Will the meeting please come to order?

Today is Tuesday, August 19th, 2025.

This is the 15th meeting of 2025 and the 44th regular meeting of the current term of the Metropolitan Council of Nashville in Davidson County.

Will all members of the council as well as the public please rise for the invocation and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance?

The invocation is being offered this evening by Councilmember at large, Berkeley Allen.

Thank you.

Let us bow our heads.

Loving God, we thank you for your creation of abundance and beauty.

We thank you for a city full of opportunity and potential.

We ask you to give us all the wisdom to see where injustice keeps some from enjoying enjoying the fruits of this bounty.

Show us where we can be bold to stand up for those who are hurting, hungry, or without housing.

Be with this body tonight as we debate topics that affect people's lives and livelihoods.

Help us to keep the good of all in front of us as we make tough choices so that we can make this world a better place.

In your name we pray, amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States.

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

Thank you, Councilmember Allen.

Council members, pursuant to my memo of this past Friday, we will have some changes in leadership effective September 2nd, and thus for some but not all of our committees.

This is the last meeting for their current chair.

So I do want to express my gratitude to budget and finance chair Delisha Porterfield, Public Health and Safety Chair, Aaron Evans, Transportation and Infrastructure Chair Parker, and all three of whom who've served uh for two years, um, uh as well as Chair Gamble uh for planning and zoning.

Um still be presiding um at the next meeting.

Um rules, confirmations in public elections, Chair Prep T and Arts Park and Libraries Chair Gadd.

So thank you to them all.

They have all served you well.

Okay, um, I want to express the council's condolences on the passing of the Honorable Judge Bill Higgins, uh, who was also a two and a half term council member representing District 24 prior to his serving five terms, some four decades as a general sessions judge for Nashville and Davidson County.

We are grateful for his service and wish also to mark the passing of the honorable judge Randall Wyatt.

Um, we extend our condolences to both gentlemen's families, friends, and colleagues.

At last meeting, we marked the return to school for our Metro Nashville public school students.

And as the Athens of the South, we also have many college students arriving back on campus and getting their studies started this week.

So they would we welcome them back to Nashville.

And uh back to school month is also National Immunization Awareness Month.

So we remind all Nashvilleans to please consult with their physicians regarding recommended vaccines to help keep Nashville healthy.

And to that same end, council will be doing its part by joining with the Metro Health Department again for our third year to provide flu vaccines to everyone working uh in the historic courthouse and city hall and its environment and attending our first October council meeting.

Um, regarding that first October council meeting, uh, please note that due to the primary election for the 7th district congressional seat, uh, the first October council meeting will be shifted to Thursday, October the 9th.

Please make a note, and we will be noticing that shift as well as one for the first meeting in December in the coming days.

Okay.

All right.

Uh, without objection, we will suspend the calling of the roll and ask the clerk to please record the names of the members present throughout the meeting.

Is there a motion for approval of the minutes of the meeting of August 5th?

As okay.

Um, there's a motion properly seconded, and so without objection, and seeing no one seeking to be recognized for a change to the minutes.

The minutes of the meeting of August 5th, 2025 are approved.

Mr.

Clerk, are there any messages from the mayor?

There are no messages from the mayor.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

All right.

Um, the first item on our agenda this evening, Section E' elections.

The first uh and only election that we have this evening is uh for the Industrial Development Board.

Uh this is uh our consideration of nominees to fill three vacancies on the board with terms expiring August thirty-first, twenty thirty-one.

Candidates in this category uh were subject to a recommendation of vote by the rules, confirmations and public elections committee.

And so to that end, um we go to Chair Prep T for his uh committee report.

I would ask people in the vicinity of Chair Prep T to please be mindful of our cameras so that we can see him.

Thank you.

Um could you speak in your microphone, sir?

Oh, well, I gotta turn it on too.

Go ahead, sir.

Taking all sorts of messages.

You're recognized for a point of order.

Chair Parker just pointed out that my nominee Derek Lyle is on the agenda, but doesn't appear to be on the board, and I did not look quickly enough to see if he was on the initial screen.

Okay.

Okay.

Um Mr.

Clerk, can you speak to that?

Is our vote in order?

Yes, he has listed just the uh character limit on the screen.

Thank you so much.

Okay, so um uh yes, Ms.

Hancock, go ahead.

Okay, I appreciate that for clarification.

Mr.

Prep T will be giving his report, which will include all seven persons.

And we will say for the clarity of the viewing public and members of the chamber um that the depth of our screen is not presently allowing for the subsequent two of uh so you're seeing five, there's two more.

Um Chair Prep T, could you give us a report on those seven individuals, please, sir?

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor, with regard to the honorable Nancy.

With with regard to the nominations of the honorable Nancy Van Reese, Laura Yankee, uh Natalie Alvarez, uh David Weir, uh Tequila Johnson, uh, Derek Lyle, and Bob Braswell, all seven individuals received a vote of uh seven in favor, zero against zero not voting.

All right.

Um thank you, uh Mr.

Prep T.

All right, um, council members, uh, for this vote, um uh state law uh does not provide a specific vote threshold for this election.

So election will be determined by um a simple majority of those voting.

Okay.

Abstentions uh do not count.

Um Mr.

Clerk's system accounts for the number of people voting um and how to deduce a simple majority from among those folks.

Okay.

Um and so uh with that, um, the committee report of uh uh Mr.

Prep T, an explanation of how the vote will proceed.

Uh Mr.

Clerk, if you would please uh open the vote.

Mr.

Eastlick, are you seeking to vote, sir?

That's okay.

With all votes in, um, Mr.

Clerk, will you please show the results?

Okay.

Um colleagues, um, eighteen is the simple majority threshold, okay, at this juncture based on the number of people voting.

So thus far, um, and we will kind of hold collective applause till we have proceeded through the entirety of the vote.

Um, but so far, council has elected to the industrial development board, Tequila Johnson and Nancy Van Reese.

Okay.

Um, and so um uh yep, that's that's fine, but we're gonna wait till we get everybody um uh uh filling these uh three vacancies, okay.

Um and so uh with those uh folks having been elected, um, we'll be removed um from this next vote.

Um and so uh this time um you will be voting for one member, okay, at this time.

Um uh Mr.

Clerk, will you please uh load the vote?

Uh with all votes in, Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

All right.

So um no one has received a majority at this juncture.

Um and so um we have to go a little bit into our uh rotation.

Um and so for elections with multiple candidates to fill more than one vacancy, um uh the first vote held um includes all candidates for all available vacancies.

Okay, and so after two rounds of voting, um, if no candidate receives the requisite number of votes, um again, this is not yet, um that pool of candidates uh will be cut um uh to two candidates per open position, um, but I don't believe that is at this round.

Ms.

Darby, can you speak to that please on what happens on this next round with no one having received uh a majority at this juncture?

Okay, special counsel, go ahead.

Um uh so the question special counsel is um at which juncture.

Um so I understand through our process, um, so if we kind of consider this uh round two, right?

Because for our subsequent vote with one spot remaining, we had five candidates.

No one received a majority.

Um so by my notes, we are now on round two of our voting, um, which will be conducted again with all the same remaining candidates at this juncture.

Yes, in round in round three, we will have all the same candidates uh for the election.

Okay, so we are in round three.

Yes, we can one and two.

This is potentially called the try again round, okay?

Because you've kind of seen the writing literally on the wall.

Um, and thus we will try this one more time before we eliminate candidates, okay?

Um so um the voting uh will proceed again with the same number of candidates.

Um uh but after that um uh Ms.

Darby will explain to us we'll we'll proceed by taking um uh the lowest, or rather we'll we go ahead, Ms.

If no one wins um this particular round, round three, then we will go into round four with the top two vote getters and then vote getters or people urge the topics.

Um and uh and and and have the election again, try the election again if no one wins in round three, then we will take the top two candidates from that round into round four.

All right, we are on round three.

Is everyone clear on what's transpiring at this juncture is going to be uh similar to uh or in fact exactly the same as the vote that you just took.

So again, we're gonna try again.

Members having seen the results at this juncture.

Um if we do not have a candidate um receiving uh eighteen votes at that time, then we will reduce um to a vote between the top two vote recipients in round four.

Okay.

Um Mr.

Clerk, uh please uh load the vote and open the vote.

Um Mr.

Horton.

Are you all set?

Mr.

Clerk.

All votes are in.

Please show the vote.

All right.

Here we are at round four, at which juncture with uh uh oh, oh special counsel.

Um so what we had articulated prior um was that the top two vote getters would remain for round four.

But what we have is a tie in the second uh spot.

Um does our process contemplate that special counsel and shall we leave the three top vote getters?

Yeah, we should leave the three top vote getters.

All right, for fairness, then um to articulate what the vote will be at um this time with respect and thanks um to Mr.

David Ware and Natalie Alvarez.

But at this time, um the vote for the final one vacancy will be taken between um uh or from among uh Mr.

Bob Braswell, uh Derek Lyle, and Laura Yankee.

Okay.

Uh Mr.

Clerk, if you could please load the vote for those three persons for the one remaining vacancy.

All votes are in, Mr.

Clerk.

Please show the vote.

All right, um, at this juncture, again, proceeding from the top with the top two vote getters.

We have concluded round four.

We will now proceed to round five with respect and thanks to Mr.

Derek Lyle.

Um at this next round, we will be uh voting um from among our council will be voting from among uh Laura Yankee and Bob Braswell.

Okay, so we are on round five for the one remaining vacancy.

Council will be voting um uh for one spot um between uh Laura Yankee and Bob Braswell.

Again, it takes 18 votes to achieve the election.

Assuming no one abstains, special counsel added for me.

Thank you.

Council has elected Laura Yankee.

Um if all would please uh stand to be recognized.

Council has elected uh to the IDB, uh, Ms.

Laura Yankee, uh, the honorable Nancy Van Reese, and to Keilah Johnson.

Congratulations and thank you to you all.

All right, council members.

I know we are all um very glad to be uh congratulating these folks, but let's uh please keep uh proceeding uh through our agenda.

We are now on section F appointees and nominees.

This portion of the agenda shares all persons that were scheduled to appear before the rules confirmations and public elections committee for an interview this evening.

Referrals back to the committee will be by rule as part of the council's two meeting process for all elections and confirmations.

No votes will be taken by the body in this section of the agenda, other than for deferrals.

Chair PEP T committee report, please.

Uh first for any withdrawals or deferrals, please, sir.

On this section, there were no withdrawals and or deferrals.

Okie dokes.

Um next, Chair Prep T, then a very brief summary report, uh, just the name of the board and commission or committee and the persons uh who were interviewed today and will be referred back for confirmation consideration on September 16th, please, just for the record.

All right, thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

With regards to the fire and building code appeals board reappointment of Raymond Andy Barry, as well as the reappointment of the Vender Sandu, um, the historic commission reappointment of Dr.

C.

William Bill McGee, um, as well as the historic commission uh appointment of Matthew C.

Smith.

Um, all those individuals received received a vote of seven in favor, zero against the zero not voting.

All right, so they will be advancing in the process and um uh we'll have a vote on September 16th.

Okay, next um section G, confirmations.

Chair Pepti, you are recognized again for your committee report on the appointees in the second step of your committee's two meeting process.

Go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

With regard to the historic commission with the with regards to the historic zoning commission appointment of James Hubler, that nominate that appointment was withdrawn.

Okay, noted.

Um withdrawal of G4, James Hubler for the Historic Zoning Commission.

Go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

With regards to the Metro Action Commission reappointment of Tipania Buyers, the historic commission appointment of Gary uh of Gary Burke, uh the historic commission reappointment of Jane Landers, the hospital authority board appointment of Reverend uh Shane Scott, the Human Relations Commission reappointment of Dr.

Amy Crawford uh Charlton, the National Entertainment Commission reappointment of Hazel Smith, the Stormwater Commission reappointment of Fiona Halter Abbott, as well as the Metro Transit Authority reappointment of Catherine Hayes.

All of those individuals received a vote of seven in favor of zero against zero not voting.

And with that, I move approval.

All right.

You have heard the report of Chair Prep T and his motion to confirm all the appointments in a collective uh vote.

Um is there a second?

Okay, properly seconded.

Is anyone seeking to remove an item from the collective vote uh per for purposes of a no vote or an abstention?

Okay.

Um here hearing none.

Um all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Council has confirmed all uh appointees.

Um to our confirmed appointees.

Uh, if you chose to return to the council chamber this evening, which is not required, uh, do please stand to be recognized as I read the names of everyone confirmed uh this evening.

So council has confirmed uh the reappointment of Topania Byers uh to the uh Metro Action Uh Commission.

Um council has confirmed the appointment of Gary Burke, Jane Landers to the Historical Commission.

Hello, sir.

Um and uh council has uh confirmed the appointment of uh the Reverend Shane Scott to the hospital authority board.

Uh council has confirmed the reappointment of Dr.

Amy Crawford Charlton to the Human Relations Commission to the Nashville Entertainment Commission.

Council has confirmed the reappointment of Hazel Smith and to the Stormwater Management Commission.

Council has confirmed the reappointment of Fiona Halter Abbott.

And lastly, council has confirmed the reappointment of Catherine Hayes to the Metropolitan Transit Authority.

Uh whether in the chamber or watching live from home or on a replay, we wish you congratulations and we appreciate your willingness to serve our city.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

All right.

Now we are moving um to into the very meaty uh nomination section of our agenda this evening, section H.

Um, first, item H1 uh regarding the historical uh commission.

