Good evening, everyone.

Today is December the 16th.

I call this announcement period to order.

We are going to start off with a resolution honoring the Grand Opry by Councilmember Greg, a resolution artist 2025-1684 honoring the 100th anniversary of the Grand O'Opry.

Council Member Greg, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madame Pro Tim.

I am so excited to stand here tonight and celebrate the 100th birthday of the Grand Ole Opry.

On November the 28th, the Grand Ole Opry officially celebrated its birthday.

And it's been an incredible year-long celebration.

What started back in 1925 as the WSM barn dance grew into something much bigger, a true American cultural institution.

For artists stepping onto the Opry stage is the moment they dream about their entire careers.

And becoming a Grand Ole Opry member, well, that's one of the highest honors in music.

So tonight, we as the council stand here in honor one of Nashville's most treasured institutions, and that serves as the heart of the city's history and also is a global influence, not just in music, but what it represents to our city.

So with that, Mr.

Whereas the members of the Metropolitan Council are proud to recognize a legendary institution that has introduced country music, the city of Nashville, and the state of Tennessee to audiences worldwide.

And whereas the show has stood as a cornerstone of American culture for a century, influencing the way we experience live performance and serving as a place of hope during society's darkest periods, and whereas the Grand Ole Opry began as a small WSMV uh WSM radio program called the WSM Barn Dance on November 28th, 1925, broadcasting 80-year-old fiddle player Uncle Jimmy Thompson as its first performer live from Nashville, National Life and Accident Insurance Company offices and where and whereas in 1928 the show was renamed Grand Ole Opry after the December 1927 show introduction by founder George D.

Hay.

For the past hour, we have been listening to music taken largely from Grand Opry.

But from now on, we will present the Grand Ole Opry, followed by a harmonica performance of Pan American Blues by musician DeFord Bailey.

presidents, world dignitaries, and countless fans to its stage, serving as both the cultural ambassador for Tennessee and a cornerstone of Nashville's identity as Music City USA and as a century of the opera is symbolizing enduring power of music to unite generations, honor tradition, and embrace innovative remaining live li living linked between past, present, and the future American culture and whereas it is fitting and proper for that the Metropolitan Council of Nashville and Davidson County recognized the Grand Ole Opry for its extraordinary contributions to Nashville's cultural heritage, tourism, and creative economy, and to celebrate its 100th anniversary.

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Council of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville in Davidson County, we hereby go on recognizing go on record, recognizing the 100th birthday of the Grand Old Opry.

And tonight we have Nicole Judd and Gina Kellner here with the Opry.

Thank you all for having us.

I've never gone through this before.

This is quite an ordeal.

Um, I I'll say for myself, I started working for the Opry um 26 years ago, and at the time we were celebrating our 75th anniversary, and uh I never dreamed I would make it to the hundredth, and it's just been such an incredible year.

Um we are so blessed to it's it's a job, but it's a heart thing uh for us, and we're just so um so proud and thrilled for this treasure that we have in uh the Nashville community that's known throughout the world, and you can now hear it from throughout the world.

Let's do a hundred more, shall we?

Thank you so much.

Congratulations, and we're gonna give you all the opportunity to take a picture.

Thank you so much and congratulations.

And now we will move into our second resolution honoring Elmer Denzel Irwin by Councilmember Vowe, a resolution artist 2025-1620, honoring the life of Elmer Denzel uh Denzel Irwin, the late owner of Nashville's Santos Pub.

Council Member Vaux, you are recognized.

Thank you so much, Pro Tim.

Um, and thank you, everyone, for being here tonight, and most especially thank you to the Irwin family for allowing us to honor um the honor of sharing this moment with you.

We are gathered not only to present a resolution but to celebrate a life that left an indelible mark on the city and on everyone fortunate to know Mr.

Irwin.

I'm certain like you, many of us have stories we could share about our visits to Santa's pub.

It's a special place where my friends and I would exchange Christmas gifts in July and then sing karaoke.

How fitting that we honor Nashville's Santa today during this holiday season.

So resolution number 20 RS 2025-1620, a resolution honoring the life of Elmar Denzel Irwin, owner of Nashville's Santa's pub.

Whereas on Saturday, September 13th, 2025, at the age of 75, a true Nashville legend was lost in the passing of Mr.

