my pleasure to be here before you uh as I've shared before after meeting with individuals and constituents across the city, as well as the leadership team here at City Hall.

One thing is clear.

There is a deep love for this city and a deep commitment to delivering more.

And I thank you for the opportunity to be here and request your approval so we can get to work.

There's no council in the queue to speak.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please prepare the screen for the vote.

It has been moved by Councilman Warren, second by Councilman Spinoza.

Canale, yes, Easter Thomas, yes, Ford, yes, Green, yes, Spinoza, yes, Walker, yes, Warren, yes, white, yes, chairwoman Swearing Washington, yes.

That item passes.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call item number 18.

Item number 18 is also congratulations.

Item number 18 is also appointments to the airport authority.

We have Belinda Anderson, Pamela Clary, Damar Roberts.

There's also a request for same night minutes for item 18.

Councilwoman White, you're recognized.

The committee met in recommended approval and I so moved.

It has been moved by Councilwoman White, seconded by Councilman Spinoza.

I don't see Miss Claire in the audience.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please prepare the screen for the vote.

Yes, Easter Thomas, yes, green, yes, smiley, yes, Spinoza, yes, Walker, yes, Warren, yes, white, yes.

Please show council member Ford as voting yes on this item and chairwoman Swarrange in Washington, yes.

That item passes.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call item number 19.

Item number 19 is a resolution to accept and allocate surface transportation block grant funds in the amount of five hundred eighty-one thousand eight hundred and forty dollars in grant funds from the Tennessee Department of Transportation for the Memphis Airport Plow Boulevard Access Road, Project PW01109, District 3, Super District 8.

This resolution is sponsored by the administration.

There is a request for same night minutes.

Councilman Smiley, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The committee may recommend approval not so move.

It has been moved by Councilman Smiley, second by Councilman Spinoza.

There are no council members in the queue to speak.

Madam Comptroller, please prepare the screen.

Council, if you'll vote at this time.

Easter Thomas, yes, Ford, yes, Green, yes, Spinoza, yes, Walker, yes, Warren, yes, White, yes, Chairwoman Swearing Washington, yes.

Please show Councilmember Smiley as voting yes on this item.

Tenzanaya.

That item passes.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please call item number 20.

Item number 20 is a resolution appointing MATAS Fiscal Trustee.

All council districts.

This resolution is sponsored by Councilman Ford, and there is a request for same night minutes for this item.

Councilwoman Green, you're in the queue.

Thank you, Chair.

I just wanted to clarify again for the listening public that this is taking out Walter Person, who was our CFO and putting in Art Davis, who is now our CFO.

It is not in any way approving a contract because we don't do contracting for any amount in regards to any trustee.

So just so everybody's clear, this is just putting in one name for the other because there's now been a change in leadership.

But we don't make contracts or set salaries.

Thank you, Councilwoman Green.

Councilman Ford Canale, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The committee met recommended approval and I shall move.

All right, it's been moved by Councilman Ford Canale.

Second by Councilman Warren.

Madam Comtroller, if you will please prepare the screen.

Thank you.

Canale, yes.

Easter Thomas, yes, Ford, yes, Green, yes, Spinoza, yes, Walker, yes, Warren, yes, White, yes, Chairwoman Swearing Washington, yes.

That item passes.

Madam Comtroller, if you will please call item number two.

Item number two is an appeal of Romanus Corporation and others.

Memphis Alcohol Commission Matter T 36342, file pursuant to 4-3 and 412 of the City of Memphis Code of Ordinances required by ordinance.

This was held from March 24th.

Okay.

Councilman Hork Canale, you're recognized.

Do I yes?

Move it.

Right.

Yeah, just move it without a recommendation.

All right, thank you, Madam Chair.

Without recommendation, I move to the floor.

All right.

It's been moved by Councilman for Canale.

Can I get a second?

And second by Councilman Spinoza.

At this time, we're gonna give each side 15 minutes.

Would you like to start?

Thank you very much.

If you'll put 15 minutes, you already did.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you very much.

My name is Robert Spence, 65 Union Avenue, suite 900.

And I have the distinct pleasure of representing the appellates in this appeal that is before you today.

We're asking the city council to overrule the Memphis Alcohol Commission approval and find that Ethan Etwart's application to operate a liquor store at 870 South White Station Road does not satisfy the proximity distance requirement.

That's what we're asking the city council to do today in this appeal.

And the reason that we're asking this city council to take that action is for one simple straightforward reason.

The location of Mr.

Edwards Liquor Store violates ordinance 74-5A, and it falls within the 1,500 feet proximity requirement, and is within 1,500 feet of Woodland Presbyterian Church and School.

All of you are familiar with your own ordinance, 7-4-5-A, which provides the proximity distance requirement that I've talked about.

It requires any store selling alcoholic beverages not be located within 1,500 feet from any church, school, park, library, or the liquor store.

So that is that is the rule that is applied uniformly with respect to all applicants like Mr.

Edwards who seek to open a liquor store in our community.

Now before Mr.

Edwards ever filed an application, he engaged a professional surveyor to measure the distance for him from his proposed liquor store location.

On September 5th, Pickering Surveyor Lynn Spencer told Mr.

Edwards, the store doesn't meet the straight line measurements.

Can you get a variance?

Can you get a variance?

And then there are several other communications between Mr.

Edwards and Ms.

Spencer, which basically say that they know the rule, they will not ask the city for any clarification or explanation of the rules because they don't want to send up red flags about this application.

So it is it is clear that before the application was submitted about two weeks after these communications, Mr.

Edwards was aware that his proposed location did not meet the proximity distance requirement.

A week after these communications, his own lawyer, attorney Mark Joe, told him I'm a little concerned about the distance to Woodland if you go south on White Station and East on Park.

His lawyer further told him, I do think you have to turn down park and finish 1,500 feet east and west from the center line.

There are a lot of things important about this communication, but one of the things that I that I want you to focus on is that at the time of this communication, September 13, 2024, there was no dispute that the center line at issue for a correct measurement was White Station, was White Station.

There is some individual named Gerald, who is only identified as Gerald, who instructed the professional surveyor how to perform the survey.

And she acquiesced to his request, and we ended up with this.

The first survey submitted by Mr.

Edwards was fraudulent.

He knew it was fraudulent when he submitted it.

What is strange is that the alcohol commission didn't flag it as fraudulent when he submitted it.

Because you, as you see from this survey, he submitted, as opposed to turning east and west on park, which is denoted by the blue dashes, which is required.

He presented a survey that kept straight on White Station, and that's the yellow line.

But again, even on this fraudulent survey that Mr.

Edwards submitted, the center line is on White Station Road because that is where the liquor store fronts.

That is where the liquor store fronts.