Um, council members uh will have received uh a memo uh regarding the uh vacancy um on the historical uh commission on uh August uh fourth um with a call uh for nominations and so at this time we will take nominations to fill one vacancy on the commission with a term expiring August 10th of 2029 um that election to be conducted um at the meeting of September uh 16th okay um uh members if you'll enter the queue for those nominations please um first I see councilman Jeff Gregg, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to nominate Phil Clayburn.

Okay, um Councilmember Greg has nominated Phil Claiborne.

I believe the honorable Phil Clayburn, former council member.

Okay.

Um uh Mr.

Eastlick, you're recognized.

I would like to nominate Chris Brummett.

Okay, uh Mr.

Eastlick has nominated Chris Brummett.

Okay.

And uh Miss Benedict, you're recognized for a nomination.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to nominate Betsy Phillips.

Okay.

Uh Council Member Benedict has nominated Betsy Phillips.

Okay, again, uh Mr.

Clerk will be in touch with those nominators.

Um, I'm sorry, okay.

Yep, I apologize.

We've got um more folks in the queue.

Um Ms.

Webb, you're recognized.

I would like to nominate Jason Corlew.

Okay, Ms.

Webb has nominated Jason Corleo.

Okay.

Um Ms.

Kimbrough, you're recognized for a nomination.

I'd like to nominate William Kant, K-A-N-T-Z.

Okay.

Um Councilmember Kimborough has nominated William Kant.

Um is any other member seeking to be recognized for a nomination uh to fill the one vacancy on the historical commission.

Okay.

Um uh seeing none, we will close those nominations and again, Mr.

Clerk will uh reach out to the nominators um uh for additional uh details on their nominees.

All right, um next on our agenda.

Um uh all these other nominations remaining uh this evening are for positions to be elected by the council um at the meeting of September 2nd.

Okay, council received a memo from me on July 18th, um, and I would ask that members seeking uh to nominate uh please just raise their hands as I call for each position moving through the agenda.

Okay.

All right.

Um first, and um I should have as well in my in my thanks and congratulations off the top of have have thanked our current um president pro tem uh Miss Sandra Sepulveda.

So thank you, uh Mr.

Pulvida for your service this year.

Um so item um H2 Um is uh uh nominations for president pro tempore uh for a term expiring August 31st of 2026.

Um uh you we're gonna raise hands, Ms.

Tombs, but that's fine.

Ms.

Hill, um chair, you're recognized.

Oh, I'm sorry, go ahead.

Thank you, madam vice mayor.

I want to uh uh nominate our LEBT caucus chair, Russ Bradford.

Okay.

Um uh chair uh Ms.

Hill has nominated Councilmember Russ Bradford.

Uh Councilwoman Toombs, you're recognized for a nomination.

Thank you, madam um Vice Mayor.

I recognize uh nominate council member Delisha Porterfield.

Okay, Councilmember Tombs um has uh nominated council member at large um Delisha Porterfield.

Okay, looking for any more hands in that regard.

No, okay, that will close the nominations um for President Uh Pro Tim.

Next, um item H3, uh planning and zoning committee chair, um, as well as planning commission representative um uh serving both roles.

Uh we are now uh opening those nominations for that two-year term.

Um uh Mr.

Cortez, you're recognized, sir.

Oh, I gotta keep pushing these buttons, y'all.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to nominate John Rutherford.

Okay.

Uh Councilmember Cortez has nominated uh Councilman John Rutherford and uh Miss Toombs, uh, you are recognized again for nomination.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

I uh nominate Councilmember Rollin Horton.

Okay, Councilmember Toombs has nominated uh Councilmember Rollin Horton.

Are any other members seeking to be recognized for a nomination for planning and zoning committee chair?

Okay, seeing none, uh those nominations are now closed.

Okay.

Um next, uh item H4, traffic and parking commission representative.

Um this is a nomination for the council uh representative to serve on the traffic and parking commission for a two-year term.

Uh if uh raise of hands here, okay.

Mr.

Prep T, you're recognized, sir.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

I nominate the honorable councilmember for district five, Sean Parker.

Okay.

Uh Councilmember Prep T has nominated uh Councilman Sean Parker.

Okay, Ms.

Webb, you're recognized for a nomination.

I'm gonna nominate my neighbor, Jeff Easley.

Okay.

Um uh uh councilwoman Webb has nominated council member Jeff Eastlick.

Um all right, are any other members uh seeking uh to make a nomination um for a traffic and parking uh commission representative?

Seeing none, those nominations or that nomination rather is closed.

Um next um item H5, uh the Metro Audit Committee.

Um two council members are elected uh to serve on the Metro Audit Umittee along uh with me, the Vice Mayor, um uh and uh members of our community.

And so uh with that, we will open the nominations for the Metro Audit Committee.

Mr.

Huffman, you're recognized, sir.

Oh, I'm sorry, Mr.

Huffman.

Go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to nominate Jason Spain.

Okay.

Um councilmember Huffman has nominated Jason Spain.

Um uh Ms.

Suara, you are recognized for a nomination.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Okay, council member at large, uh Solfatswara has nominated councilmember at large, Delisha Porterfield.

Okay.

Um and uh council member uh Allen, you're recognized.

Okay, Madam Vice Mayor, I'd like to nominate Courtney Johnston.

Okay.

Uh Councilmember Allen has nominated uh council member Courtney Johnston.

Are any other council members okay?

All right.

Um Ms.

Toombs you are recognized for a nomination.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

I nominate uh Councilmember Joy Styles.

Okay.

Um Ms.

Toombs has nominated Councilmember Joy Styles.

Okay, Ms.

Hancock, um you're recognized for a nomination.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to nominate my neighbor, Jennifer Friendsley Webb.

Okay.

Uh Councilmember Hancock has nominated Councilmember Jennifer Webb.

Are any other council members seeking to make uh nomination for the two positions on the audit committee?

Okay.

Seeing none, the nominees are Jason Spain, Delisha Porterfield, Courtney Johnston, Joy Stiles, and Jennifer Webb.

Okay, and we will close the nominations uh for audit committee.

Next, item H6, uh short-term rentals appeal board.

Um we will open the nominations for one council member to serve as a non-voting member of the short-term rental appeals board for a two-year term.

Okay.

Um anyone uh Mr.

Parker, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to nominate um Councilmember Tom Cash.

Okay.

Um Council Member Parker has nominated uh Tom Cash, Councilmember Tom Cash.

Okay.

Um are any other uh colleagues seeking to make a nomination to the short-term rental appeals board.

Okay, seeing none, um those nominations are also closed.

All right, um, that concludes uh our nominations again.

These elections will be conducted at the meeting on September 2nd.

Okay.

Um please refer to that memo of July 18th regarding uh your uh letters to council and working um with special council Darby um to communicate uh your um qualifications for um these positions.

Okay, um that's to our nominees.

All right, um, so now we are moving on to section I of our agenda, public comment.

Members of the public uh who are Tennessee residents wishing to speak during public comment may sign up at a table outside of the council chamber from 5 p.m.

to 6 p.m.

on the day of a council meeting.

Public comment is limited to 20 minutes total at council meetings, and each speaker is allowed up to two minutes to speak.

Request for interpretation services should be directed to the council office prior to the meeting.

Uh two comply uh with state law.

Um uh items on the agenda um must be uh prioritized.

Items that are um on this evening's agenda must be prioritized.

All right.

Um with that, um I will uh go ahead and call um first of several speakers so that we can kind of proceed along quickly.

Um I will go ahead and call on down the list.

And so if you would go ahead and sort of cue up in the vicinity of um our main door there, um please not blocking the door.

Um first uh to speak is Gray Skinner on agenda items 79, 80, and 81 um regarding the nation's UDO speaking in support.

Um after uh Gray Skinner will be Woody Baum and Steve uh Ryder, if you would go ahead and come forward.

Um Mr.

Skinner, um, you are recognized, sir.

Yep, uh good evening, council members.

Uh, thank you for the opportunity.

Uh my name is Grace Skinner.

Um, a native Nashville.

Um I'm speaking in support of Councilmember Horton's zoning proposal.

Uh I think that this has a huge impact uh on our city, and I think that councilmember Horton's proposal is a step in the right direction.

Um affordability is a critical issue in our city.

Um I first uh became personally aware of the housing affordability issue and what a burden it was placing on our teachers in the city uh through my own children and getting to know their teachers uh at a Metro Nashville public school.

Getting to know them, I heard story after story of them not being able to live uh close to the school or even into the in the city.

Um I think this is uh not sustainable for the growth of our city, uh, and it's really important that our teachers are able uh to support our children and stay in the schools uh and have have a strong retention in Metro schools.

Um Councilmember Horton's plan uh takes a step uh in the right direction uh in addressing affordability.

Um I first met Rollin over two years ago uh in a pressure professional context.

Uh the first thing that we talked about was housing.

Uh I want to commend his process.

Uh he's done an incredible job of building a coalition, talking to residents, hosting meetings, uh, gathering input.

Um it's really admirable uh what councilmember Horton has done and everyone who has supported him.

Uh so I just want to say uh thank you for considering this proposal.

Uh and I think it is a step, uh a needed step in the right direction for Nashville.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Skinner.

Um, next is uh Woody Baum, um uh speaking on agenda items uh 798081, um, collectively uh uh known as the The Nation's uh plan um and UDO in support.

Mr.

Baum, you're recognized.

Hi, good evening, council.

My name is Woody Baum.

I live on Kentucky Avenue in the nations with my wife and two kids.

I also work in the neighborhood, and I'm speaking in support of the plan.

I first became familiar with the plan um as the as a board member of the neighborhood, the nation's neighborhood association and co-chair of the planning and zoning committee.

Um council member Horton re uh introduced the plan nearly two years ago and has since held over a dozen meetings with the neighborhood association and different stakeholders.

Um I want to point out that councilman council Min Horton uh his election, he ran on a campaign promise of affordability and infrastructure improvements, and this plan does both of those things.

Um 1600 people voted for him to deliver on his campaign promises, and this is one of them.

And as a council member, he's accountable to us, the constituents.

Uh I also want to point out that this has been an inclusive and thoughtful process throughout the entire entirety of the two years that he's been working on this.

Um feedback from both supporters and detractors have directly shaped the final proposal.

Concerns about tree canopy, building height, and stormwater protections weren't ignored.

They were incorporated into the final proposal.

As a result, this plan better protects our trees, improves stormwater mitigation, and keeps building heights consistent with the neighborhood character.

It's a balanced, thoughtful plan with broad community support and buy-in.

It's an objective objective improvement over the status quo and offers something for everyone.

Last, we started the meeting with a call to help those without housing.

Today, the council has an opportunity to take a step in the right direction by supporting a plan that will take a small like that will that will address that affordable housing crisis that we're facing in Nashville.

I strongly urge you to urge for you to support this rezoning and uh and vote yes.

Thank you.

Uh thank you.

Uh Mr.

Ryder, as you come forward in subsequent folks coming forward.

I do see that we have members of the press who have attached their own mics to our mic, but that does not mean you cannot lift the mic up closer to your voice so that um we can hear you uh well or pull it down as the case may be uh for subsequent speakers.

Um after Mr.

Ryder uh will be Lauren Magley, um, Manon Hall, and Ben Vaught.

Um so if you would please come forward and go ahead and line up.

Um uh Mr.

Ryder is speaking on agenda item 22.

Um, this is resolution 2025 1436.

Go ahead, sir.

Thank you, madam chair, and members of the council.

Uh earlier today you heard various explanations, even yesterday, regarding what happened with uh DePaul USA and uh Office of Homeless Services.

I want to tell you tonight that a previous finance director, based on allegations of misconduct and financial mismanagement, actually seized the assets and uh the accounts receivable accounts payable of a department until they could clear up problems.

Here we have an extraordinary problem.

The finance director earlier today said there was a clear policy violation that took place.

Clear, and believe me, it was agregious.

It should have never happened.

We're talking about 3.5 million dollars here, and we're just gonna say, oh, you guys go out there and use you spend it how you see fit, I guess, because there's we you know it's a grand contract.

So essentially, finance department isn't monitoring that.

So what I'm asking is some something really extraordinary.

Since the previous finance director took over the accounts of another department, that that's what has to happen here.

There's a cr clear policy violation here.

And until we get this squared away, the Office of Homeless Services should not be overseeing 3.5 million dollars of this contract.

The person who's the finance person for them, I don't even think has a finance degree.

I mean, he's gonna go out there and I guess take some classes.

Great.

So um also this thing on D D eight of the contract on media.

Uh we don't need to have that.

This isn't a defense contract or anything.

We just don't need that.

It doesn't make any sense.

It's time that you take responsibility and step up to the plate, and let's get some answers and get this straightened out as soon as possible.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

Ryder.

Uh next is uh Lauren Mackley.

Um, you're recognized.

Um, she is speaking on agenda item 798081 in opposition.

Go ahead.

Thank you very much, counsel, and thank you for listening tonight with an open mind.

Um, so the nations that is a neighborhood that we love deeply.

If um folks that are here tonight who love the nations, if you guys could please stand up, we're here to show our support.

Um, we have 925 signatures and growing by the minute on our petition.

Nine hundred and twenty-five people in this community who are asking, who are begging council to please hear us.

What we would like is for the UDO to align with the objectives that have been promised.

A lot of these objectives of which we agree upon.

Councilmember Horton has stated publicly and privately that he supports two-story 35-foot tall homes and the residential character areas.

We agree.

He has said that he supports gentle rezoning, a diversity of housing types, more residential capacity on the corridors, and walkability.

We agree.

All we are asking for is that the UDO actually reflects these items.

Right now, the legislation as it's written, even with the amendments, does not reflect what has been promised to the community.

Things that we agree on, a shared foundation, four units per lot, two-story scale, growth that fits, growth that should promote walkability and livability, preserve the vibe.