Elmer Denzel Irwin, the beloved and iconic owner of Santa's pub dive bar, located in the Wedgwood Houston neighborhood.

And whereas after retiring from a 40-year career as a painter, Mr.

Irwin opened his iconic eponymous Santa's pub in 2011, using the nickname given to him by his 21 grandchildren.

Santa's pub is the kind of place where you're just as likely to see Ed Sheeran, Casey Musgraves, or Jelly Roll hanging out as you are a neighbor or friend, because it's a favorite among everybody in Nashville.

And whereas since Santa's pub opened, Santa himself has been a familiar and constant presence behind the bar, reminding patrons of the rules of the bar.

There's no cussing at Santa's.

Irwin's family.

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Council of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County.

Section one, the Metropolitan County, uh Metropolitan Council hereby goes on record as celebrating the life of Almar Denzel Irwin, owner of Nashville's iconic Santa's pub and recognizing his impact on the Nashville community.

This resolution takes effect from and after its adoption.

The welfare of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County requiring it.

Thank you so much.

And now we have a member of the family gonna and they're gonna share a few words.

Riley.

So it's uh it's it's it's it's it's an honor.

We never expected to be here.

So again, thank you all so much.

Thank you, Nashville.

Thank you so very much.

And as you all are gathering for a picture, we will quickly uh do the announcement period.

You all, we are running behind schedule, so we will have to be uh extremely brief.

I want to thank everyone that came out and volunteered last month at the store the branch in the second harvest food bank.

And as we head into the holidays, we're hoping to spread some extra cheer to local seniors who may not have low uh loved ones visiting.

So uh council members and council member staff, please consider joining Vice Mayor Henderson and myself this Saturday at 10 a.m.

as we serve as Sandas L's and deliver smile holiday gifts to nearly 100 residents at a local nursing and rehabilitation center for senior citizens.

We will be assembling those gifts Friday at 5 30 p.m.

in the council office and can use one or two extra sets of helping hands if you're available.

And if you could join us Saturday, the address is on your desk.

Festive attire is encouraged.

Santa hats are welcome, and please be willing to wear a mask so that we can spray it cheer and not germs.

As always, thank you for your service.

And do we have any council members that would like to be recognized for announcements?

Councilmember Bradford, you are recognized.

Thank you, Pro Tim.

Just uh to let the folks know that Metro Animal Care Control is partnering with Williamson, Murray, and Cheatham Counties to participate in Silent Night.

And so this is uh where they're hoping to have the shelter empty by Christmas Eve and Christmas Day.

There are three ways the public can help.

They can adopt right now.

Adoption fees are $25 through the 23rd.

You can foster all the foster stays are flexible.

Just let them know your preferred time frame.

And you can stop by any time between December 20th and 23rd to break out a friend and share the holiday love.

Or you can also share this information with your neighbors so that if they are interested in fostering uh a cat or dog over the holidays, they can reach out to Mac and help clear the shelter.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Bradford.

Uh, would there are there any other council members that would like me to be recognized?

Councilmember Webb, you're recognized.

Thank you, Chair.

I just wanted to let everybody know uh that the Nashville Fire Department has come back out with their fire calendar to support all of their nonprofits.

And you can get this at uh Nashville Fire Calendar.com.

It makes the perfect gift, and it does go to all their nonprofits.

So uh we'd like to see everybody support it.

Thank you, Councilmember Whip.

Is there anyone else that would like to be recognized?

Uh Councilmember Coopin, you're recognized.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Pro Tem.

Uh, just want to let everybody know that tomorrow is Jewish night at the Pred celebrating Hanukkah.

So um the game is at seven o'clock.

There's a pre-ceremony.

Um, please reach out to me if you've got any questions or interest.

And in light of the um horrific incident over the weekend in Australia, I have passed out on everybody's desk a uh stand up to Jewish hate pen.

It's a hashtag symbol.

Um, so I encourage everyone to wear that in solidarity with the Jewish community at this time.

Thanks.

Thank you, Councilmember Coopin.

Uh, Councilmember Stiles, congratulations on your in and out.

And you are recognized.

Thank you very much.

I actually have a presentation.

They have not brought me the proclamation.

Will I have time to make that presentation?

We only have two schedule for today.

There was not a third one scheduled.

Uh, let me check with council staff.

Uh yes, I I requested it a month ago, so I'm not sure what happened, but my people are here today, so okay.