Even though Mr.

Edwards submitted a fraudulent survey to the Memphis Alcohol Commission for some inexplicable reason, the Memphis Alcoff Commission approved it on September 20th, 2024, in a meeting that was later determined by a court of law as violating the Open Meetings Act.

So they have a fraudulent survey, they conduct a meeting that is valative of the Open Meetings Act and approve Mr.

Edwards application.

Well, same parties that are gathered here today went to court.

In court, Mr.

Edwards added something to his argument.

What he added was that the proximity distance ordinance that all of you know is in effect that it did not apply to him.

That it did not apply to him.

As section four-five of the Memphis City Code of Ordinances was not the governing law at the time of the application.

That was obviously absurd.

So by this time, we have a fraudulent survey of a meeting that violates the open meetings act.

We have an absurd legal position in court that the ordinance doesn't apply to Mr.

Edwards.

So we have all of these aberrant behaviors, fraudulent surveys, open meeting act violations.

We're not a governing body that is that is required to comply with the open meetings act.

All of these aberrant behaviors are being litigated, just a stone's throw from here.

Edwards, the court did not buy what they were selling.

And the court first, with respect to the cross petition that this city council was required to file to defend the ordinance, the distance proximity ordinance, the judge ruled on July 8th, 2025.

It is the court's opinion, order and declaration that the 1,500 foot restriction from churches, schools, park libraries, and other liquor stores, for instance, the 1,500 foot restriction, as originally stated in section 4-5 of the 1985 city code is still in full force and effect and the governing law.

A proposition that all of us would have taken for granted.

Mr.

Edwards argued in a court of law that this ordinance didn't apply to him, and therefore he didn't have to meet the 1,500 foot restriction.

Because remember, at that time, the survey that he submitted didn't turn down park.

It didn't turn down park.

Further, with respect to the Memphis Alcohol Commission, the court also rejected its specious argument that it was not a governing body, and that the Tennessee Open Meetings Act did not apply to it.

The court ruled, therefore, the court concludes that CMAC, City of Memphis Alcohol Commission, was functioning as a governing body on September 20th, 2024, and it deliberated and made decisions regarding Ethan Edward and Grind Management request for a certificate of compliance as part of the application for a liquor license before the TABC and was required to hold the meeting subject to the requirements of the Act.

Now governing bodies know that as a matter of course, as a former city attorney, it's an embarrassment for the alcohol commission to take the position in a court of law that the Tennessee Open Meetings Act does not govern its proceedings.

And because the Memphis Alcohol Commission's conduct was so aberrant, aberrant.

So we have all of these aberrant and strange behaviors by Mr.

Edwards by the Alcohol Commission prior to in leading up to Mr.

Edwards' second application.

What is on the screen now surveys that were done by other surveyors?

Thank you so much.

Am I done?

Yes, sir.

Are you buying my 15 minutes?

Yes, sir.

All right, but thank you.

All right, thank you.

All right, we will now have 15 minutes.

Excuse me.

Judge Ibn Start over.

Okay, thank you.

Give me the sign with this time.

Okay.

I am uh retired Judge Bernice Donald.

And I am here this afternoon with pride to represent grind management owned by Ethan Edwards.

I have a prepared presentation, but I want to just address two quick things because you know I'm senior now and I need to correct a couple of things.

Mr.

Spence accuses my client of fraud.

And I want to absolutely and flatly rebut that right here and now.

Mr.

Edwards sought legal advice after reviewing the Muni Code, which at that time had dropped any reference to 1500 feet.

It had some ellipses there.

And Mr.

Spence and the council went to Chancery Court and they argued to Chancellor Jenkins that that 1985 ordinance, even though there is no facial reference to 1500, it's still there because the ellipsis preserved it.

If you went around this chamber right now and asked people in this audience, what do the ellipses mean?

Most of them could Mr.

Edwards is not a lawyer.

And that's the reference which Mr.

Spence skews.

On the September 18th Open Meetings Act agenda, there was not a quorum.

Mr.

Edwards didn't set that agenda, but the alcohol commission could not do its business because they didn't have a quorum.

And Miss Fully Love announced to the audience, we don't have a quorum.

We will try to canvas our members and find out when we have a majority, and then we will reconvene.

If you have something on the agenda and you want to be heard, let us know.

Mr.

Edwards was there, heard that, and he appeared by Zoom on the 20th.

Not anything that he did.

The Alcohol Commission handled a number of items at that time, including voting on his application.

They voted on the opening of another liquor store, 321 South Main.

The only person who was challenged in Chancery Court was Grind Management.

The other liquor store that was approved on that agenda, the court said everything is null and void.

Busters didn't go in there and say, oh my God, they're opening up, it's null and void.

That liquor store opened two to three months later without incident.

What I want to say to you now before my 15 minutes are up.

This afternoon, we are asking this body, which sits not as a legislative body, but as a quasi-judicial body, meaning that you act as judges without the formal rules, but as judges, making judicial decisions.

And I want to ask you to dismiss this petition for three reasons.

One busters, D-Wine, and the Liquor Dope Liquor Depot have no legal standing to appear before you and challenge this application or challenge the actions of the Alcohol Commission.

They have no injury in fact or law.

There is nothing that they could do before January 6th, when this was approved, that they could not do afterwards or now.

They have no cognizable injury.

Mr.

Spence is a brilliant lawyer.

He is well esteemed, but his esteem and his brilliance cannot create legal standing in a court of law or before a quasi judicial body.

The other thing is, as I said, there is no injury in fact.

They cannot come in here, even though they mention Woodland Presbyterian, they cannot invoke the jurisdiction of Woodland Presbyteria to church or school in order to get standing.

They simply have none.

They are non-parties, and a non-party cannot come in and challenge this application.

In the statute, it provides for a right of appeal, but that right of appeal is for the applicant.

Busters, D wines, and the Liquor Depot were not applicants.

There are people who come in here every time you have a meeting and seek to speak, they fill out a card.

But that filling out a card and speaking does not give them the right to step into a court of law and sue your action.

Mr.

Spence argues a pseudo-good government argument.

The Supreme Court has said that the person who comes in and gets standing to challenge a petition must not have a general generalized right that every other citizen would have.

They have to have some special injury.

None.

What is the injury that the wine depot suffered?

None.

This is a spurious and ongoing campaign to keep Mr.

Edwards and Grind Management from opening their store.

I want to quickly go through the presentation now, because I want to show you a couple of things.

I want to talk to you about investments in Memphis.

So why are we here?

We're here because Busters and those other appellants do not want lawful competition.

They do not want this man to open.

They want to try to bury him.

The station has been open for five months.

And if you today accede to their request, what do you get?