The nation's is quirky and we like it.

I call it the wild wall west.

We've it's truly a melting pot of everything.

And we want to continue to be able to build upon that.

We agree, but there are some, you know, adjustments that need to be made.

We are asking for a deferral so that the UDO language can reflect what the talking points that Mr.

Horton has promised this community.

Thank you very much for listening.

Thank you.

Um next will be Manon Hall, followed by Vin Vaught.

If Chris Rimke and uh Rachel Gladstone would please also go ahead and come forward.

Go ahead, you're recognized.

Before I start my two minutes, can I make a procedural like question?

The last person when they signed up cut me and then didn't show ID.

They had a picture of their passport and then a screenshot of their voter registration.

They also have an ID in their wallet.

It doesn't appear to be from here.

Anyways.

Okay.

This is she said she was morning number.

I'm just gonna use this as your time, so if you please just go ahead and proceed.

Thank you.

Okay.

Please remove parking minimums on every single parcel in Nashville.

But apologize, you're speaking regarding agenda item 82.

I should have clarified.

Thank you.

Okay.

This week, last week benches were removed on KVB in Nashville.

And DOT said it was because they wanted to beautify that they wanted to put public art, but then they admitted that there was no public art planned yet.

That's CYA.

That was they were not removed for beautification.

And and Koopin admit and Coupen CM Koopin kindly thank you.

Was was able to clarify and say, you know, it was it in part was because of the homeless population.

And then he said that it was a cut through.

KVB 20 years ago was gonna be a highway.

Nashville fought for that road to be a boulevard.

It deserves to be a boulevard and supported like a boulevard, like the East Bank does.

This is the same stuff that Nashville does across Nashville.

We do and across Nashville is hiding the homeless out of sight, out of mind.

We need to address that by building housing.

And filtering exists.

We need to approve the nation's rezoning.

I won't be able to afford to live there, but I know plenty of people who are forced out of Nashville that more types of housing will be able to allow them to stay here.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, okay, so that was not actually on agenda item 82, but that's okay because it's open public comment and people can speak about whatever.

Um, and so next is uh Ben Vaught um uh speaking on agenda item 79, um, ordinance BL2025 830 and support.

Go ahead, you're recognized.

All right, thank you.

Uh my name is Ben Vault, uh, a national resident.

Would you please pull that mic up closer to your mouth?

Thank you, sir.

Uh my name's Ben Vault.

I'm a national resident speaking in support of the nation's uh neighborhood plan.

I currently work in the hospitality industry downtown, but I'm also a former licensed civil engineer uh with experience in water and wastewater and transportation.

Uh the opposition tonight's gonna talk to you a lot about infrastructure.

Um they're going to tell you the infrastructure can't support this plan.

Um I think that's a bad faith argument.

They're basically just throwing spaghetti against the wall to see what will stick.

Um I also think it's a false choice.

It's a false choice between this plan and nothing, and that's not the choice.

The choice is between this plan and more sprawl.

And we all know sprawl is more resource intensive, more expensive, it doesn't even pay for itself.

Every ring county is raising their property taxes because all they develop is sprawl, and it puts more strain on our water and wastewater systems and our roads.

More sprawl means more traffic.

And half the city, half the residents of the city can't even afford the homes they live in, technically, if you use um 30% as an affordability threshold.

The opposition doesn't understand that because they're mostly older and wealthier than the city as a whole.

More supply lowers costs, more density lowers costs.

We know this.

All like the available data we have all tells us the same thing.

More supply lowers costs.

Which brings me to my final point.

Budgets reflect values, and our zoning map is a form of a budget.

Our zoning map says that our values are more expensive homes for the wealthy, while the rest of us are left to fight over the scraps that line state highways.

This body has to change that.

Our zoning code is incompatible with our stated values and our stated goals on housing, climate, transportation, transit, inclusion.

It is long past time to act to enact to act to enact the plans we say we want.

The wealthy homeowners can wait, but the rest of us cannot.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Next is uh Chris Remke speaking on agenda items 79, 80, and 81 regarding the nation's uh speaking in opposition.

Go ahead, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'm Chris Rimke, I live in District 15.

I have said multiple times that this is there's more here in agreement than not.

And tonight, you know, we've we've been talking through all kinds of conversations, sprawl around this for sure, but there is a focused consensus on what these people agree to, what these neighbors do, what the Nashville neighborhood, I mean the National Nations Neighborhood Association agrees to.

It boils down to these points.

Four units per lot.

I've heard Rollin tell the news that three or four times this week.

Two-story scale, 35 feet tall.

All right, that's the second item.

However, within the UDO, we still have 20 percent five percent of the houses on Illinois that can be 45 percent feet tall on the corners.

This is a simple coordination thing within the UDO.

We just need the language cleaned up.

Everybody else agrees on the rest.

The final thing is that the corridor coming in has the capacity, or or in the UDO, you would have the ability to build those buildings 75 feet tall.

Some of these 60, probably the predominantly, if you can build them that tall.

What the neighborhood's saying, you guys have been doing a study, and you're promoting the missing middle, and that's much taller than the missing middle.

What they're simply saying is they'd enjoy the missing middle.

They'd like a missing middle solution on the corridor.

So basically, all we have to do is align what has been the common goal between them.

Four units a lot, two-story scale, 35 feet tall, and let's make an adjustment to have missing middle as it was originally attended on the corridor.

Please defer so they can do those three things.

Four units a lot, two-story scale, 35 feet tall.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um before the next speaker, I just want to uh indicate or understand that um from MNN that our uh broadcast on our live stream um and online on channel three is the picture, um the video is going in and out, um, but the sound, um, the words being spoken into the record here uh is is working.

Okay, and so uh with that, knowing that um we are going to uh continue and proceed, okay.

Um and so uh Ms.

Gladstone, um you're recognized.

Uh Ms.

Gladstone is speaking on agenda items uh 79, 80, and 81 uh regarding the nations in opposition.

Go ahead, please.

Thank you, Vice Mayor and Council.

Councilman Horton and those opposing this legislation are not as far apart as you would think.

Councilman Horton has stated publicly and privately that he supports two-story, 35 tall homes in the residential character.

We agree.

He has uh said he supports gentle rezoning, a diversity of housing types, more residential capacity on corridors and walkability.

We agree.

All we ask is that the UDO document reflect this shared commitment.

So the outcome matches the narrative that council member Horton, the Nations Associ uh Neighborhood Association, and the voice of the nation have already agreed upon.

Allowing up to four homes on a standard 50 by 150 foot lot, adds housing options while preserving neighborhood character.

Councilmember Horton has expressed the same expectation.

A two-story height limitation, 35 feet max, keeps new homes in scale with existing houses.

Councilman Horton has expressed the same expectation, deliver what is promised, four units per lot and a 35 height limit in residential areas.

Growth should promote walkability and livability.

Corridors must remain compatible with nearby residential streets.

Councilman Horton has um suggested this.

We have the same expectation.

Um we want to preserve the vibe of the neighborhood, very important to us with a high density, but not 60 and 75 foot tall buildings.

So we have one request, simply align the UDO with the stated goals of all the neighborhood groups and defer the spell so we can come together to realize Councilman Horton's vision.

I would also like to say that I have lived in this neighborhood 23 years, and I am not wealthy.

When I got my house, I worked four jobs and had roommates to pay for it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is uh Patsy Harvey and uh Michael Lacey.

Um, if you would go ahead and come forward, please.

Um, Ms.

Harvey is speaking on agenda items 79, 80, and 81 regarding the nations in opposition.

Go ahead, you're recognized.

Uh yes, thank you for allowing me to speak tonight.

I'm honored to be a voice for the nations.

I do not live in the nations.

Um I live in District 23.

Um, but I do think we are really getting close to agreement in many areas.

Um, as we talked about, and I went to a meeting on Sunday.

Uh, Mr.

Mr.

Horton agreed to four units per lot, two-story scale, which is 35 feet, growth that fits the neighborhood, and um they have a great neighborhood.

I've really really enjoyed meeting so many great people over there.

And I asked for your you to defer so they can then work more together because I think they're really very close, and that's what we're all about.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is uh Michael Lacey.

Um speaking regarding agenda item uh 22, um, resolution 2025-1436 in support.

Go ahead, sir.

I put support because I don't know what is the right way to talk about this.

What I support is that we have contracts where we pay people, that we have process.

We're struggling as a country to hold on to any sense of you know democratic norms, and that's incumbent on us as one of the places where some of the most anti-democratic norms, Tennessee, are being exported around this country.

And if we this alleged progressive blue dot in a red state, can't follow simple procedures and be transparent.

And I want to bring up a couple things.

And is not clear on why they did that, though it has been stated by them in email that it was because it might have law enforcement on there that are confidential, and therefore we can't let the public know where money is going.

I'm gonna say something I think we all agree with.

I love Austin Kyle.

He's a great guy.

But when I asked for a list of the laws passed by this body, I was given a price of $4,500 to see those.

Before 1995, they're not online.

I like Steve's comment.

It's in the past we have taken over the finances.

I'm looking for who could take over the finances of this whole thing because we are out of order.

Uh thank you.

That uh concludes uh public comment.

That was our tenth uh speaker.

Um there is not sufficient residual time from other speakers uh for another slot.

Um, so we will not be dipping into our wait list.

Um, and that uh concludes public comment.

All right.

Um next we will move uh to section J, uh the consolidated consent agenda.

All resolutions and second and third reading ordinances on this agenda are included on the consent agenda if recommended for approval unanimously by all committees to which the item was referred.

Items on the consent agenda will be voted on at a single time.

The item number along with the resolution and ordinance number of the items on the consent agenda will be read aloud by me.

Um members of the council may remove any item from the consent agenda by request subsequent to my reading it before the consent agenda vote is taken.

Okay, all right.

The first item proposed for the consolidated consent agenda is agenda item two, resolution 2025-1416.

Agenda item three, resolution 2025-1417.

Agenda item four, resolution 2025-1418.

Agenda item five, resolution 2025-1419.

Agenda item six, resolution 2025-142.

Agenda item seven, resolution 2025-1421.

Agenda item eight, resolution 2025-1422.

Agenda item nine, resolution 2025-1423.

Agenda item 10, resolution 2025-144.

Agenda item 11 resolution 2025-1425.

Agenda item 12 resolution 2025-4 1426.

Agenda item 14 resolution 2025-1428.

Agenda item 15 resolution 2025-1429.

Agenda item 16 resolution 2025-1430.

Agenda item 21 resolution 2025-1435.

All right, that is all the resolutions that were proposed for the consent agenda.

Now we'll move next to Section M.

Um, well rather we're still in our consent agenda section, but to bills on second reading that are proposed for the consolidated consent agenda and first among those second reading bills are agenda item 56 ordinance BL 2025-953.

Agenda item 61 ordinance BL 2025-959.

Agenda Item 63, Ordinance BL 2025-961.

Agenda Item 64, Ordinance BL 2025-962.

Agenda Item 65, Ordinance BL 2025-963.

Agenda Item 66, Ordinance BL 2025-964.

Agenda Item 67, Ordinance BL 2025-965.

Agenda Item 68, Ordinance BL 2025-966.

Agenda Item 69, Ordinance BL 2025-967.

Agenda Item 70, Ordinance BL 2025-968.

Agenda Item 71, Ordinance BL 2025-969.

Agenda Item 72, Ordinance BL 2025-970.

Agenda Item 73, Ordinance BL 2025-971.

Agenda Item 74, Ordinance BL 2025-972.

Agenda Item 75, Ordinance BL 2025-973.

Agenda Item 76, Ordinance BL 2025-974.

Agenda Item 77, Ordinance BL 2025-975.

All right, that concludes uh second reading items proposed for the consolidated consent agenda.

And now we will move into bills on third reading proposed for the consolidated consent agenda.

First among those is agenda item 78, ordinance BL 2025-820.

Agenda item 83, ordinance BL 2025-860.

Agenda item 84, Ordinance BL 2025-861.

Agenda item 87, Ordinance BL 2025-925.

Agenda Item 88, Ordinance BL 2025-926.

Agenda Item 89, Ordinance BL 2025-927.

Agenda Item 90, Ordinance BL 2025-928.

Agenda Item 91, Ordinance BL 2025-929.

Agenda Item 92, Ordinance BL 2025-930.

Agenda item 93, Ordinance BL 2025-933.

Agenda Item 96, Ordinance BL 2025-936.

Agenda Item 97, Ordinance BL 2025-937.

Agenda Item 99, Ordinance BL 2025-939.

Agenda Item 100, Ordinance BL 2025-940.

Agenda Item 104, Ordinance BL 2025-944.

Agenda item 105, Ordinance BL 2025-945.

Agenda Item 106 ordinance BL 2025-947.

Agenda Item 107, Ordinance BL 2025-950.

And lastly, proposed for the consolidated consent agenda.

All right, that concludes the reading of the consolidated consent agenda with all proposed resolutions, bills on second reading, and bills on third reading.

Do any items need to be removed from the consent agenda?

If so, members please join the queue.

Councilmember Welsh, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to pull item 22.

Okay.

Um Ms.

Welsh has requested uh the removal of agenda item 22.

Um this is resolution 2025-1436, and it will be removed from consent.

Um are any other members uh seeking to be recognized uh to remove an item from the consent agenda.

All right.

Um uh yep, yep.

Let me do one other thing here because it's a little bit new.

We've done it a few times.

Um, Mr.

Clerk, um, are all committee reports in for the items on the consent agenda?

Yes, all committee reports are in.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

Is there a motion for the approval of the consent agenda?

Okay.

Um uh uh okay, we're properly moved and seconded.

Um all in favor, please say aye.

Okay, council has passed all items on the consent agenda.