We will do our best to accommodate you, Councilmember Styles.

Are there any other council members that would like to be recognized?

Council member Vaux, you are recognized.

Thank you so much, Pro Tim.

Just want to let everyone know that we have a community toy drive that Love Thy Neighbor has been doing.

And um, you can drop off uh new unopened toys and drop them off at the Severe Park Community Center.

Um, and uh that's going through now through the 17th, and then the um Toy Drive will happen on December 19th.

And I want to invite everyone to the Kwanzaa celebration at the Pruitt Library.

It'll be on Monday, December 22nd at 2 p.m.

So 1222 at 2.

Uh, please come and celebrate Kwanzaa with us.

We're very excited.

There'll be food fellowship um and honoring elders, and we'll learn about the seven principles um from our young neighbors.

So just want to thank everyone who came out to the town hall earlier this month and look forward to seeing you all next year.

Um, thank you so much.

Thank you, Councilmember Vaux.

We're gonna recognize Councilmember Styles in just one moment.

Are there any other council members that would like to be recognized?

Councilmember uh Sepulveda, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, madam chair.

I just want to congratulate um our councilmember at large, real quick, uh, who recently got it engaged.

Uh so just wanna recognize Councilmember Hill and congratulate her on her engagement.

Thank you, Councilmember Sepulveda.

Congratulations, Councilmember Heel.

The pictures were beautiful at Disney.

Are there any other council members that would like to be recognized for an announcement?

All right, seeing now, we are going to recognize Councilmember Styles for her uh presentation.

Councilmember, you're recognized.

Thank you very much.

I'm trying to give people a second to be able to motivate.

Come on through the gate.

Thank you so much.

Fantastic.

So uh this evening, we have a proclamation that we are presenting, honoring the 20th anniversary of the International Black Film Festival.

And uh I think it was maybe two or three months ago, council members Koopin and Vo and myself were able to go to their kickoff celebration.

Here's our director Hazel Joyner Smith is joining us tonight.

So, whereas the International Black Film Festival, IBFF, was founded in 2005 in Nashville, Tennessee, by Hazel Joyner Smith to provide a platform for films by and about people of African descent, and whereas since that time, IBFF has presented thousands of films across many gent genres and has offered workshops, master classes, and panels that support the growth of artists, professionals, and students.

And whereas the festival is opened doors for filmmakers, including students and emerging artists by connecting them with industry leaders and opportunities for distribution, and whereas IBFF has welcomed respected artists and leaders such as Debbie Allen, who served as honorary chair, along with guests including Gina Prince Blythwood, Bill Duke, McKelti Williamson, Nate Parker, Ladisi, and Cheryl Lee Ralph, and whereas IBF has helped establish Nashville as a home, not only for music, but also for independent film, while contributing to the growth of film production across the South.

And whereas 2025 marks the 20th anniversary of the International Black Film Festival at Milestone that reflects two decades of programming and commitment to education, equity, and community impact and whereas the anniversary recognizes IBFF's role in preserving stories, supporting talent, and preparing new generations of filmmakers for the future.

Now, therefore, I, Joy Styles, District 32 Council Member of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County and the Undersigned Council members do hereby recognize the International Black Film Festival on the occasion of its 20th anniversary and acknowledge its contributions to Nashville's cultural and creative life.

This is a great honor, and I want to say thank you to uh the city council and to the hard work of Joy Styles to make sure that we're recognized.

We're the only African American Film Festival in the state of Tennessee.

And we have brought the world of film to your doorstep.

And we hope that you'll continue to support us as we will continue to bring the best that film music and entertainment has to offer.

And so remind you all that no one is illegal on stolen land built by stolen labor.

Will the meeting please come to order?

Today is Tuesday, December 16th, 2025.

This is the 23rd and final meeting of 2025, and the 52nd 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 Darren Annalise Johnson, chaplain of the Southeastern Conference of the United Church of Christ.

Chaplain Johnson is the guest of District Seven, Councilmember Emily Benedict.

Go ahead, ma'am.

Thank you.

Our presence, others' absence, that silence, these words all serve as prayer.

Looking through the agenda this evening, trying to suss out what work there is before you, before all of us, it occurred to me that there is a whole lot of seeing, or at least a whole lot of seeing language going on.