If you go back and overrule the uh alcohol commission's action, which was based on substantial evidence, what does that do for you?

What does it get?

It gets nothing because the alcohol commission did not issue a final order.

They only made a recommendation to Mayor Young.

Mayor Young then reviewed that recommendation and sent it to the state.

The state of Tennessee is the licensing authority that issued that license, which gave Mr.

Edwards a property right in that license.

So if you if you um today say, okay, they didn't have authority, what do you do then?

Do you sue Mayor Young in his official capacity and ask him to revoke or rescind his certificate of compliance?

A suit against Mayor Young in his official capacity is a suit against the city of Memphis.

What does that get?

Do you go over to Chancery Court where Mr.

Mr.

Hammond and Busters has already filed an action against Mr.

Edwards?

Do you step into those shoes and try to prosecute an action against yourselves, the city of Memphis there?

Or does Memphis go to Davidson County in Nashville and file an action in Chancery Court to try and strip him of his license?

I say no.

This is the station.

You can see it's alive and going, it's been going now for about five months.

The Memphis Alcohol Commission, after a full hearing spanning two full days, found that Grimes 2025 application complied with all local state laws and ordinances.

The Biffis Mayor signed the ordinance.

So today you should reject this appeal, dismiss it, and tell Busters and their cohorts to lead this man along and let him run his business and contribute to the fabric of the city.

The survey, this is what we presented to the Alcohol Commission, which is the only real survey in the packet.

This was done by the Reese survey.

Greg Markham, a licensed surveyor, is here this afternoon.

He testified before the alcohol commission.

They questioned him.

That is the survey.

You see, they told you what people said.

It doesn't matter what anybody said.

The only thing that matters is the language in the ordinance that this body promulgated.

And that ordinance specifies two methodologies, one for a small, maybe single storefront, and the other one that relates to a commercial establishment greater than two acres with multi uh tenants on that.

That is the measurement that the other people did not use.

One thing that Mr.

Spence put up there as a as a as a survey is something by Greg Williamson with the city, or Williams, I believe, and it says spatially.

For a survey, see a professional surveyor.

So Greg Markham put in the only real survey.

There's the language up there.

Um I know we don't have a lot of time, so I'm not gonna go through that right now, but if we have some rebuttal, I'll come back.

Keep going.

Um so the measurement methodology.

I want you to think about those of you who have gone to Wolf Chase, think about all of a sudden Macy's being transformed into uh a liquor establishment.

So according to Mr.

Spence, if you wanted to measure the distance from Macis to somewhere, you would go out to either the middle of Highway 64 and begin your measurement, or you would go out to the middle of Germantown Parkway and begin that.

That is ludicrous.

Your ordinance in your language says that you start in the front of the building and you you go along a public or private street, private street being defined to be a private passageway for vehicles.

There are all kinds of passageways, but this one is a private passageway for vehicles, and so that's what Greg Markham did.

He went to the front of the building and measured from there, and he made the appropriate turns, and he yielded a distance of 1,559.37 feet, which is within the ordinance distance.

Just a couple of other uh things that I want to want to tell you.

I don't know how much time I have, but I want to tell you that in the time, the short time that Mr.

He employs 26 full-time employees and four part-times.

70% of those employees are from the city of Memphis.

He has yielded a payroll of 700, pardon me, 661,596 to date.

He estimates by years in, it'll be 788,000.

Um has spent more than 213,000 with women and minority business owners.

He's invested some 1.262 million dollars in facility upgrades to get this station going.

Um at this time estimating that in 2027, uh he will contribute some 730,255 in taxes.

Uh that's state county and city.

He is about the business of making this enterprise work.

I know I'm getting close to the end, so let me just say this to you.

Mr.

Edwards wakes up every day, mission focused, going to find out what he can do to make his business successful, what he can do to improve, what he can do to contribute to the fabric of the city.

He has been pelted and whipsawed and accused and maligned by individuals who simply do not want competition, which is what this country is based on.

Competition, lawful competition.

He spent his life, his time, his talent, his treasure.

He's exhausted his family trying to secure a safe and prosperous business that currently employs the people that I've told you.

He's never sued busters, D wines, a wine and liquors.

He's been keeping his head down, building that business.

There is no case here.

Tell Busters and their colleagues, it's time to stop.

She was blind, but she was wise.

These boys, these young boys who were full of mischief, they decided that they were going to trick her.

They said, We're gonna get a bird, and we're gonna go to her and we're gonna say, woman, we have in our hands a bird.

We want you to tell us whether the bird is living or dead.

And their plan was if she said living, they were gonna close their hands and crush it.

If she said dead, they were gonna open their hands and let it fly away, and she could hear the flapping of the wings.

And so they came to her and they said, We have a bird.

Councilman Walker, what what tell us the status?

And she said, I don't know.

But the bird's fate is in your hands.

I don't know whether Mr.

Edwards will succeed or fail in his business.

I don't know whether it will become one of the leading liquor establishments in this community.

I don't know that.

What I do know is that he deserves the opportunity to try.

And his opportunity, whatever that end may be, his opportunity is in your hands.

Do not deny him that opportunity because someone is afraid of competition.

Thank you.

Thumbs up, thumbs down.

We do have one card, and then Attorney Wade will get you to give us some clarification.

Samuel Fogastein.

Uh yield my time, yield my comment.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

All right, Attorney Wade, if you'll offer some clarification, please.

Um I'll do my best.

The only issue, I mean, this is the second appeal we've had, alcohol appeal we've had, one of them was denied because uh the alcohol commission determined that they did not meet the distance requirement.

And we heard the appeal, and I told you then that the only issue that you decide is whether or not the application meets the distance requirement.

Um you've heard a lot of arguments about standing non-competitive, how much people make.

Those arguments are irrelevant.

The ordinance provides that the city commission shall decide the restriction.

The city commission, when this ordinance was adopted, was composed of five members, one of whom was the mayor.

So ultimately, you would have to make the decision, even though the mayor is and the alcohol commission has decided that it does or it doesn't.

And I believe a court would want to know what this body's interpretation of its own ordinance was and whether it applied to this application.

Potential liquor stores within the city.

So on its face, I think it's anti-competitive because not everybody can have a liquor store.

So I think Buster's argument was that well, we've complied with the law, they should comply with the law.

That's not for y'all to decide.

All you're deciding is the literal question of whether it complies with section 4-5, the 1,500 foot.

Unfortunately, what I heard tonight from both sides did not present that precise issue to you.

Does that fly?

Does it not fly?

So you you haven't seen any of that.

You haven't seen any of those facts.

So I don't know how I can give more clarity unless somebody wants to ask them to provide specifics on those two on that specific issue.

That's all we want to know.

How is it laid out?

Show us how it meets it, argue why it doesn't.