All right.

All right.

So now we will uh return to the order of our agenda um and going back uh to section K of the agenda, uh resolutions uh that uh were not on consent.

Okay.

Um and first among those uh is agenda item one, uh resolution 2025 1100.

Um uh sponsors Druffel Hill, Evans, Ellis, Huffman, Gamble, Nash, Hancock, Alan, Rutherford, Wiener, Johnston, Webb, though, and Ewing.

This is a resolution requesting Mayor Freddie O'Connell create an advisory working group to explore and determine a coordinating model that supports a long-term sustainable youth policy and strategic plan and analysis of data that extends beyond May oral Administrations.

Um, let's see.

This was referred to the budget and finance committee.

Um uh Chair Porterfield, you are recognized.

Point of order, Vice Mayor, do we need a motion?

Um, you don't need a motion.

You can simply tell me um that it was deferred one meeting.

Okay, at which point I will um defer by rule.

Budget and finding is voted on RS25-1100, 11 in favor, zero against zero, not voting for a one-meeting deferral.

Okay, um, with that per rule eight point one, um, there is a mandatory one meeting deferral.

Okay, are you seeking a point of order, Mr.

Druffel?

Yeah, yeah, uh be recognized to uh refer it to the budget.

That's what I thought the that is that is automatic.

Um this is just by rule.

Um our rules require the committee report.

Once the chair says there was one meeting deferral, it's done.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Okay.

Um next agenda item 19.

Um I think that's correct.

Uh resolution 2025-1433, sponsors Porterfield Evans, Welsh, Huffman, GAD, Hancock, and Swara.

This is a resolution accepting an air pollution control program support grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency to the Metropolitan Government, acting by and through the Metropolitan Board of Health for the ongoing collection of data on ambient air conditions for fine particulate matter in Nashville, Tennessee.

Um, Ms.

Porterfield, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh committee reports, uh budget and finance vote attend in favor, zero again, zero, not voting for a one-meeting deferral.

Okay.

Um, and chair uh Evans.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh public health and safety recommended approval, eight in favor, zero again, zero not voting.

All right.

Um, with the recommendation of a one meeting deferral um uh by the budget and finance committee um uh per rule eight point one.

Um that is a one meeting deferral.

Okay.

Uh yes, Ms.

Allen, point of order.

Um, since the public health and safety approved it, does it go back to them automatically?

Um no, it does not.

Could it be re-referred to them?

Uh that would require a uh separate um motion to that effect.

Um if you would like um to make that motion.

Um what what do we have a miss opportunity?

A special council derby.

Since there was excuse me.

A uh deferral for one meeting in budget and finance.

It's an automatic deferral without debate or deliberation, discussion.

And so the opportunity to make a motion on this matter doesn't exist because of the one meeting deferral.

Okay.

Um uh thank you, special counsel.

Um, all right.

I will note your question there though, Ms.

Allen, for kind of future rules consideration and so forth.

But um thank you for uh asking your question.

Um all right.

Next um is agenda item 22, uh resolution 2025-1436 sponsors Porterfield, Evans, Allen, and Huffman.

This is a resolution appropriating a total of uh $3,500,000 from the Metropolitan Government of National and Davidson County, acting by and through the Office of Homeless Services to DePall USA Inc.

for the provision of property management on-site support and case management services at Strobel House permanent supportive housing.

Um let's see.

Uh committee reports, Chair Porterfield, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Budget and Finance voted for RS 2025-1436, tenant favor zero against zero not voted.

Okay, thank you.

And for public health and safety, uh the report, uh, Chair Evans, please.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Public Health and Safety recommended approval.

Nine in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Okay.

Um go ahead, Ms.

For approval.

Okay, is there a second?

Okay, there's a motion to approve properly seconded.

Um is there uh we're on to debate.

Is anyone seeking Ms.

Allen?

You are recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Since there was some discussion about this during the public comment period, um, I was just wondering if someone from finance table could address what the discrepancies were and what corrections have been put in place to um to remedy that.

Okay.

Um, Ms.

Wiggins, uh for uh the Department of Finance, uh, you are recognized.

Uh thank you, um, Vice Mayor.

The um the issue with the contract is that the original contract expired um in September, and um the department managing that contract continued to charge the invoices against um essentially against that contract, which had exceeded its value and had also expired.

Um the um situation um is that they were using a direct voucher, which is not something under the purview of finance.

Direct vouchers are approved at the department level, and it does not directly connect to that contract.

So had um the policy been followed that is to use a purchase order, then the purchase order would have connected to the contract.

And um that way then finance has a bit of a um a step in that approval process through those payments that connects the invoices to the contract, which would prevent a contract from being um exceeded in value or um after its expiration date.

So um that was the primary um gap in um in this um contract period.

So this contract then eliminates you know the gap and puts a proper contract in place um for the vendor to continue to be paid appropriately per metro policy.

Um Ms.

Allen, does that address your question?

And it will be by PO now, purchase order, so there's some oversight.

Ms.

Wiggins, you're recognized.

Thank you.

Um yes, there is the other unique thing is that this is a grant contract versus a more traditional vendor contract.

So again, um typically grant contracts are done in a reimbursement or you know, minimal payments based on reimbursement and don't really follow POs, but yes, it can be done under a PO and um and therefore tracked um by its contract value.

Thank you, Ms.

Wiggins.

Ms.

Allen, does that address all your questions?

Okay.

Um continuing the discussion, uh, Councilmember Wells, sure recognized.

Um thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, I have real problems with this.

Um the original contract here for this um service provider was for three months for $500,000.

And um the Office of Homeless Services did not notice for almost a year until a journalist started knocking on the door that they had an expired contract and they were um paying people without a contract.

Um that said, they did all these invoices that they submitted for payment were backdated um and just continue to go through the system.

Um I think this really points uh uh some very fundamental flaws in how we are doing our finance and oversight within Metro.

Um, but it's very disconcerting to me that that is not something that um came to anyone's attention.

Um after this contract expired in September, less than a week later, there was a stabbing in the Strobel House where these services were being provided.

Um that opens Metro to a lot of liability.

Um there were no security cameras.

Um the Office of Homeless Services basically denied that it actually happened in the Strobel House when it did.

Um there's just a lot of um, there's a huge lack of oversight.

Um I might have some sympathy for something like this happening if this was a unique situation, but this is not at all a unique situation with OHS.

We have found errors in contracts, math errors, uh things we've had to correct.

Um I know um last term that we had to do a late filed amendment on the floor to correct errors and contracts because there's literally no oversight.

Um there is no guarantee right now that this contract, if we pass this tonight, um, is actually going to go to PO because they're talking about not doing that for three or four more months till they get a new system in place.

Um and I don't actually trust that, given that their person who runs who is their finance officer does not have a background in finance.

His background is actually in marketing.

Um that's a very serious concern to me.

Um, but a broader concern is that I feel like if we just simply rubber stamp this contract, um, when there is no mechanism within the Metro Charter to allow us to pay uh invoices against the contract doesn't exist.

There is no mechanism within Metro that allows us to backdate invoices.

That's actually kind of fraudulent, in my opinion.

Um and I feel like if we just pass this contract and let everything just go hunky dory, I do not trust that um any of the mechanisms that were brought spoken about by the director of um OHS will actually be put in place, and I don't know what oversight will actually be there.

I'm hoping that the new chair of um health and um public safety will actually be able to do that.

Um of the excuses we got for this happening was that this was there was so much confusion, it's a new office.

Well, the director of the Office of Home of Services has been there since 2001.

Um, and as a director, she should know better.

And as we should be demanding better from our directors, and if our directors cannot do something as basic as keeping track of millions of dollars, they shouldn't have that responsibility.

So I will be a no vote on this tonight.

Thank you.

All right.

Um are there any other members seeking to be recognized?

Um there is a motion um to approve, properly seconded.

Any further discussion.

All right.

Um, knowing that we have a no vote um and uh a resolution only having apologized.

Oh, Miss Swara.

Um you're recognized.

Uh thank you, uh Madame Vice Mayor.

I I had a question in committee earlier to finance, and I don't know if there was an answer to that in terms of when the next payment is due.

Miss Swara and Council members, if you will recall, I know so often we're in committee, but we are in Maine meetings, so if you would please rise.

Thank you.

My apologies.

No, it's no worries.

Yes, ma'am.

Oh, um, Ms.

Wiggins, uh, you are recognized for the administration for finance.

Go ahead.

Um, yes.

Um at the public and safety committee, um uh the department confirmed that the next payment would be um the first week of September.

The post week of September.

And that would be before the next meeting.

Okay, okay.

No, you said by the fifth, and I think our meeting is the September 2nd will be our next meeting.

Um and so Ms.

Wiggins, you indicated September 5th would be the next payment.

Okay.

Um thank you.

Uh also there was a question that I want to ask Ms.

Wiggins on the record.

I think she's answered it for me, but it's come up a couple of times in that when you look at the general ledger for these payments, there was a 4% fund indicated.

Could you please clarify this we actually paid out of the 4% fund?

Um, Ms.

Wiggins, you're recognized to answer that question.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Um, yes, the confusion with the sub-account type referencing 4% resolution, is that that is actually a template type um entry.

And what I mean by that is um when um our office of um management and budget um when they were going to set up a way to um track an ongoing account.

So an account that would carry over a fiscal year.

The example of that was our 4% resolution because when we award 4% funds, they're allowed to carry over in a fiscal year.

And that also allowed us to attach a resolution that was approving those funds to that subaccount.

So when you look at the general ledger, if you look at the fund number, that was 30216.

Those are the American Rescue Plan funds.

That is the correct fund.

So OHS was correct in charging that fund.

When you see the uh, and then there was also um a BU, a business unit, there was also um an object account.

Those are all of the accounting strings.

But when you see the subtype, the sub-account type, that's where it said 4% resolution.

It's just telling us that that's what kind of account was set up, was one that would carry over multi-year.

It actually had nothing to do with the 4% funds themselves.

Okay.

Uh, another issue was the explanation using the dates of May and September.

The actual invoices were not backdated, but the uh explanation for the journal, he's the one that has that backdated.

Would you clarify that as well?

Can you clarify the the backdating of the invoices, Ms.

Wiggins?

The the invoices themselves were not so much as backdated as they were identified as what month the services were provided.

So that it um from an accounting perspective, you want the services rendered in January to be recorded in the month of January.

So they put um in the description, I believe it said um like 524 through um like nine twenty for the previous contract, and then it had the current months for the current for the payments that were being made outside of the contract.

Thank you.

Um thank you, Ms.

Wiggins.

Uh I will ask everyone to please look at the budget and finance committee meeting as well as the uh public safety committee meeting.

Uh what happened is egregious, is it shouldn't have happened.

Uh there's a whole lot that could have been done better.

Uh, there was a lack of following the policy on the part of the department uh and and the finance or a system uh not having the capability to catch it, thus what happened.

It's bad, but I think the conversation that we've had so far is uh do we move forward uh from the departments to finance with a lot of controls in place to make sure that not just OHS but the departments uh uh uh that there's enough control to prevent that from happening.

Now, this conversation does not have to doesn't have to end.

People can we can still ask questions.

Uh um I had thought about doing the deferral, but one of the reasons why I'm not at this point is because of that payment that needs to happen on September 5th.

And so I've asked a lot of questions.

Uh, a lot of them have been answered.

Uh, and I think that people can continue to ask questions.

I think we have to continue to do better, anything like this.

If we catch it, we should uh act and and and forward.

So uh with that I'm going to I I'm supporting it anyway.

We need to pay the contract.

And I think if people want to, if we want to ask additional question, I'm sure this does not stop that.

And so I'm just glad to, and I want to put it on record.

I do want to thank Mike Lisi for bringing it to our attention because that email is what is now caused all of these additional steps and controls to be put in place by finance to make sure that there's accountability and that uh uh uh was payments a tracking properly.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Swara.

Uh next in the queue for discussion is Councilmember Voe.

You're recognized.

Thank you so much, Vice Mayor.

Um, I would like uh to request a one meeting deferral for me.

I still um have lots of questions I want to is there a second um for the one okay, properly moved and seconded.

You can speak on the deferral now.

Thank you so much, Vice Mayor.

Um, and so I think with the clarification from um finance that the payment is on September 5th.

I think that it won't uh interfere with the payment um unless we need to get clarification from that.

But I think if we can't get more answers, question uh more answers to the questions that we have, um, it would be uh better.

And um I'll leave it there.

All right.

Um next, so um discussion now is regarding um the motion for one meeting deferral.

Um that discussion will continue next with Ms.

Porterfield budget and finance chair, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, I appreciate my colleague uh stepping up to to make sure that we have more time to get more information.

I do have a concern with the one meeting deferral.

This was discussed in uh public health and safety.

We voted against the one meeting deferral, and one concern that came up was that uh they're already providing the services, and when we asked if it would cause a delay with payment, we were told by finance that it could cause a delay.

My understanding that that was up to 60 days, and we can get clarification if we need to before we vote.

Um, but my concern would be delaying them from getting a payment for services that they are currently rendering.

Um so for that reason I will have to be voting against the deferral.

Okay.

Um, Ms.

Welsh on the deferral motion.

Okay, uh, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, I would rise in support of the deferral motion.

Um, because one, we just found out uh we have different information now than we had earlier today in public health and safety, um, which is that the payment date is actually after our next council meeting, so it won't actually have any practical effect if we defer this for one meeting.

And number two, because Ms.

Wiggins just said that those invoices were not backdated, and in fact they are, and I would like the opportunity to send all that information to my colleagues through the council office to show those invoices are in fact backdated.

So that is another bit of wrong information.