They're, of course, the always welcome recognizing resolutions and honorings, a few of which we have heard already.

There's also the one for police commander Scott Byrd, and the one for Human Trafficking Awareness Month in January.

For 160 years of First Baptist Capitol Hill, and 80 for the Adventure Science Center.

At the same time, there are projects and areas some want us to have a better eye on, whether that's a mid-year view of the budget or more transparency about a subterranean tunnel project with dim details.

Regardless, I bring all this up because in reading the bills and resolutions and amendments and analysis, another type of seeing, really a contrast between types, comes into view.

On the one hand, there is what is allowed for when we start from a place of looking out for each other, inclusive of friends and family, the stranger you have yet to meet, and the community as a whole.

This looking out is energized by and generative of a type of mutual recognition and trust.

Whatever safety it conveys comes from this affirmational engine.

However, the contrasting type of seeing being used in this moment serves different ends.

At its base, it forwards both individuation, each of us as separate selves, and distrust.

When we are warned to watch out, it is pointing at an other we're being admonished to keep our distance from a stranger about whom we should be wary.

It is of no small significance that this language, too, is being used towards safety ends.

Spaces in which we are so welcome to feel fully known.

Spaces in which some things fall beyond sight.

Infinite and ever becoming more, creator of all sight and our seeing.

As this council convenes this evening, help them and each of us keep in our vision that with every nominee presented, and all of the resolutions raised for discussion, that in commemorations and every concerned offered for examination, there is in each a person of your making and communities of your creation.

We ask that as you we take up such work, you help us remove all that would blinder us from seeing fully the inherent value present in all the labors brought before us tonight, and all the lives placed in our care.

As we hold council, help us work together with mutual patience and respect.

Should we come to places of disagreement, remind us of how we have been called and held together in common life?

We ask that you bless the work of this council, give them eyes to see, ears to hear, as well as hearts, minds, and imagination that always look out for always attentive to the possibility of your all-welcoming more.

Bless their work to make this county one that is welcoming and safe, and in which, and in which each and all feel not separated and watched out for, but looked after, tended to, and utterly totally seen.

We ask you for all this, and we thank you for all this.

Amen.

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

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

Thank you, Ms.

Johnson.

Welcome, council members and members of the community.

We appreciate you joining us this evening.

We wish the Nashville Jewish community a happy Hanukkah, and thank everyone who came to the menorah lighting on the public square last night.

From the remarks that I shared there, I wanted to share a few excerpts here is a call to action and empathy.

When horrors happen oceans away, it is important that we not create further distance within our own community by becoming numb to the deep hurt and sadness, the psychic wounds and anxiety of our neighbors being repeatedly targeted for who they are, their ethnicity, their country of birth, or their religious faith.

Perpetual mass casualties from gun violence in schools and universities, at parades and grocery stores, on beaches and during worship services, and the hateful ideologies and violent rhetoric that often spark them are so erosive to civil society.

And if we do not intentionally stand and bond together with one another, these waves of violence will undermine us all.

So tonight we come here together to lift and hold the light of Hanukkah high above the tumult and the torment and see the humanity, care, and concern in each other.

As president of the Metro Council, I know that all council members stand with the Jewish people of Nashville.

Elected leaders must never be silent about anti-Semitism.

It is on the rise in an all-too familiar way.

Literal Nazis have stood on our public square and in this chamber.

So we must not be silent about fascism.

And we must call anti-Semitic words and actions what they are without fear.

Peace has been hard to cultivate this year in our world at large and in our own hearts and minds.

Last night may have been somber, but it was also joyful and light filled.

So again, thank you to everyone who came out to the menorah lighting.

Tonight marks a transition for the Metropolitan Council that we also want to recognize.

Special Council Darby's contract with us will expire on December 31st, and she will be moving on to opportunities outside of Metro government, which she has very capably and diligently served for 25 years.

I want to express my appreciation to Ms.

Darby and thank her for her work for the council and also thank Attorney Brian Wilson on the council office team for the last two and a half years.

Uh working with Margaret and council members for his willingness to step into the special counsel director role in an interim capacity for the next several months as we seek a new special counsel.

Without objection, um pro Tim Pardon?

Without objection, Pro Tim Porterfield seeks to be recognized for a surprise honorary item for special counsel Darby.