Y'all make the decision one way or the other.

It's simple, it's not hard.

It's not into all of what the history was.

The ordinance is the ordinance, it is in effect, and everybody has to comply with it.

So we need to know why they think they do, why they think they don't, and you decide which side you believe has made the case.

So I think you gotta hear a little more from them on though on that particular issue.

I don't want to hear about how much money and what a great guy and how well he wakes up every day and looks for looks for goal.

We need to know those specific facts.

Those facts have no personality, they are what they are, they are hard, cold, black and white.

Let's hear those, make the decision up or down.

That's my recommendation.

Let's hear that.

Can we do that with five minutes on each side?

Can we do that in five minutes?

And then we'll hear from the council.

Okay, councilman, before he comes.

So before each of you present, um echo what attorney wade said, but I also want to know particularly because attorney Wade said, you know, how are you currently complying, but I do want to know was any alterations made after the initial application to the um alcohol commission.

So that's it for me.

But I look forward to hearing the arguments because I'm thoroughly enjoying this master class of attorney work today.

I you know, I don't know what what order y'all want to do it, but it may be that you might want to show what your situation is, and I don't know how y'all want to agree to do it.

I don't care.

Councilman Warren, did you want to say something?

Do you think that makes sense?

For y'all to go first.

Before they speak, did you want to say something?

Go ahead.

I just have a question.

Um there was a guy named Gerald that was mentioned a little bit earlier.

Uh I don't know who he was.

He was mentioning by Councilman Spence a couple times that referring to Gerald.

Uh, and you know, as I recall, you know, when this we we first heard about this thing, it had we had like we hadn't updated our uh ordinances for a while, and we had like some 1980s version that sort of omitted, I guess, this 1500, and it's almost like that's what was presented to the alcohol commission.

So I guess part of this is we're sitting here.

I know we're supposed to interpret the law, but we're also judges and judges sort of interpret the law based on the situation where you're there.

So I just need to know what our leeway is, and I want to know who Gerald is and what he said.

I don't know who Gerald is either.

Councilor Warren, I think whoever Council War.

Okay.

I'll go second.

I'll go second.

I go second.

Well, I had a presentation that dealt with this issue.

I just didn't get to get to it.

Um yeah, twenty minutes, but anyway.

I I'm just are they ready or not?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay, allow me to get into opinions.

Okay, council, are we ready?

Are they getting ready?

So much I think we call it you so much.

I mean, I got so much time.

All right, madam controller, if he'll put five minutes on the screen, and we're gonna go ahead and get started.

Oh, all right, Madam Chairman.

Okay, so the rules will be each side will explain factually what's what's there and what's not there.

Okay, period.

And then based on that, you will make a decision.

We don't want opinions and expert opinions and so on and so forth.

We want facts, basically, those two facts.

What's there and what's not there?

Attorney Spence, would you like to begin?

Yes.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please put five minutes on the screen.

All right, uh, as I understand the question in the area of inquiry, it concerns uh what's there now.

Um my time ran out.

This is my next slide.

All right, so on this slide, we can see what Mr.

Edwards submitted with his second application.

Um, and you can see that every other survey measured along those blue dots from the front of the building to the street on which it fronts, which is White Station White Station the Park, turn on White Station, and it is the distance is less than 1,500 feet.

Well, what Mr.

Edwards did in his new submission, knowing that that what he submitted the first time had been discovered, he then as opposed to measuring from the front of the store to the street on which it fronts, he started through the parking lot and measured through through his own parking lot to try to get more distance for so that he could meet the proximity distance requirement.

And so that's what the Memphis Alcohol Commission approved, and that is inconsistent with the ordinance.

That is inconsistent with the ordinance.

The blue dot.

Not to the front of the street as all the applications, as all the surveys require, but through his own parking lot, claiming that his parking lot was a private drive, was a private drive, and as this council is well aware, and a private street, um the UDC speaks to what is a private street.

Five point two point seventeen.

A private street must be labeled on the fly the final plat and be assigned as such.

That doesn't exist here.

The second requirement is that it must be constructed to equal or exceed the base materials, compaction and final surfacing, standards of public streets as certified by the city engineer.

And thirdly, it must be owned and maintained by property owners association.

Because the street doesn't exist, nobody owns it.

It's a non-existent street.

So Mr.

Edwards attempt to claim that his own parking lot is a private street where he can measure between and among parking spaces to try to creep out more distance in order to meet the proximity distance requirement, does not work and violates your ordinance.

The final thing I'll say, if the methodology that Mr.

Edwards is relying on, is approved.

It won't just be approved for him.

It'll be approved for every future individual like Mr.

Edwards who wants to own a liquor store.

Every church, every school in this community will be at risk to being next door to a liquor store.

My five minutes are up.

Thank you.

Thumbs up, thumbs down, please.

Madam Comptroller, if you will please put five minutes on the fair on the screen.

Yes.

Good evening, Council.

Mark Job of Glencler Brown, one of the attorneys working for Mr.

Edwards.

The opponents just gave you a bunch of definitions and references to an ordinance that does not control.

This is not governed by the UDC.

The UDC is not the controlling ordinance.

As we established in court, Section 4-5 of the 1980 85 Memphis City Code is the controlling ordinance.

A private street is defined in that ordinance.

It is defined as highlighted above.

It's a private passageway for vehicles in a multi-establishment commercial area of at least two acres in size.

That is precisely what we have here.

And the point of commencement was properly done on the survey performed by the Reeves firm.

When you you take the point of commencement in front of the store along the private passageway in this multi-tenant commercial center, and then proceed, not in a straight line along the center line from that point of commencement out to the public street, not the private street, and then along the remaining center lines of streets and intersecting streets.

That was established in court.

We have followed the ordinance to a T, word by word, and outlined it in our presentation.

Not only that, busters use this same methodology, the same private drive methodology to open its second store in Ridgeway Trace.

The survey included as part of that application is attached.

It starts in the private drive, the private passageway for commercial or for uh vehicular travel travel in a multi-establishment commercial area out to Poplar and up and down the street.

This is not novel.

It is the methodology they used.

Um Mr.

Spence warns of liquor stores proliferating.

There's a cap on the number of liquor stores.

And frankly, the citizens of Memphis should be allowed to follow the plain language of the ordinance.

Now we went through a long rig-marole about that last year with another application, but this application follows the ordinance exactly as it's written.

Not only that, as part of the Buster's submission in 2023 to open its second store, they got an opinion letter from Josh Whitehead, former planning director, who analyzes this same section.

The 1500 feet of churches, schools, parks, playground, or liquor libraries, and other liquor stores as measured along the street or private parking lot aisle for shopping centers, two acres areas, but it said it should be acres from the midpoint of the front facade of the proposed liquor store that faces the street of the probably line of a church, school, park, library, or playground.