And until we have all the correct information, I don't think that we should be rubber stamping this.

So I am definitely in support of a deferral.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh Mr.

Huffman, Vice Chair of Public Health and Safety.

Um, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh, I rise in opposition to this deferral.

I appreciate my colleagues' uh concerns, but one thing I want to point out is that this is not only a financial matter.

There's around 90 people that live at Strobel House that we don't want to interrupt service to potentially I that's one thing that I just cannot get passed, and that's why I just cannot support a deferral.

Also, Nepal USA, it's a company that has uh a great reputation throughout the country for providing these services.

I would hate to uh muddy the waters with that relationship, especially with how uh long that that search was.

So uh I advise uh against a deferral in this situation.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Or is there any further discussion on the motion uh to defer?

All right, uh, we will proceed to the vote that can be taken by voice, as I've often remind council members.

Uh please, it is the number, not the volume.

Um, and so we are now voting on a one meeting deferral.

All in favor, please say aye.

Um uh those against a one meeting deferral, please say no.

Uh Mr.

Clerk, I'm gonna have to put on the board.

I apologize.

Um, can't deduce it by ear.

All votes are in.

Uh Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

Okay, the deferral motion fails um with 10 voting in favor, uh, 26 against.

Um, so that means um we are back um to the motion uh to approve um this resolution, um, which was properly seconded.

Um we had some previous debate.

Um, is there any further debate on uh the motion to approve at this juncture?

Okay.

Um uh recognizing that we will have some no votes um that have been stated uh from the floor.

Um I think I would advise that we just go ahead um because it is a resolution.

Um uh Mr.

Clerk, uh, if you could please uh put this to the machine, please.

Um all votes in.

Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

Okay, this resolution has passed with 30 votes in favor, four against, and two abstentions.

All right.

Um moving next to um agenda item 26, uh resolution 2025-1440.

Sponsors Porterfield, Evans Welsh, and Huffman.

Uh, this is a resolution approving a memorandum of understanding between the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security and the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County by and through the Nashville Fire Department for training participation of T DOSHS personnel um in the EMT services provided by the Nashville Fire Department.

Uh Chair Porterfield, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh budget and finance, I'm sorry, committee reports, budget and finance voted on RS 2025-1440.

Eight in favor, zero against, and two not voting.

Okay.

Um, for the report of public health and safety, Chair Evans, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh, the committee recommended approval, six in favor, two against, one not voting.

Okay.

Um, it's back to you, uh, Sponsor Porterfield for a motion.

Move for approval.

Okay.

Is there a second?

Okay, properly moved and uh uh seconded.

We are on to discussion.

Um is anyone seeking to be recognized for discussion on this resolution?

Okay.

Um, Miss Swara, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Madam Vice Chair.

I will be voting on this resolution and just put it on the record like I did in committee, is that uh looking to the agreements.

Uh the fire department does need volunteer for EMTs, and that's why they're signing up for this.

Uh, but this contract also requires the Tennessee uh Department of Homeland Security to have access to patient information and to be there when they're picking people up and a whole lot of stuff.

And it's interesting that when you look at the actual contract, the fire department actually put a note in there that um the Tennessee Department of Homeland Security would not disclose that information that they come in contact with, which is very interesting.

So I'm glad that they did that.

And they also have a clause in there that they have the option to pull out of the contract if the Tennessee Department of Homeland Security is not following that.

So I'm I'm grateful to NFD for thinking I aid and putting those clauses in there.

Uh but in terms of the history and some of the things that is going on and information getting the answer of Tennessee Department of Safety.

Uh, I cannot in good conscience vote for this, and so I will be at no thank you.

Okay.

Um, is anyone else seeking to be recognized um for uh discussion on this resolution?

All right.

Um by rule, knowing that we have um a no vote, um, we do have to do a roll call.

Um, and so with that, uh Mr.

Clerk, could you please open the vote?

Okay, um, with all votes in, Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

This resolution has passed um with 27 votes in favor, six votes no, and two abstentions.

All right, last among our resolutions that we're not on consent is agenda item 45, resolution 2025-1459.

Sponsors Tombs, Swara, and Allen.

This is a resolution recognizing the Parkwood 8U All-Stars for finishing in third place in the Diamond Youth Baseball World Series.

All right.

Um Ms.

Tombs, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor, committee report.

Chair Prep T for the report of rules, confirmations, and public elections, please, sir.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

With regards to the substitute, we voted five in favor, zero against zero, not voting, and then on the resolution as substituted, we voted five in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Okay.

Um, all right.

Uh back to you, Ms.

Toombs, uh, for a motion to get the resolution before us.

Move for approval.

Okay, go ahead.

I'd like to move the substitute.

All right, is there a second for the substitute?

Okay.

Um uh is there anything uh you want to share on the substitute?

Not necessary if you don't I'm gonna wait till the presentation uh the first meeting in September.

All righty.

Um is there any discussion on the motion to substitute, which is properly seconded?

Seeing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Okay, um back to you for a motion for resolution is substituted.

I'd like to move approval as substituted as well as in vote rule 12.3.

Okay, all right.

Um there is a motion to approve as substituted with rule 12.3 applied such that all members voting in the affirmative will be recorded as co-sponsors.

Okay.

Um any further discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Any voting no or abstaining?

All right.

Congratulations to those all-stars.

Okay, that concludes our resolutions.

Um, and now um we are on uh bills on introduction and first reading.

Section L of our agenda.

All items on first reading shall be voted on at the same time unless requested either by uh the primary sponsor individually or by two or more other members.

Do any items need to be removed um from the collective vote?

All right.

Um seeing none, is there a motion for approval of all the items on first consideration?

Okay, um uh properly seconded and without objection, you have approved all items on first reading.

Okay.

Now we are on to uh section M of our agenda.

Um I will state just because I spoke to it prior, quite a while back.

I believe somewhere in the midst of the consent agenda, the video feed was restored for our channel three viewers and live stream.

So we are back um uh with that.

So um now, agenda section M bills on second reading.

Uh first among those is agenda or rather uh agenda item 55, ordinance uh BL 2025-911.

Um sponsors Hancock, Porterfield, and Gamble.

This is an ordinance to approve a lease agreement between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davison County by and through the mayor's office of emergency management and the Department of General Services and the Community Resource Center for use of a warehouse at 801 Anderson Lane in Madison, Tennessee.

Uh Ms.

Hancock, you are recognized.

This is not an emergency, but it's really cool that it's 911 since it's for emergency management.

Committee reports, please.

Yes.

Um committee report from budget and finance.

Chair Porterfield, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Budget and finance vote on bill 2025-911.

Nine in favor, zero again, zero not vote in for the amendment, and nine in favor, zero again, zero not vote in for the bill as amended.

All right, it's back to you uh for a motion, Miss Hancock to get uh the bill before us.

I'd like to move for approval of the bill.

Okay, is there second?

Okay, now it's back to you um regarding your move.

Move the amendment, which add some information on insurance, um removing some liability from general services and some extra clauses at the end that we needed.

Okay, is there a second on the motion to amend?

Okay, it's properly moved and seconded.

Is there any further discussion on uh the motion to amend?

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

Any voting no or abstaining?

Okay, and now it's back to you for a motion for your uh approval of your bill is amended.

I'd like to move the bill as amended, please.

Okay, is there a second?

Any discussion?

All in favor, please say aye.

Any voting no or abstaining?

Okay, this is passed its second of three readings as amended.

Next is agenda item 57, uh ordinance BL 2025-954, sponsors Coupen, Alan Rutherford and Styles.

This is an ordinance amending title six of the Metro Code of Laws to amend the definition of entertainment transportation vehicles and to regulate the operation of seated sightseeing vehicles.

Uh Mr.

Koopin, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madam President.

Committee reports, please.

All right, for the report of transportation and infrastructure, Chair Perker, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

We recommended a one meeting deferral, 12 in favor, zero against.

Okay, and with that, um per rule eight point one, that is a mandatory one meeting deferral.

Um that will be taken up again at um our meeting of September 2nd.

Okay.

Uh next is agenda item uh 58, uh ordinance BL 2025-955, sponsors Ellis Huffman, and Allen.

This is an ordinance to amend section 9.20.020 of the Metro Code of Laws regarding motor vehicle noise within residential zoning districts.

Okay.

Um first uh uh to sponsor Ellis.

Um uh Miss Ellis, uh, you are recognized.

Thank you.

Um you're gonna request your committee reports.

Uh yeah.

Okay.

Um all right, uh Chair of Government Operations.

Uh Chair Hill, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

We voted uh for defer one meeting, seven of in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Uh one meeting deferral.

Okay, one meeting deferral.

Okay, and um for uh uh the report of the transportation infrastructure committee, Chair Parker.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

We recommended a one meeting deferral, 11 in favor, one against zero not voting.

Okay.

Um uh and for next the report of the public health and safety committee.

Um, Chair Evans.

We recommended a one meeting deferral, nine in favor, zero again, zero not voting.

Okay.

Um uh with that, Miss Ellis per rule eight point one.

Um, that is a mandatory uh one meeting deferral.

Okay, so uh this uh bill will be taken up again by those committees at the meeting of September 2nd.

Okay.

All right.

Uh next, um, also sponsor this um agenda 59 uh ordinance BL 2025-956, an ordinance to amend uh chapter 12.40 of the Metro Code of Laws regarding abandoned vehicles and restrictions on street and alley parking.

Um Ms.

Ellis, you're recognized.

Yep, committee reports.

Okay.

Um uh government operations, Chair Hill, you are recognized.

I think my vice mayor.

We recommend a deferral of one meeting, seven in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Okay, thank you, ma'am.

And for the report of transportation infrastructure, Chair Parker, go ahead.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

We recommended a two-meeting deferral, 11 in favor, one against, and zero not voting.

Okay.

Um uh by rule eight point one, uh that uh that one meeting deferral uh prevails.

Um, and so uh that will be deferred uh one meeting um as well to the meeting of September 2nd.

Okay.

Uh all right.

Moving right along.

The next item.

Okay, that concludes our second reading items.

Um now we are on um uh agenda section N bills on third reading.

Um okay, and uh those that were not on the consent agenda.

First among those is agenda item 79, sponsor Horton.

This is ordinance BL 2025-830.

Um uh this is an ordinance to amend uh title 17 of the Metro Code of Laws, the zoning ordinance of the Metro government by changing from RS 3.75, RS 3.75 A, R6, R6A, RM9, RM20, RM20A, RM20, RM40, OR20, M U N, M U N A, C N, C L, C S, C S A, and IR zonings to RM40 ANS, OR40 A, M U N A, M U N A N S, M U L A, and M U L A N Soning for Various Properties Located on the East and West Sides of 51st Avenue North, North of I 40, and South of Centennial Boulevard, between 63rd Avenue North and 43rd Avenue North, and north of Centennial Boulevard, east and west of 61st Avenue North and Linder Industrial Drive, and on the Northeast side of 51st Avenue North and Louisiana Avenue.

This is 29 293.33 acres.

Uh Mr.

Horton, you are recognized, sir.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Okay.

Um we first need your committee report, sir.

That's okay.

Um Chair of Planning and Zoning, uh, Chair Gamble, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Planning and zoning a recommended uh approval of two amendments.

Do we want to go move the amendments first or bill?

Yeah, yeah, for your report.

If you would report on the votes on um the amendments and then on the bill uh as amended, please, ma'am.

Great, thank you.

We considered amendment one, uh 12 in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Then we considered amendment two, twelve in favor, zero against, zero not voting.

Then we considered the bill as amended with amendment one and two, uh recommended approval, eight in favor, one against two not voting.

Okay, thank you, ma'am.

Okay, now it's back to you, uh Mr.

Horton for a motion on your bill.

Thank you, Ice Mayor.

I'd like to move for approval with a brief comment, please.

Okay, sir, second.

Go ahead, sir.

Thank you.

Uh this bill uh and the subsequent companion bills uh collectively referred to as the nation's neighborhood plan.

Uh is something we've been working on uh collectively over the last almost two years now as a neighborhood uh to deliver on a lot of our key shared priorities as a neighborhood.

Uh greater walkability, greater support for our local neighborhood businesses, uh different housing options for residents, uh restoring and replenishing our neighborhood's uh tree canopy, uh as well as starting to combat the growing flooding problem in our neighborhood.

Um it's something we've worked on um exhaustively over the last two years.

I think we've had 24 different community meetings um since January 2024 have been working on with planning since October 2023.

Um the lat last two community meetings we've had have happened since our last public hearing, and we discussed it uh the this bill extensively last meeting, but what's new today is an amendment um one on this bill, uh two on this bill, uh that reflects some of the additional um community input we've received in the last time uh since the last meeting.

Um so with that I would like to move approval for amendment one, please.

Okay, is there a second?

Okay, um is there uh any uh discussion on this amendment?

Would you like to share what the amendment includes?

Yes, please.

Um so the rezoning component of this prohibits new short-term rental properties um in the residential areas of our neighborhood.

Uh it's an important goal of our neighborhood.

Um in many instances, short-term rentals are a harmless feature of the property and provide supplemental and uh supplemental income to residents.

In other cases, it's a real nuisance, and we get a lot of complaints from neighbors.

Um so we prohibit new short-term rental um contracts as part of the rezoning.

Um what this amendment does is it clarifies content and intend to address the concerns of existing short-term rental um permit holders that existing short-term rentals will not be eliminated as part of this.

Um this applies to new short-term rentals moving forward um as required under state law.

All right.

Um Ms.

Johnston, do you seek to be recognized on the amendment?

Mr.

Coopin, do you seek to be recognized on amendment one?

Okay.

Um is there any further discussion on amendment one?

Um uh seeing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Um any voting no.

Uh, any abstaining.

Okay.

If you'd renew your motion.

I'd like to move for approval with the bill as amended, please.

Okay.

Um uh is there a second for that?

Okay, so we're back on to discussion.

And at this juncture, if you would like to offer amendment two, you may, or um, we're just on to discussion generally.

Um and so uh we have another we have a friendly amendment from from council member truffle.

I will I'll let him move it.

Okay, um, all right.

I am gonna allow that if even though it's a little bit out of order because we've got the queue or those folks okay, it's a friendly amendment.

Appreciate that.

Mr.

Drupal, you are recognized, sir.

Uh yeah, thanks, Chair.

Uh due to the uh potential cumulative uh traffic impact on that area with the increased uh zoning and and density.

Uh I'm requesting that uh the master plan a multimodal will include Mr.

Duffel, you just need to uh you can describe it, but have you moved your amendment?

Oh I'd like to move amendment two.

Okay, is there a second?

Okay, sorry to interject, sir.

Please continue.

Okay, so uh as a potential uh cumulative traffic that is uh on that corridor.

Uh the goal is to uh uh ensure that the uh uh master plan, uh my multimodal master plan would be included uh so that would represent and ensure the traffic uh is isn't the best situation.

All right.

Um is there any uh discussion on the motion to amend with amendment two?

Mr.

Horton, go ahead.

You're recognized.

I'd like to thank Council Member Druffel for bringing this amendment.

Um discuss with NDOT who confirmed that this is something they would be covering as part of their master plan review.

Uh but I think it's important also to provide certainty as well as to flag this um specifically for the review.

Uh so thank uh councilmember Druffel for bringing it.

All right.

Um seeing no one else seeking to be recognized on the motion to amend uh with amendment two um from councilman uh Druffel, we will move to the vote.

All in favor, please say aye.

Any voting no?

Okay.

Um uh any abstentions.

All right, pardon?

Yep, this is on amendment two, the Druffal amendment.

That's correct.

Um the the motion to amend has passed.

Um uh Mr.

Horton, do you want to renew your motion for approval as amended?

I'd like to move for approval as amended, please.

Okay.

Um, so what is uh before us at this time, colleagues?

Okay, um amendment one and amendment two are on the bill.

At present, there is a motion to approve on third and final reason as amended with amendment one and amendment two, and so we are on to general discussion.

And first in the queue is uh Ms.

Johnston.

You're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um so the I typically don't get involved, and I think a lot of us have that um thought process that district um rezonings are something that is left to the district council member um for good reason.

Um the only reason that I'm uh standing up and talking is because we've received such an overwhelming response and and some opposition and concern that I feel like we have a process problem um that I that I think it's incumbent upon all of us to address.

Um it is really hard to connect with voters.

It is really hard to connect with your constituents.

Not everybody is paying attention.

There's a lot of people that don't even know who we are, and so I get that.

Um, but if a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?

That is irrelevant.

What's relevant is that nobody's there to hear it.

So the meetings, the 18 months or two years of work, the 30-something meetings, it's irrelevant if no one was there or a large portion of people were not there.

And so for a lot of people in this neighborhood, their first um notification of this came in the mail from planning saying this is this is what's happening.

So to them it's very, very new.

Um, I think it's really important for us to get it right, not just to get it done.

Um, I totally sympathize with the sponsor who obviously has put in a lot of work to with this.

My interactions with the sponsor have always been he's been very reasonable um to deal with.

And so I would just hope uh I was really encouraged to hear that we're that the group um that is concerned is very, very close that they agree on more things than they don't.

Um there may be some um concerns that can be um just explained that um just like some misinformation or some misunderstanding about it, and so it would I would move for a deferral, but I think any deferral amount of time that I would come up with would be arbitrary because it's not my meetings that I have to put forth, it's not my constituents that I have to um to work with.

So I would just respectfully ask the sponsor to make one more deferral.

I understand that we've there's been other deferrals.

Um one more meeting or whatever it would take, I think would show good faith and good will that the council is hearing our constituents.

We're here to to represent them and work with them.

It's their neighborhood.

This isn't a commercial property that people are impassioned about.

This is their home.

This is where they're raising their families and sitting on the porch and watching their kids in the backyard.

Um, so it's it's emotional, it's important, and I just think it's really important that we get it right, um, not just get it done.

And so I would hopefully ask um and respectfully ask for the sponsor to to make his own deferral motion to show that goodwill and good faith to get it right.

All right, um, next in the queue for discussion is Councilmember Koopin.

You're recognized.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, before I begin, I'd like to ask the planning table uh question if I may.

Um, one of the uh concerns I heard from uh public comment was that the amendment doesn't address the height um height issue.

Can I ask you?

Um Mr.

Couldn't you address the question to me and then I put it to the planning table?

Um, Ms.

Milligan, you're recognized for the planning department.

Um yes, so that amendment is actually on the UDO, which this is the rezoning.

So um I can address it now if you would like, but that's not the this bill.

It's the next one.

Would they be able to address it since they kind of all tie together?

Um discussion.

I would encourage you to wait for the UDO discussion.

Happy to do that.

Um appreciate the uh the public coming out again, as you can see by this line of questioning.

I want to make sure that questions that were asked this evening are answered.

And as uh my colleagues said, this is emotional, this is people's homes.

It really is important.

It's not something I take lightly, it's not something my colleagues take lightly.

Um and I was also encouraged to hear tonight that um that people feel like they're very close.

That we're really there there's progress being made.

It doesn't feel like it's the same situation first when folks first learned about this.

Um, but I know that as you've heard, my colleague, the sponsor, uh, ran on this this proposal and ran on this idea, uh, has worked on it tirelessly for two years, um, has had a ton of meetings.

Um that's one of the hard parts about being a district council member is we try to reach everybody.

We try to make sure people's voices are heard, and inevitably there are waves of folks that do come out, they do learn later, and it's that balance of um getting getting things done, getting legislation passed, making progress, but also um making sure that along the way folks who come on uh to the to the train and learn about it, uh have their opportunity to be heard.

Um I think this is a really good bill.

I think that it it provides forward progress.

Um it provides w measured and reasonable growth.

Um it does not mean bulldozers come tomorrow.

It allows for growth over time um to happen.

I think the sponsor did a lot of work on it.

You're hearing that work here tonight from the comments we heard originally to now, you can tell the difference.

Um so it's something I'm very supportive of.

I you know, I I appreciate the idea of councilmatic courtesy, whether it's there or not.

Um, but I know that in my district, if I had something that I believed in, I would want my colleagues to support my efforts and trust my ability to work with my voters and address them and answer to them ultimately.

And I I trust my colleague uh to do the same.

So I think it's a good plan.

I think it's a good proposal, and I'll be supporting it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Koopin.

Uh, next is Councilmember Allen.

You're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

Um, this is a really complicated issue, and I've spent a lot of time trying to soak in what we've heard from the neighbors who have taken a lot of time to come out and speak both in support and um in opposition.

And I appreciate the people that came tonight and said, here are the three things that if we could fix, we think we could be good.

Um, so I would ask um the sponsor when he uh speaks again if he could address the four units, which when I do the math, RM40 on a very small lot is four units per lot.

And and I think maybe explaining that to people could address a lot of concern.

Um, and that the 35 feet height um is an issue that is very important to people, and that um that by an amendment that I think we already have put on there that takes away the the bonus that that has been addressed.

So if if the sponsor can clarify the questions that had been brought up, I will feel better.

I will say um I also would love to see a little bit more time so that the neighbors who are uncomfortable could have these discussions.

I hope that will happen one way or another.

Um the sponsor was nice enough to sit with me and go through my my pro and con chart, which I always make on these things, and uh, you know, and sort of talk me through this is this is how it deals with affordability, walkability, tree canopy, traffic and stormwater.

I know how hard he's worked to make all these things um fit.

Uh I am still concerned that at a process this big um that doesn't reach people.

If more effort can be made to do block parties or walking or whatever, that's not wasted time.

Um I'm not gonna call for a deferral, uh, but I just throw out that suggestion that if it happened if a deferral happens, it'd be a great use of time.

If it doesn't happen, I still think that needs to happen to ensure that the neighbors at this effect understand what this is doing.

I I agree with all the the goals here.

Um I'm sorry the process has has left some people feeling like they were not communicated with, and we need to rectify that both on this one and in future ones.

Um, and I will just continue to listen to the conversation.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Allen.

Mr.

Horton, do you want me to come back to you to address those two points um that Ms.

Allen elevated?

She had remaining times, which I'm sure she'd be happy to cede it to you.

Um uh go ahead, sir.

Yes, please, thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, to the question about whether this limits um four units per lot.

Um so RM40 is a zoning a zoning district, which means 40 units per acre.

Uh, the number of units that you can fit is proportionate based on the size of the lot.

Uh typical lot size, for example, mine in the nations is a tenth of an acre, uh, tenth of 40 is four.

Um, so on a typical lot, we will be permitting uh four units on a lot.

It's obviously some are a little bit bigger, some are a little bit smaller, so it might be three to five, but the typical um lot density will be four per for four units per lot.

Okay, Miss Allen also made the the point or asked for a clarification regarding the height bonus and um the amendments, how they address that, please.

Speak very that's on the next bill.

Um but it eliminates the height bonus to reduce it to 35 feet on our residential.

Okay, let's say on this bill.

Okay.

Um all right.

Uh next uh for discussion in the queue is Ms.

Welsh.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um I want to point out that of the um four people who actually got up and spoke tonight um in opposition to this, uh, three of them do not live in that district, and including the woman who first spoke actually lives in Franklin.

Um please be quiet and sit down.

So um please be quiet.

Ma'am.

Um we need to take a we do not take comments from the gallery at this time, okay?

If you want to email this council later and address what you see is an inappropriate I'm gonna ask you to leave if you do not be quiet, okay.

Ms.

Welsh, what I will ask you is in the general point of your belief that folks that were speaking in opposition earlier do not reside in the district.

Fair point.

Let's not go specific to that, okay, so that we will not inflame folks.

I am asking everyone in the gallery to please be quiet.

Thank you.

Um I think that it's very important that we remember that many times people in government have to make decisions that not everybody is going to be happy with.

Um there isn't ever going to be enough engagement that every single person gets involved and whatever.

And sometimes most times we need to lead.

That's what we are elected to do.

We need to make these decisions, and we need to be looking at our city as a whole, not just um in as individual neighborhoods and pieces.

Sometimes we have to look at we are addressing a housing um deficit that is devastating to us right now.

We see increases in homelessness, we see all sorts of problems as a result of that deficit.

And so we need to make decisions that are actually going to address these larger issues.

Um I'm hearing very, very specific things, like for example, the 35 foot height.

Uh right now, 45 feet in height is what is allowed under our code.

So this is actually lowering the height of buildings by 10 feet.

Um, there's a lot of misinformation out there about um and fear mongering spread about this rezoning, spread about my rezoning that is still kind of in process, and it's very hard to combat that um with all these forces aligned against you who don't really want to listen to what the actual facts are.

Um Councilmember Horton has had innumerable meetings about this.

Um, all of the main concerns that we have heard in our emails and whatever are addressed in his legislation and in his UDO as it will be amended.

Um and if people don't understand that, then they're not actually understanding they need to reread the documents because those things are in fact addressed.

I don't think we can be closing up neighborhoods or um acting as if um we can control what other people do with their property.

Neighborhoods are not HOAs.

We have to look at them in the broader sense and do sometimes the hard work of what's best for the city as well as what's best for the neighborhood.

And and this is a good plan for this neighborhood, and it's going to bring positive benefits to the neighborhood.

So I ask my colleagues to support this.

Um and let's move ahead and start addressing um these issues that have plagued the Nashville for such a long time.

Thank you, Miss Welsh.

Uh, next in the queue is Councilmember Huffman.

You're recognized.

Call the question.

All right.

Umright uh Mr.

Huffman um has called the question.

Um is there a second?

Okay, it's properly seconded.

Uh this is a non-debatable motion um that requires uh two-thirds of those voting.

Okay.

Um when you call the question, that means that you are ending uh debate um on this matter and then proceeding to the vote.

Okay, so this uh calling the question is uh uh an effort to um or a motion uh to end the debate.

It requires two-thirds of those voting.

Um we will try it first by voice with the reminder, colleagues, please.

It is number, not volume.

So just a steady voice on this.

Um and uh we will move uh to the vote uh to call the question.

Um so if you want to end to end debate um at this time, um you will vote uh aye or yes in favor of calling the question.

If you want to continue debate, you will vote no.

Okay.

All right.

Um all in favor of uh the motion to call the previous question, please say aye.

Aye.

Um all against this motion, please say no.

No.

Okay.

Um I believe that uh the ayes have it.

Um and we are going to uh uh proceed then now um to the vote.

Um so the motion uh to call the question prevails, and we will now move to um uh the vote.

Um Mr.

Rutherford, do you have a point of order or you need to stand, sir?

Oh to go on the board for the previous question.

Okay, um special counsel Darby.

Um so you you are challenging my uh ruling um that the motion to call the previous question prevailed.

Yes.

Okay.

Um so if you want to go on um the board uh for the roll call on the uh motion to call the previous question, you need three seconds.

Um okay, wait a minute.

I want those seconds by raised hand, please.

Members of the body.

Okay.

Um all right.

So um okay, yeah, point of order, Ms.

Porterfield.

Point of order.

How long does it take before a motion dies without it being properly seconded?

Um was made and it was not seconded.

There was a clarification, and then we got second.

So I'm just curious as to know what is the time frame before that motion dies.

Uh special counsel Darby.

Okay, so what is transpired here is we had a voice vote on the motion to call the previous question.