It's the same methodology.

It's not new.

And we are here defending it.

We went through, we got through the court case.

We have followed the ordinance exactly as it's written, and here we are again being challenged.

But again, we've evidence we've shown the MAC over two days of hearings exactly how we follow the ordinance, and we've exhibited it to you here today.

Not only that, we've shown you how it was used by the quote opposition in their application just a few years ago.

Thank you.

Thumbs up, thumbs down.

You have a minute left.

Did you want to add anything?

Um you don't want to add anything, Judge Don?

I I think they're doing madam chair.

Okay.

All right.

Councilwoman Green, you're recognized you in the queue.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh Attorney Wade.

Um, so we've gotten a citation of the Muni code, and we've gotten a citation of the definition in the UDC.

Can you speak to the council about which is the controlling law that we should be looking at as we make this factual determination?

Um, I really don't know the answer to that question, uh, to be honest.

I think it's um that's a do our ordinances that is a question of of interpretation, and I think that's something for the court to determine.

The issue before you is solely on 4-5 of the the court of ordinance.

Of the ordinance.

So that's my question is um our ordinances are speak specifically to the laws we want to enforce.

The UDC, we've adopted it, but it is uh more broad in scope, right?

No, I I think it controls your decisions as well.

I think you may use the UDC as I mean sometimes as a persuasive authority for how you would interpret it, but it's still your your judgment as to how you interpret 4-5.

And and I and I will commend the parties that they basically did what what I wanted them to do was crystallize the two positions before you, whether 4-5 controls and or whether the what the applicant did in terms of you know, I don't want to say anything derogatory, but but create a position that they've used a private drive, and the question is is it a private drive or is it right?

And so that's why I'm asking you about the definition of a private drive because it appears they are different in the UDC and in the ordinance, and so I would like to know when we're making this determination of fact as a quasi judicial body, we are only to be looking at the ordinance because that is what we are deciding on today.

Correct?

That is correct.

Okay.

Uh, and look, I think we all are frustrated and would love for the alcohol commissioners to be here so that we could have some words with them because none of us would be here having to do this.

But I just wanted to make sure that as we're looking at this, we're looking at the right definition so that we can make the determination of fact based on that definition.

Yeah, I think you are, but I think you've raised an issue that I have, you know, I've been involved and I've looked at this thing hours and hours.

And my I mean, it's basically a land use restriction, and and I would suggest that we look hard at making it uh have to have a special use permission committed and go through the UTC where we have a record.

We don't have we have people with expertise in making those kind of recommendations to us rather than an alcoholic.

Well, we're gonna fix this on the back end, yeah.

Yeah, I know I understand.

Uh you you you're preaching my language now.

But right now it creates a clear ambiguity, and I think that's something a court would have to do.

They would have to reconcile the two to see if they can stand together or they're inconsistent.

And I and I don't think that's that's something that you have to do.

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman Green.

Councilman Smiley, and then um Dr.

Warren, do you recognize?

All right.

My question is for counsel for busters.

I think um counsel for um Elworth brought uh brought up a what I think is a pretty good point.

Um I want you to talk specifically about how do you rectify if it's true um busers doing something similar in its second store councilman smiley?

Um that argument um is a red herring.

Um busters application it's submitted to the alcohol commission to open up its second store is not before the council.

So to just lob some argument without challenging the distance requirement for busters is erroneous in a formal proceeding.

So at the outset, it's a red herring argument.

But but beyond that, the two locations are entirely different, they're entirely different.

And so to try to compare Buster East's location with this location that that fronts on White Station within 30 or 40 yards to Busters East that's back in a shopping plaza, they're just totally different.

Um so it's it's difficult for me to explain to you all the differences that would be applicable to the Buster's East location versus this location, um, when it has not been formally challenged, it wasn't before the council, and if you measure around Busters East, 1500 feet, there are no churches, there are no schools, there are no parks.

So if it's it's just a difficult thing to to do uh without there being a formal challenge for me to respond to, just a comment off the cuff.

I got a question for uh I got a question for counsel for Elworth.

What what I'm trying to was there an existing driveway before and was that driveway being demolished to so that the existing driveway is in compliance, and if it was, does it even matter?

Okay, so the way that I understand it is um oppose the council's argument that is that it's supposed to go from the front door of the store directly to um the street.

And was it at any point a different driveway, or is it just a matter of a survey or drawing the line a different way?

Because I believe go ahead.

After going through the litigation, modifications were made to the site.

Okay.

If think back years ago when the crime was rampant, everything was going, and and Bells' counsel can speak to this, the northernmost and southernmost uh curb cuts were closed with jersey barriers.

Um after the litigation and in the fall before this application was submitted, the landlord modified his site.

And with city approval, proper proper city approval, all city approvals, uh Memphis Fire Department involvement, they executed that plan.

And but here the nuance that Mr.

Spence speaks of isn't anywhere but the ordinance.

The differences are not defined anywhere else but the ordinance.

These places are not different.

Ridgeway trace is not different than White Station Plaza as it relates to this ordinance.

The requirements are simple.

You measure from a private passway for vehicles in a multi-establishment commercial area of more than two acres per size.

That is the same qualification to Ridgeway Trace.

So you start there.

But yes, modifications were made, and I alluded to this, this is in the record.

If if you are building a building or doing anything, and you get a citation from the city, you have the right to comply.

You have a right to comply with the ordinance.

If you pass, if you fail your electrical inspection, you don't tear the building down.

You comply with the ordinance, you get it right.

And that's what we've done.

The ordinance says what it says.

So what did you do?

What did you do to comply with the ordinance?

Well, there is multiple reasons, and again, Bells can speak to this if you'd like to hear that.

Is the second entrance was permanently shut except for fire department use only.

And the northern curb cut was closed, and the center curb cut was moved to align with the um with the across the street uh development and to better uh to better uh uh traffic flow, if you will.

I think my last question, and I'm gonna let some other people ask the question.

In your opinion, does the what I believe to be a modification after the fact even matter if it's in compliance now?

No.

Okay, that's it for me.

Thank you, Councilman Warren.

Thank you, madam chair.

And you know, I I think we're showing our legal uh expertise here today on the board.

I'm just gonna come through as a simple country family doctor here, saying that looking at this, it seems to me that we shouldn't be here talking about this.

Uh we need to go ahead and think about what smells right, and we need to vote that way.

So thank you very much.

Thank you, Councilman.

Councilman Councilwoman White.

I see that our council is amused today.

Um, first I just want to say thank um both sides for their presentations.

Um and you all ultimately really did get me to really understand what was going on.

Um so we appreciate the background and the history and those things, and thank you, Attorney Wade, for uh giving us guidance on what our responsibility is in kind of narrowing the issue.

So after listening carefully to both presentations, I just want to make sure that I got this.

So the appellant is arguing that the measurement should be from the door storefront, and then the appellee um is arguing that the ordinance is on definition, um, gives the gives a definition of private street, um, and that in this instance that it applies here because it's a multi um establishment commercial um area with the private passageway for vehicles, and that's where the measurements should start.

And that the last survey, which is the read survey, says that it's 1539 square feet.

Is that right?

The only thing I would like to correct, it's fifty well, okay.

It's 1559.37.

I would like to correct that the appellant is the opposition to the station.

They appealed the MAC's decision of approval.

Right the okay.

Okay.

All right.

Right.

Um, okay.

All right, and so the the what I want to make clear though is well, I I get it.

The language in the ordinance states private drive.

Okay, I got it.

Sure.

Can I just thank you, Councilwoman White?

Councilman Spinoza.

Thank you, madam chair.

So I'm gonna ask uh attorney Wade.

So after reading all this last night, I have been surprised today.

So safe to say that the first attempt to get a license was denied for the reasons it was denied and explained today, not in compliance with the foot, the 1500-foot rule, correct?

I think it was denied because the approval was void for failure to comply with the open meetings act, which meant that they had to reapply because that original one was not effective.

Okay.

So when they came with the new one, they changed they modified the site as they told you.

And so my understanding again, what we're voting on today is is it in compliance today?

Yes.

And just being honest here, I thought one thing before I got here today.

So what's a question is the private drive, correct?

Correct.

And what about this as far as the private drive goes?

You go to the center line of the street, typically you would see a straight line from that center line.

Correct?

Yes.

And now we've got a swerve, and that's how we're so close to the 1500-foot rule.

He said 15 to 55.

So what we're voting on today is the swerve line versus a straight line.

That's correct.

How many do we know how many swerve lines we uh the alcohol?

I can't wait to talk about the alcohol commission at our next meeting.

Um, and then not talk about them.

But all right, so so what's what's before you tonight is a vote to um approve the appeal.

If you approve the appeal, then you vote in favor of the Romulus app.

Yes, it's a yes to vote.

A no appro uh denies the appeal, and uh that is in favor of uh of a grind management.

Uh yes means you approve the appeal and you've you're against grind management and no is do not overturn the decision.

Yes, right?

Yeah, okay.

And hey, for the record, I want to say I have a relationships, very close ones on both sides of this.

So I'm not voting against any individual today.

I'm trying to interpret the law, so I just want to say that for the record.

Dr.

Warren, I was ready to call for the vote.

Yes, ma'am.

I just have one uh question.

I have relationships with both, and like both I feel the same way you do.

But I think we have seen one other curved line today.

Uh that's the only other I don't know how many alcohol has to deal with, but we did see one other besides this one.

Judge Donald, did you want to say something?

Yeah, just one quick thing.

On behalf of Mr.

Edwards, I want to thank you for this opportunity, but I do want to make this point.

Under Tennessee law, because I've heard the word up here, ambiguity.

If there is a perceived ambiguity in the ordinance, that ambiguity must be resolved in favor of the applicant and against the municipality.

That's the law.

And I've got many cases I can give you city of merchants, borough, uh, right versus city hall.

There are a bunch of them, but I just wanted to make that point.

If if you perceive there is an ambiguity, then the ambiguity must be resolved against the government and in favor of the property owner.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Judge uh councilman smiley, you recognize I do not want to be a judge.

Can't make one final point.

It's not how long?

30 seconds.

I'm not sure about brevity with you, attorney spit, but go ahead, and I'm gonna say it, and then I think we're gonna call for the question.

All right.

But but then, but we're not talking about the most important language on which the liquor store fronts.

So public or private street is attached to on which it fronts.

There's no question in this case that this liquor store fronts on white station, it doesn't front on a private passageway.

And so when you read the ordinance as a whole, it's clear there's no ambiguity.

It's on which it fronts.

All right, Councilman Smiley, we're gonna wrap it up.

Can I call for the question after this?

Yes.

All right, uh, I'm gonna make a statement, and I'm pretty sure it's gonna be litigated.

Um, I'm making a statement.

And uh, I just you know, we about to make a vote.

You should uh should give people a reason why.

So here's my position, and I'm gonna tell you how I'm gonna cast my vote.

I believe, you know, after looking at the ordinance and hearing the the excellent argument by both councils, so kudos to to both both sides.

I believe that um the way that Edwards um address the the survey, it violates the spirit of the ordinance.

However, I don't think this council should be in the business of putting folks out of business.

I'm gonna vote no.

Um, and that's my reason why please prepare the screen.

Oh, oh my goodness.

Yeah, come on now.

I'm sorry, we we can vote, but I do want to say this because well, no, because I just wish you had it just left well enough alone.

Because tell me what to do.

Well, yeah.

So I I know attorney wait, I will, but this is what I will say.

I just didn't agree with the that it violated the spirit of the law park because as I said here, it seemed as if that it's a commonly used methodology, and then I think what's persuasive is the ordinance itself that says that a private from a private drive and it explains it, such as this as a multi-establishment commercial property, and so it seems that the ordinance itself actually describes a private drive, and that that measurement is what is used and has been used uh for that particular ordinance.

And so it seems that the ordinance itself actually describes a private drive, and that that measurement is what is used and has been used uh for that particular ordinance.

So for that reason, I'll be voting the other way.

So we still vote.

You tell me you can't leave well enough alone and then make an argument.

All right, thank you, Council members.

Madam Control, I want to stop giving us a bad name.

Thank you, uh Council members.

Please prepare the screen.

No, Easter Thomas abstained, Ford abstained, Green, no, Smiley, no, Spinoza, yes, Warren, no, White, no, Chairwoman Swearing Washington, no.

Please show Councilmember Walker as voting no on this item.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

That item failed.

Okay, that brings us to our same night minute items.

Councilman Canale, would you please read the same night minute items into record?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Same night minute items are four, seven, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, nineteen, and twenty.

And with that, I move it to the floor.

Thank you.

It's been moved by Councilman Canale.

Right, right.

So I think and second by Councilman Dr.

Warren.

Please prepare your screens for the voting.

Yes.

Canale, yes.

Easter Thomas, yes.

Ford, yes, green, yes, smiley, yes.

Walker, yes, Warren, yes.

White, yes, chairwoman swearing in Washington, yes.

That item passes that moves us to our public comment cards.

First on the agenda is Cynthia Bailey, and then Lucy.

Chamber, Chamberless.

Hello, good evening to you all.

Uh Cynthia Bailey, community advocate at uh 1095.