I believe the ayes had it.

And so that I said the motion to call the previous question prevailed, and that we would be moving on um uh to the debate on the primary uh question.

Um then uh Mr.

Rutherford stood, didn't say point of order, sir.

What did you say at that time?

You just asked for a roll call on the vote that had just transpired.

Okay.

Um Ms.

Darby indicated that that needed three seconds by hand.

Um special counsel, can you describe where we are and answer Ms.

Porterfield's point of order?

Yes, rule 38 addresses roll call votes, and it requires that the chair to call a roll call vote when upon motion of any member prior to a vote or immediately following a voice vote before the next item of business.

The chair shall ask if there are any seconds, and if seconded by three additional members, the chair shall call for a roll call vote.

Okay.

Um all right.

Given that, I will allow it.

Um so uh Mr.

Clerk, can you please open uh the vote on the motion to call the previous question, um, which will uh end debate um on uh agenda item 79 um eight three zero all votes are in, Mr.

Clerk.

Please uh show the vote.

Okay.

Um uh the motion uh to call the previous question and end debate um fails um with twenty-two voting.

Wait a minute, Mr.

Clerk.

Two-thirds, okay.

Um 22 voting in favor, uh, Mr.

Clerk, what was that?

13 against and I zero abstentions.

Okay, um, so that does not achieve uh the two-thirds threshold again, a clear majority, but sometimes it is a little challenging by voice, and sometimes frankly, people change their vote once there's a roll call.

Okay.

So um we are on um now debate um of uh the motion to approve uh uh ordinance um eight three zero um with um as amended with amendment one and amendment two okay and next in the queue for discussion is councilman parker you're recognized, sir thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um I definitely want to say how much I appreciate the um the lead sponsor of this as well as his community for um really clearly coming together on this for so much time and having so many meetings um to come up with what I think is a really great plan for their area.

Um there's been a lot of talk about affordability and how allowing more housing um uh types can have a positive impact on affordability in a community, but I I also think we haven't talked enough, at least in this body about how allowing more housing types can improve like livability.

Uh for example, I live in a neighborhood that's full of townhomes and triplexes and yes, one point two million dollar single family homes and yes, larger apartment buildings, but um we've also got lots of great amenities that we can walk to.

Um me and my I live in a town home.

Me and my neighbors, we hang out in the alley.

If we want to go grab a drink, we can walk together to uh to a neighborhood business.

And um I think that's what a lot of people in Nashville want.

I think it's um not accessible to enough Nashvilleans, and I think that um you know, having more neighbors supports those businesses, kind of a virtuous cycle.

Um support walkability, it can support livability, it can support all these great things that many, many people in Nashville want to see um outside their door when they look out their window.

Um, and you know, infrastructure has been brought up a lot, and uh, we had a public commenter who made the point that you know the most expensive kind of infrastructure to deliver and to maintain is um for lower density.

I mean, especially like the I think you mentioned the suburban sprawl that we're seeing as some of that infrastructure kind of ages, and you know, many of those neighborhoods were built without um without sewer to begin with, and those areas are facing a lot of challenges and they are having to increase their taxes.

I grew up in Rutherford County, my folks are still out there.

Um so I'm familiar with kind of the issues they're facing, but you know, what having density in an area means is not only that the infrastructure is less costly to deliver, but you've got no you're not recognized at this juncture.

We're we're on a Mr.

Clerk, please stop the time.

Mr.

Parker is speaking.

What I mean, I I can't see why a point of parliamentary inquiry would be appropriate at this time.

You didn't say point of order, you said point of inquiry.

Okay, point of order prevails.

What is uh your point of order?

Well, my question is for Director Darby.

Um for for those that are here in the audience.

If they wanted to file uh open records request to that's not a point of order at this time.

Your point of order is about how the meeting is proceeding, how I have ruled, what is transpiring in this room at this time.

That is okay.

So so then to the second point, if the is it considered uh the sunshine law is valid if you know the council members are communicated.

This is not an appropriate inquiry at this time.

It doesn't, it's not about parliamentary procedure.

It's not appropriate this time.

That's why I stood and asked for a point of order.

Okay, all righty.

Um as I saw it, Mr.

Parker still had um 40 some odd 47, 48 seconds.

Um Mr.

Parker, you're recognized again.

Uh the point I was making is that not only is it more efficient to deliver infrastructure to denser areas, but you have more taxpayers in those areas to support the construction of that infrastructure.

You have more rate payers paying into stormwater fees, you have more ratepayers paying into sewer, paying into water.

Um so it's it's overall more efficient and it's gonna allow the infrastructure to improve in this area um at a more rapid clip than you would otherwise.

So I think it's a great plan, especially coupled with the UDO, which I might comment on when we get to that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Parker.

Um, next in the queue for discussion is planning and zoning chair uh Gamble.

You're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thank I appreciate the hard work that the sponsor has done in uh pulling this bill together, working with the community.

I also appreciate the community, uh particularly the residents of the nations who felt left out of the conversation, who came to the public hearing and expressed the frustration for feeling being left out of the out of the conversation, but continued to work with uh councilmember Horton since the public hearing to uh come to an agreement of of what they feel is is a good compromise and what they feel they think that the council member and they also agree is good for this bill.

However, uh there are some uh I guess still questions about or clarity needed on what the uh upzoning actually means for the neighborhood.

And I too would have liked to have seen a deferral to allow more time uh to get those clarifications for those residents whose properties will be impacted directly.

Um I because I guess a deferral has not been offered by the sponsor that leaves me in the quandrum because I am not uh comfortable giving my full support to the bill uh at this juncture without feeling like we've done everything that we go Ms.

Ellis sit down and be quiet, please, ma'am.

Hey, no, we are not doing this right now.

Okay, I I would like you to please sit down, ma'am.

I am judge and jury up here, as a matter of fact, okay?

Ms.

Ellis, please sit down and be quiet.

Please sit down and be quiet, Miss Ellis.

It's not appropriate at this time.

Ms.

Ellis.

Please sit down and be quiet, Miss Ellis.

Okay, this should not count against your time, Miss Gamble.

I do apologize.

Um, you are disrespecting this body and the members here who are trying to have a fair debate about your colleagues.

I'm sorry, I may not even need all the time.

I just wanted to end by saying that uh I'm not comfortable at the at this juncture, giving my full support.

Although uh if I if we had a deferral and had more time, I I feel more comfortable with that.

So with that said, um I'm not sure if I'm a no or something else.

It won't be a yes at this juncture.

So thank you.

Thank you, Chair Gamble.

Next in the queue for discussion.

Um, if someone has a point of order, you you may you must rise to say a point of order.

Ms.

Tombs, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

Would it be appropriate to take a five minute recess at this time?

It would not.

If Ms.

Ellis would like to take a five minute recess and go out and collect herself, she may.

But we're Ms.

Ellis, I am presiding over this meeting, and you are disrupting the meeting.

Okay, which hopefully we can do is that only requires two more members to rejoin us, please.

All right, with quorum uh restored, I am going to call the meeting back to order.

Um, I'm gonna remind any and all members, okay.

Um, it is incumbent on me to let you know when you are out of order.

And so um, if you are standing up other than for a point of order or a point of parliamentary inquiry, or other than me recognizing you, you are out of order.

No member of this body may stand unrecognized and shout out to me, other colleagues, no one, okay.

Um, and so uh we are back then um on a debate.

Um Ms.

Toomb has called a point of order.

You're recognized, Ms.

Tombs.

Oh, personal privilege.

My apologies, Vice Mayor.

I think that's the more appropriate thing to say.

Okay.

Um I will allow it uh with the hopes that it will help us um improve the tenor of this meeting.

Okay, Ms.

Tombs, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

Um, as the chair of the minority caucus, um, I stand with my uh fellow members of the caucus um to address what has been occurring.

We we all know that we're going to disagree um on particular issues.

Sometimes those disagreements can get heated, but at no time is it appropriate to disrespect another colleague.

I have to, as the minority caucus, we have to remind our body that the optics of a white male colleague approaching a black female who is seated and using profanity towards her is an act of intimidation, and it can't be tolerated in this body.

And it can't be tolerated in this body.

And we will gladly work with you moving forward, Vice Mayor, to help not necessarily smooth things over, but to improve relations uh on the council and to address some of the concerns that were brought up by colleagues.

Because some of those concerns are not unique to Miss Ellis.

And so I want to make sure that we have a great work and relationship.

We're only halfway through the term, so we want to all work together to represent the citizens of Nashville to the best of our ability.

All right.

Mr.

Parker, do you seek to be recognized, sir?

Go ahead.

Thank you, Vice Mayor and Minority Caucus for this opportunity.

Okay.

I appreciate the apology.

Thank you, members.

What I do want to advise, I'm I am not condoning any member speaking um cruelly, inappropriately to any other member.

But what we are trying to do here is maintain an orderly debate on the matters that are before us.

We owe that to the people that we were elected by.

So I would ask that nobody speak inappropriately to any member, whether you know, out loud or in close contact.

But for the order of the meeting and the collegiality of this body, if someone says something to you that you think is unkind or unfair, kindly please, if you feel it's appropriate or you're comfortable, just take that out into the hallway.

Okay, um, so that we can then um proceed uh with our meeting.

Okay.

So we are going to do that at this time.

I hope that uh cooler heads will prevail and that we've all taken a deep breath.

Um and so now where we are on our agenda is that there is a motion to approve agenda item 79, um, ordinance BL 2025-830, sponsor Horton as amended with amendment one and amendment two.

Okay, there's a motion to approve, it's properly seconded, and we are continuing with debate.

Next in the queue for that purpose is Mr.

Spain.

Thank you, Madam President.

Call question.

Okay.

Okay.

Um Mr.

Spain has made a motion uh to call the question.

Um it requires a second, which we have.

This is a non-debatable motion.

Um this requires uh two-thirds of those voting.

Um, I am not even going to try this by um voice.

We're just gonna do it um by roll call.

Um Mr.

Clerk, um, if you vote in favor of the previous question, colleagues, you want to end debate and move on to the vote on this item.

Um, if you want the uh debate to continue, you would vote no.

Um, Mr.

Clerk, uh, would you please uh open the vote uh for the motion to call the previous question?

All votes are in, Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

The motion passes um with 28 votes in favor, seven against, and zero abstentions.

Um that means at this juncture, um, we will uh move uh to the vote.

Um this is an item on third and final reading.

Um uh I believe um members have stated um that they may uh uh be a no.

And so um for that reason um I think we will uh need to do a roll call.

Is that okay?

Um, Mr.

Clerk.

Okay, um, all right.

Um so there's a motion for a roll call vote, and it is properly seconded.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Clerk, if you would please open the vote.

Colleagues, this matter requires 21 votes for passage on third and final reading with all votes in, Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

The motion passes with 25 votes in favor, nine against, and one abstention.

All right.

Now we will move to agenda item 80, ordinance BL 2025-831 sponsor Horton.

This is an ordinance to amend Title 17 of the Metro Code of Laws, the zoning ordinance of the Metro Government of Nashville and Davison County by applying an urban design overlay district for various properties located on the east and west sides of 51st Avenue North, north of I-40, and south of Centennial Boulevard, between 63rd Avenue North and 43rd Avenue North, and north of Centennial Boulevard, between Louisiana Avenue and Linder Industrial Drive, and on the east and west side of 51st Avenue North, zoned R S 3.75, RS 3.75A, R6, R6A, RM9, RM20, RM20A, RM40, OR20, M U N, M U N A, C N, C L, C S, C S A, and I R.

This is 30 357.29 acres.

Um, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, this is the uh companion bill, uh, an urban design really accompanying the zoning component.

Um we've debated them both extensively now tonight and last meeting.

Um what's new on this one um is an amendment.

Um this amendment uh does two primary things.

Uh the first is it clarifies um intent and context around our intention to preserve uh existing mature trees as well as planting new ones to replace all the ones we've lost in the last 10 years.

It also significantly eliminates um the height bonus uh of 15 feet, which was originally included in the bill to provide an incentive uh to build uh more family-sized units by allowing them to build 15 feet higher than would otherwise be permissible.

Uh this eliminates that and ensures that our residential structures on the interior streets are limited to 35 feet.

Um so with that, I would like to move approval of the amendment, please.

Okay, let's move approval of the bill.

A second.

Okay, that gets us before it, and you can move on.

I'd like to move our approval of the amendment one, please.

Okay.

Um uh is there a second for um the motion to amend with amendment one?

Um okay, uh uh Mr.

Druffle, are you seeking to be recognized on uh the motion to amend, sir?

You're recognized.

Yeah, I I just want to get a clarification on the height.

Do you have a point of order?

Oh, I apologize.

You asked me for Mr.

Druffle, I do apologize.

Um, Mr.

Horton needs to uh ask for his committee reports.

I apologize.

Um thank you, Chair Gamble for the reminder.

Go ahead, ma'am.

Sure, thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh committee considered amendment uh and voted in favor, 10 in favor, zero against zero not voting, and then we recommended approval of the bill as amended, ten in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Thank you, uh Chair Gamble.

Back to you, Mr.

Horton.

I guess at this juncture we have a proper motion now, having received the committee report.

Um what is uh before us then is a motion to amend um with uh Mr.

Horton's amendment.

Mr.

Druffle, um you are in progress speaking on the motion to amend you're recognized again, sir.

Uh I just want uh clarification um from planning uh uh for you uh vice mayor.

Uh uh the height restriction is 35 feet, and uh I just want to make sure it's not at 45, which I I seem to see in uh the substitute.

Okay.

Um uh Ms.

Milligan uh for the planning department, uh you are recognized to address Mr.

Druffle's question uh regarding uh the the height um limits in the UDF.