Huh?

You can go ahead.

Yes, ma'am.

Oh, Poplar Avenue.

Um, I'm coming today.

Uh it been a lot of issues at MATLAB, as you all know.

And myself, Mr.

Johnny and Mr.

Sammy, we came in May, and we have given you all a list of things that have been happening and occurring at MATA.

The things that supposedly been happening haven't been happening.

Now I heard you all said that uh Mr.

Home is doing a great job, and it's okay if you all feel that way, but we totally disagree.

We don't see no new buses that you all said that's supposed to be out.

Uh I think uh councillor white was on the uh news or something, talking about a great job that he's doing.

Okay, that's fine, but when you have the community as a whole consistently and constantly come to us and complaint every day, it's not one day that I'm down there that I hear complaints consistently about the buses.

Transportation matters, just like police department matters, just like education matter, transportation matters, and it's to me now.

Because we out here, and I promise on the oath that I'm gonna do everything in my power when I was on the board, and I'm continually doing it.

But we need support.

We need someone to speak up and speak out about what the citizens are coming saying to you all.

Okay, uh Council Lady Easton Thomas, you asked us in May to give you a list.

And we gave you all a list of things.

We have not received any feedback from nobody about that list.

Thank you.

Would you like to respond?

Ms.

Bailey, spot on.

I did get that list from you, and we didn't receive any response.

So that's why I didn't give you a response.

I just wanted to make sure that that was on your record, too.

Thank you, Miss Lucy.

Lucy Chambliss.

Um I'm a little thrown off.

I don't think I've ever seen that many Republicans in this room.

Sorry.

I'm ready, yeah.

Uh two weeks ago, I stood before you and asked you to do something.

At that time, three people had been killed by the Memphis Unsafe Task Force.

Darren Pegrim was killed by a DEA agent, Levi Blandon.

Why was the DEA serving a warrant that didn't have anything to do with drugs, though?

When Memphis police were on the scene, why did we have to have a federal task force federal agents carrying rifles to confront a man at work?

We need to understand why that happened.

Jonah Neal was killed by an HSI special agent.

He was suffering a mental health crisis and his family called for crisis intervention.

Why was an HSI special agent sent?

We need answers on that.

Gunned down 20-year-old Tyron Johnson.

I asked who gave consent for the military to carry weapons and engage in law enforcement activity.

Mayor Young made it sound like they'd be picking up trash, and Governor Lee said that they wouldn't be armed or engaging in law enforcement activities unless requested by local law enforcement.

So who made that call?

The day after I last stood here before you, Alfonso Ivey was shot and killed by DEA agents.

And again, we have to ask why was the DEA involved?

At this point, eight American citizens have been killed by these federal task force nationwide so far this year.

Half of these extrajudicial killings have happened here in Memphis.

And the most we've heard from this administration is that they were unfortunate incidents.

Who is making these calls that is making life more difficult and less safe for Memphis?

And where is our leadership?

How is that seat at the table served us?

And is it not time for us to remove ourselves from a table that never truly welcomed us in the first place?

Thank you so much.

Corey Travis and then Wenesia Hyman.

Corey Travis isn't here.

Okay.

Whenesia Hyman, she isn't here.

Claudia Hyman.

Sammy Hunter.

Yes, uh, my name is Sammy Hunter, uh 4211 Park Chester Avenue.

Uh I co-chair the Memphis Bus Rider Union since 2012.

Uh Council today will I'm coming to you simply on some things that Miss Cynthia Bailey said.

I'm picking back on that.

Uh first thing, bus riders are still standing two or three hours waiting on buses.

Even if they got trackers on the phone, the buses are still not showing up.

Um second thing is that when Mr.

Holmes first got in, there were 20 buses that were approved by the board, which Miss Cynthia Bailey was on.

Uh 20 buses supposed to be coming from Kentucky.

Mr.

Holmes stopped those buses from coming.

My thing is if he at least could let some of those buses come in, we wouldn't be in the shape that we're in now.

They say they got a bus shortage going on.

If he had let some of those buses come in, we wouldn't be going through what we're going through now with the bus rider standing out here a long period of time.

Now, the second thing, he said 12 buses, new buses.

He wanted new buses.

I couldn't stand that.

He said 12 buses were expected in June.

That's what Mr.

Holmes' word was.

Now, we going almost going into August.

We don't see any buses yet.

We haven't seen anything.

So I'm just saying this is a mess.

But Memphis needs a better transportation system in Memphis.

We need a better because when you go to other cities, that's what they say.

Well, what's wrong with y'all's transportation system down there?

Well, I don't want to come there because I can't get around.

And you don't have the trolley to get me where I want to get.

I'm trying to visit Memphis, but I can't come because you don't have a better transit system.

So this is what I've been to other cities, and I see this.

It makes me makes me mad when I hear this because I know we can do better in this.

We need to do better in the city of Memphis, and we need people on board to try to get this transportation system better.

Thank you.

Absolutely right.

We appreciate your comment.

Councilman Ford.

Okay, let me get something straight right now.

Yes, sir.

With the buses.

Yeah, we were supposed to be getting some buses from Kentucky.

But why get some from Kentucky that's just like the ones that we're trying to get rid of?

No, that's why you stop here.

Now if you go and check your facts, we've got nine new buses in.

I am not a liar, and please don't call me that.

He's not a liar.

Please let me talk, okay?

And then you go get your story straight, and then you will know about the buses that are here.

They coming by threes.

We've got three, six, nine.

This week we should get three more.

We'll be that twelve.

Within the end of the year, we will have some brand new more buses.

If you go out there, they will be glad to show them to you.

I ask for the councilman to respond.

This is not a debate, and he is sharing some information.

Please continue, councilman.

I appreciate it, but do not ever call me a liar because I don't lie.

I don't have to lie.

I'm too old to lie.

You know, but I don't like nobody don't get facts.

You know, we've been meeting with the bus people, okay?

But y'all are not listening.

Y'all are listening to the wrong people.

But I know as a fact how many buses have come in, and they're coming in that way.

Three, three, three, and three.

And you're one thing that you're correct, it's shortages on trying to get buses.

But we're gonna have 12 brand new ones, and by the end of the year, we're gonna have quite a few more.

Brand new buses, not a used bus that's gonna break down.

Then not only that, the riders, and you know, you said people saying three hours, I don't know where you're coming from with that.

That's not true either.

Okay, unless you missed the bus, and then it wasn't supposed to come to that time.

You know, you're supposed to have been that seven, you got that 715, that bus gone.

So the next one may come in at a certain time, okay.

Only thing that we're having right now, and I'm having issues with that right this man.

And that we hadn't even had far.

You can ride the bus free.

How many cities ride the bus free?

Now, my wife is from Mobile, Alabama.

Now you go there, I you're gonna pay quite a bit because you know that's privately owned.

They don't have brand new buses.

You know, it takes time.

We've been working on this for quite a while, but it's much, much better.

Okay.

We had some, hey, and it's our fault that we had the wrong people trying to get it together.

They kind of disappointed us, but we're on the right track right now.

Y'all talking about attorney homes.

He could be doing something much better.

He don't have to be helping us.

This man is doing a job to help the city.

Okay, we're trying to keep him as long as we can because he's ready to go.

He was supposed to only been here 90 days.

This man changed things within 30 days.

We can't afford this man.

But this man is just here to try to help this city.

He can be gone today, tomorrow, and everything else.

You know, what we end up giving this man, he made that in a few days.

He don't have to help us.

He's willing to help us in the stay on.

But he could have been gone in that 90 days.

But I need y'all to get y'all's facts together.

You know, everybody's complaining.

Bus, this, this, this.

They even complain about bus stop.

He built some.

Well, hey, if it's raining, you can be under something.

Why complain?

Oh, you put it in the wrong buttons.

Everything, you're not happy.

You know.

But get your facts together.

I'm gonna be proud, but please get your facts together because, hey, that's what you're saying is not true, and I don't want the public to see that, hey, these things are not true because it's it's happening.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman.

And thank you for your leadership, and we know that MATA was a disaster.

And we've had to practically start from scratch.

I mean for real.

So we're gonna continue to work because we know we deserve a better transit system, and we will not rest until it continues to improve.

In a lot of cities, you can ride the bus 24 hours.

So we have a lot of work to do, but we will not rest until we continue to provide the services that you all deserve, that we deserve.

Mr.

Ricky Lewis, and then Johnny Mosley.

After Johnny Mosley, Andrew Guthrie, and then Brianna Berg, and that's it.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

My name is Ricky Lewis, and I am still a uh advocate of the ones that fired to uh at MLGW.

And Timothy Davis uh been having contracts M L GW didn't sorry, I might got you.

Uh he'll he'll he'll help you with that microphone.

Just fix that for you.

There you go.

Yeah, Timothy Davis, VP from Light Gas and Water.

They're really uh robbing the city of Memphis, uh Light Gas and Water with the contracts.

Um if I said I gave you some some brochures or whatever, and and it says Ruth is 30 years.

She's been knowing him 30 years.

So if a friend come and get a 8 million, a five million dollar contract, that is that a code of ethic.

If it was one of you guys, Channel 3513 CNN be investigating you guys.

So I feel they need to be investigated.

All contracts from Davis, it need to be cut, it needs it needs to be um needs to be investigated.

Ruby is the contract lady, it's the VP, senior VP of ECS partner, and it was closed uh 2025, and now they have a contract of hometown hub.

And Memphis City, Memphis, Memphis Lagas and Water has always trained our own at Memphis.

We never went outside to get nobody.

We trained our own at Light Gas and Water.

And now we go on to California, uh getting people from California or Texas or whatever.

If CJ Davis had a fired them, this chamber would have been crowded every every week.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Lewis, I would like to encourage you to go to the MLGW board member meeting and share your sentiments.

That would be a great place to speak to those individuals who are making those decisions.

I have already.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Johnny Mosley and then Andrew Guthrie.

Johnny Mosley, 1150 Petican Lane.

When you are a transit advocate, you hear a lot.

You even feel the pain of bus rider.

You know what it's like to be cursed out and to be treated as a nobody.

But when you've been honored as a living legend and recognized by leadership organization for your leadership, Alpafi Alpha Fraternity, the Delta's and the state legislator.

You look back with deep gratitude.

You remember why your late father, a 50-year sanitation worker, march for dignity and the struggle that brought Dr.

King to Memphis, Tennessee in 1868.

I'm grateful to stand as a voice for bus riders who feel that they are trapped in the public transportation system that is stripping them of their dignity.

I understand what I just heard from the city council earlier and my city council member, Councilman Fole, who I have nothing but respect.

I can only respectfully ask that the Transportation Committee schedule a meeting to address the problem facing bus riders.

Some of the same pain that 1,300 sanitation workers in their family face in 1968.

I can only respect the fact and ask this city council to move public company up so bus riders be allowed to speak for themselves and don't have to worry about being scrunched downtown.

As I witnessed their suffering standing in the hot sun.

Over 100 degrees today.

Thank you so much.

Mr.

Andrew Guthrie.

And then Brianna Byrd.

Good evening.

I'm here with concerns about the held civil service referendum ordinance put forward by Councilmember Carlisle.

I'm sure you'll agree we need clear communication between politicians and the workers of Memphis.

Frankly, this referendum is opaque, concerning, and confusing.

Though I very much hope I'm mistaken, it seems the referendum would undermine the very basis and existence of civil service protections in Memphis.

That would be disastrous for our city.

For months, you all have been hearing from our library workers how they are desperate for basic civil service protections.

You wisely decided to open a path for them to win those protections.

Would you want to take away the basic autonomy that public workers need to do their jobs?

Would you want to give politicians more power over the working people of Memphis?

Do you want to weaken or do away with civil service protections?

And most importantly, will you protect our public servants?

Thank you in advance for trying to be more transparent with us.

And please protect our civil servants.

Yes, sir.

Thank you so much for coming down.

Ms.

Brianna Bird.

Hey Brianna Byrd, 720 Loeb Street.

Good afternoon, Council members.

I'm also here because I am concerned and a little bit confused about item 14 that was uh pushed from this meeting, which I am grateful that that was pushed from today.

Um I'm afraid that the referendum could undermine the protections that our government workers need to do their jobs because the foundation of good government is independent and uh nonpartisan civil servants, of course.

Last year, Donald Trump and Elon Musk showed how dangerous it is when someone creates new government entities that can undermine civil servants.

Uh, I have to ask, would this referendum create something similar to Doge in our city?

I also uh want to know what are the motivations behind this referendum.

Is someone trying to do away with civil service protections as we've heard in the past?

And looking at the language in the ordinance, can you be clear about what these uniform administrative procedures or systems for disposition of appeals would be?

Uh would City Hall be undermining the independence of the civil service board.

These are just some of the questions that we've got um and would like some further clarification on because we're a little unsure about this.

Um yeah, uh to close.

Um, please protect civil service workers, uh, and I appreciate your time.

Thanks.

Thank you for coming.

We held it because we wanted additional clarification as well.

I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

That was our last comment card.

I will entertain a motion to adjourn.

It has been moved by Councilman Ford Canale.

Can I get a second?

All right, I got a second by councilwoman Green.

Meeting adjourned.

Everyone have a safe evening.

Thank you, fabulous staff.