Go ahead.

Certainly.

So there are um different character areas within the UDO.

So there is a residential character area, there is and then there are mixed use and neighborhood center character areas as well.

The residential character area covers the majority of the area that the UDO is a proposed to be applied to, including the interior areas of the neighborhood.

Um the residential character area is limited to 35 feet in height for single family, two-family, detached multifamily and town homes.

For stacked flats, it's limited to 35 feet on interior lots and 45 feet on corner lots.

There was at one point a height bonus that was permitted within the residential character area with the amendment that has been removed.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Uh Chair.

I just wanted to clarify because it sounded like 35 feet was going to be the limit at one point.

Okay.

In terms of height.

So you have sufficient clarification?

I do.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Druffel.

Um next on the motion to um amend.

Um I would ask members of the gallery, please be quiet, okay, because I need to be able to hear what my members um are asking for, please.

Um Mr.

Horton, you are recognized.

I'm sorry, sir.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh we're still on the amendment one now, right?

Correct.

Um we're on a motion to amend.

Do you seek to be recognized again?

Um I'd like to move a uh renew my motion for approval of the amendment.

Okay, great.

Um, okay.

Um uh seeing no one else seeking to be recognized on the motion to amend.

Um all in favor, please say aye.

Any voting no or abstaining?

Okay.

Um the motion uh the the amendment um uh passes.

Um and so uh Mr.

Horton, if you would please uh renew your motion um to approve as amended, and I would think at this time, special counsel Darby, um Mr.

Horton can also add um the companion bill uh 81, uh which requires certain materials to be restricted in the construction of buildings that is in ordinance 831.

Okay.

Would you like to add the companion bill, please?

Okay.

Correct.

Um okay, so the motion that is before us, and I'm I'll state it again so we can get a second, is um it's a motion to approve 831 as amended um with the companion bill 832, which is a technical companion requiring uh certain materials to be restricted.

Is there a second for that motion?

Okay.

Um so we are on uh to debate um on that uh uh bill.

Um is anyone else uh okay?

Um uh Ms.

Allen, you're recognized.

Um thank you, madam chair.

Again, as we did on the last one, I would just ask the sponsor if he can uh address some of the things that I think um are in this UDO that address some of the concerns that we've heard, um, specifically stormwater is a topic that has come up, and there's this very specific thing called ISR.

If he could unpack that and explain what impervious service ratio is and what this UDO does with regard to that that should help solve some of the stormwater issues and anything else he wants to comment that deals with some of the concerns that we've heard.

All right.

Uh Mr.

Horton, you are recognized to address uh those uh questions and suggestions of Ms.

Allen.

Uh thank you, Vice Mayor, and I and I may uh ask planning to weigh in as well on additional details, but um one of the reasons we have such a bad bad flooding problem in our neighborhood is that currently um developers can and and frequently do cover almost the entire lot with uh what's called impervious surface.

That's things like concrete or impervious turf or buildings and things like that.

The types of materials that the ground can't soak up stormwater as flooding has gotten so bad in our neighborhood getting worse almost every day.

Uh what this bill does with the zoning component imposes uh impervious surface ratio requirements, uh the maximum share of the lot that can be things like concrete.

This UDO heightens them further, uh, both to make sure that stormwater is not getting worse in our neighborhood as well as preserve um green space and address the growing flooding problem in our neighborhood.

All right, is there anything um that you would like to direct to the planning table in particular?

I think that's it actually.

Okay, all righty.

Um Mr.

Druffel, um uh you're recognized um for discussion on this main motion now.

Go ahead.

Uh yeah, I I would ask uh there's uh a master plan to be in developed for stormwater, and I was just uh would like to ask uh how this may fit into the master plan.

Um Mr.

Horton, you're recognized to address uh Mr.

Druffel's stormwater question.

Uh the master plan is something that I don't know if we're joined here by any representative Metro Water.

Um, but this is something that um we've been working on extensively um with Metro Water over the last um several months and year plus.

Um obviously the nations is part of the master stormwater plan um, and something we'll continue to work on them with after this plan passes, just as we would before this plan passes.

Um this plan um doesn't solve every single problem in our neighborhood.

It won't fix every single flooding problem uh tomorrow, but it will it will help and it's a step in the right direction.

Mr.

Dreffel.

Well, uh yeah, I and I think this gets us where infrastructure uh is behind the some of the the planning and zoning we're doing.

The infrastructure master plans due in 27 and 28.

Um so as we start to make these um decisions on zoning changes, we don't have all the pieces on the infrastructure, and I would suggest that we really need to put the infrastructure ahead of the planning and zoning in the future.

Thank you.

All right, uh, thank you, Mr.

Druffle.

Um, is there any additional debate?

Um, Mr.

Horton, you're recognized, sir.

Uh thank you, Vice Mayor.

I would just like to apologize very briefly to a constituent of mine who is here in the chamber today.

Um she does live in the nation.

She lives right behind me on the western part of the neighborhood.

Um while her and I have not always agreed, her contributions um have greatly improved this plan, and I've very much valued her participation throughout this entire process, and it's it's much better for her and every other constituents uh involvement.

So we'd like to apologize to her as well as thank her for her involvement.

I appreciate the clarification.

Thank you, Mr.

Horton.

Okay.

Um is there any uh further uh debate?

Okay.

Um seeing none, uh, we will be moving to the vote.

Um, knowing that we had no votes on um the prior associated bill and anticipating additional ones and an abundance of caution.

Um Mr.

Clerk, um, if you would please uh load the vote um for the motion to approve 831 as amended and eight thirty two all votes are in, Mr.

Clerk.

Please show the vote.

These bills have passed with 27 votes in favor, six votes against, and two abstentions.

All right.

Next on our agenda is agenda item uh 82, ordinance BL 2025-837.

Sponsors Huffman, Greg, Evans, Horton, Spain, Parker, and Coopin.

This is an ordinance amending title uh or rather amending section 17.20.030 of the Metropolitan Code of Laws to eliminate the minimum parking requirement for the bar and nightclub use.

Mr.

Huffman, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Committee Reports.

UK Um first for the report of and well, and only for the report of the planning and zoning committee.

Chair Gamble, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Planning and zoning recommended approval, six in favor, one against, one not voting.

Okay.

Um all righty.

Um back to you, uh, Mr.

Huffman for a motion on your bill, sir.

Yes, uh, I'd like to make a motion to approve with a brief comment.

Okay, is there a second?

Go ahead, sir.

Thank you, colleagues.

I will try to keep my remarks brief.

Just a couple of points that I I want to hit within this particular legislation.

Uh, first, this is a great tool that helps small businesses.

Uh, right now, uh, the situation that bars and nightclubs find themselves in is that they're often hit with this mandate to have extra spaces that they don't need.

And uh this frees up uh a lot of uh spaces to do other things, which gets me to my next point, which it improves the land use.

That's something that our our planning department has said time and time again that that's we need to do that it aligns with Nashville next.

Um it also aligns with national best practices as we continue to grow.

That is something that we need to be uh mindful of.

Other cities have done this, they have seen great success with it.

Cities such as Portland, Minneapolis, uh, Buffalo, New York have all seen success with this.

Lastly, uh I want to highlight uh as the series talking.

Sorry about that.

Yep.

So uh lastly, I want to highlight uh public safety.

It's a big subject to me is the incoming uh chair of public health and safety.

Uh it encourages ride share and transit uh for folks that are drinking, it does discourage drinking and driving uh by just having less spaces.

Uh but I I will end with with this, and it's it's really just uh a very big clarification.

It's that this bill doesn't take away parking.

Parking will still exist.

Um it takes away the mandate.

It lets the bars and the nightclubs drive based on the demand.

And they're gonna want customers coming to their facilities.

There's no doubt about that.

Um, but this just uh helps those those small businesses that are just trying to get by uh to start up a business, uh, especially.

So with that, uh I ask for your uh support.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Huffman.

All right, uh, we are on to debate, and first in the queue uh is planning and zoning chair Campbell, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I want to start by saying I appreciate the sponsor's intent uh behind this.

However, I do have concerns about the impact uh or the potential negative impact that this bill could have on neighborhoods and specifically on residents uh that are on a fixed income and um would have to deal with parking in front of their house in their neighborhood as a result of this.

I know it's been said that this has been done in other cities and it's been successful.

However, a lot of those cities that have been named have better infrastructure outside of the UDO.

This bill removes the minimum parking requirements outside of the UDO, which is outside of the urban district, and a lot of the areas outside of the urban district don't have adequate uh infrastructure such as sidewalks for people to walk safely um to their destination.

We don't have uh robust public transportation, and I know it's been said that uh many people use rideshare to go to bars and nightclubs.

However, I haven't found evidence of that.

In fact, I haven't seen it on my own, and then I haven't uh found evidence of that.

In fact, according to Ride Guru and Drover site ride share, the top five destinations for ride share in Nashville are the Busick City Center Central, which is our downtown uh we go station, Dunkin Donuts inside of that downtown we go station, uh Gray Line where people are taking um transportation to the airport, the airport, of course, and other we go public transit stops were the five top destinations for ride share in Nashville.

And so while I appreciate the intent and I think uh we could possibly move in that direction, I would like to see something put in place an amendment on this bill that would address the undue burden uh that this may cause on residents and neighborhoods, particularly elderly residents.

I think it's been said that residents would have the option of purchasing a residential uh permit uh for to get a space in front of their house on those on their street.

Currently, the permit cost is ten dollars per year, however, it that cost is gonna go up.

The there's been a fee study done, and I know uh after talking with NDOT that that cost is gonna go up at least over 100, probably twice as much as that.

Uh so that's gonna do an undue burden.

So I would like to uh recommend a deferral or offer a deferral or motion for at least a one-minute meeting deferral so that we can look at what amendments on just second.

Um ahead, please.

Yes, so that we we can look at what uh measures we can put in place to address those uh undue burdens that could be caused to neighbors and residents.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um there is a motion uh to defer uh one meeting.

Um it is properly seconded.

That motion uh prevails um over the motion to approve.

Um uh and so we are on debate on um the motion to defer one meeting.

Um Mr.

Horton, do you seek to be recognized on the deferral motion?

Ms.

Tombs, do you seek to be recognized on the deferral motion?

Okay, Miss Timbs, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

I rise in support of the deferral motion.

Um I I looked at this bill and it's a pretty straightforward bill, and I've read um councilman uh Huffman Huffman's um justification for the bill.

I I understand that in his part of town and other parts of town that most folks are using rideshare to get to the bars and the nightclubs, and so that's leaving empty, unused parking spaces.

Uh that is not the case in district two.

Um I I I looked at the bill and try to think of a way to make it better and and wasn't able to do that by the amendment deadline, so some additional time would be appreciated.

I think that when you're doing these innovative things, you have to think about all the different neighborhoods um in the county.

Uh some areas are not like others.

There are cultural differences, and so we really need to pay attention to those things.

So I think an additional two weeks uh may be helpful.

So that for that reason I support the deferral.

All right.

Um, just to clarify, Chair Gimbel, your motion was to defer.

I think I stated one meeting.

Okay.

Okay.

I think two.

Oh, I apologize.

Two weeks.

I'm sorry, I thought you said two meetings.

Um, okay.

Uh, it is a one meeting uh deferral.

Um, uh, Mr.

Horton, I think I asked you on the deferral.

No, Mr.

Huffman on the deferral.

Yes, sir.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Chair.

And thank you to the the planning chair for for those concerns.

Um, I I do want to highlight I I did my homework on this one.

I did my homework months and months.

Um I'm not saying that that makes me ride over you, but uh, what I I want to highlight is just in the cities that I uh highlighted before, those patterns, they just don't exist.

Um, I I will entertain a deferral tonight to have those conversations, uh, if that will make it uh go smoother.

So uh totally fine with that and support the deferral.

All right.

Um uh any uh further discussion, um uh having heard uh that the primary sponsor supports the deferral.

Seeing none, um, all in favor of a one meeting deferral, please say aye.

Um, any voting no.

Any abstaining.

Okay.

Uh one meeting, uh, and that is to the first meeting in September, September 2nd.

Um, all right.

Next, um, we are on to agenda items uh eighty-five and eighty-six.

They are companions to each other, sponsor Benedict.

Um, eighty-five is ordinance BL twenty twenty-five-eight eight two.

This is an ordinance to amend title seventeen of the Metro Code of Laws, the zoning ordinance of the Metro Government by amending a specific plan on properties located at one thousand seven and one thousand nine Sally Drive, approximately one hundred and fifty feet west of Gallatin Pike, zoned RS seven point five and SP.

This is three point three one acres to permit fifty-five multifamily residential units.

And uh Bill eight eight three um is its companion, um, which uh requires certain materials to be restricted in the construction of buildings.

Uh, Ms.

Benedict, you are uh recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Committee reports, please.

Okay.

Uh Chair Gamble for the report of planning and zoning.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Planning and zoning, uh, and I'll take both bills, is that okay?

Yes, ma'am.

Um recommended a two-meeting deferral, eight in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Okay.

Um back to you for a motion on your uh bills, Miss Benedict.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to move a two meeting deferral, please.

Okay.

Properly moved and seconded.

Is there any debate on the two meeting deferral motion?

Seeing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Um any voting no or abstaining.

Okay.

Um, those two items will be uh deferred.

I am turning, turning, turning, and seeing uh no other items on our agenda.

So that concludes this evening's agenda.

Um our next council meeting.

Um uh and all committee meetings due to the Labor Day holiday will be on Tuesday, September 2nd.

We are adjourned.

This has been a service of the Metro Nashville Network.

If you would like to see this presentation again or for more information on this and other programs, visit Nashville.gov.