Uh Pro Tim, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I am requesting a suspension of the rules to allow for a surprise late file record uh resolution to recognize special counsel Margaret Darby for her 25 years of service with the Metro government.

Is there any objection to the suspension of the rules?

No, no, there is not.

The rules are now suspended.

Please thank you so very much.

Uh Vice Mayor.

Um, Director Darby, uh, we appreciate everything that you have done for us.

First of all, 25 years is a long time to be in public service, and we know that there are so many um outside entities that could have used your wisdom and your service and your brilliance, uh, but you chose to do that here with the um with the the Metro government and since 2021 through the Metro Council through some of the toughest times that this city has had to navigate from COVID to uh all the things I won't rehatch all the trauma that we've experienced over the last four years, um, but we do just want to thank you for your service and colleagues.

If you would like to sign on to this, please email the clerk um to sign on and show your support and again, Director Darby.

We thank you for everything that you've done.

We congratulate you on your next steps.

All right.

Um, okay, we will move to the vote.

Um, all in favor, please say uh this question coming in these things.

Oh, you oh right.

Trying to be efficient, as I think Ms.

Darby would appreciate, but um uh um Ms.

War, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Vice Mayor.

I know we have a uh long agenda and I do want to be uh delay it, so I stand in support, but I wanted to see if we can just apply a rule.

I can't remember.

Um so that we don't have to email individually.

I think everybody wants to sign on and all of us want to say thank you.

All right.

Um is there any objection to uh amending your motion for approval to apply 12.3, Miss Porterfield?

Oh, okay.

It's it's all good.

Um uh okay, so all those voting in the affirmative will be recognized as co-sponsors.

Is there any further discussion?

Okay, seeing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Yay.

Any voting no or abstaining?

Okay.

Uh go uh go ahead, Ms.

Porterfield.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, and uh thank you to Vice Mayor who has um orchestrated a picture to be taken.

So, Director Darby and Vice Mayor, if you could come down and join us, council members, if you can stand up really quickly and push into the middle.

We're gonna take a celebratory uh picture of uh with Director Darby.

Yes.

Okay.

All righty, we're gonna be back in regular order, officially documented.

Um 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 December 4th?

Uh it I heard a second.

Um there is a motion properly seconded without objection.

And seeing no one seeking to be recognized for a change to the minutes.

No.

The minutes of the meeting of December 4th are approved.

Mr.

Clerk, are there any messages from the mayor?

There are no messages from the mayor.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

All right.

Now we're moving into our agenda.

Section E, um, elections.

Mr.

Cash, Chair, um, can you uh give us uh your committee report um for the uh two items for election, please, sir?

Yes.

Uh first the ones that uh that we're elected tonight or yes, sir, just for elections, the contract and compliance board and human relations commission items E1 and E2, please, sir.

If you'll just share your committees, all right.

For the contract and compliance board.

Sorry, let me pull it.

Uh we voted six and and for the for uh Emma Boyd Elliott and Stuart Huffin for the contract and compliance board uh term ending October 15, 2026.

We voted C six to zero to zero.

And for Kim Ken Adams on the Human Relations Commission for a term ending December 16th.

No, I'm sorry, April 18th, 2028.

We voted six in favor, zero against Z were not voting.

All right, you all have uh heard the report of Chair Cash for these items uh for election.

Uh first is E1, contract and compliance board, consideration of nominees to fill one vacancy on the board for a term expiring October 15th, 2026, with an election to be conducted uh this evening.

Uh your tablets are on.

Um there are uh two uh recommendations and nominees for this election.

Mr.

Clerk, would you please open the vote?

You are voting for one, please, council members anyone else need assistance with their tablet or with their vote.

All right, with all votes in.

Mr.

Clerk, would you please show the vote?

This requires 21 votes.

Council has elected Emma Elliott with 27 votes uh to Stuart Huffman's five votes.

Uh we appreciate both uh folks for uh uh their willingness to serve, and we congratulate Emma Elliott.

Congratulations.

Emma, are you with us this evening?

Thank you.

We appreciate you.

Congratulations.

All right.

Uh next uh is for the Human Relations Commission item E twelve.

This is consideration of uh a nominee to fill one vacancy on the commission for a term expiring April 18th.

So this can be taken by voice, uh, colleagues, because there is just one person nominated uh for this one uh vacancy.

Uh and with the report of Chair Cash in, we will just move uh to the vote, and that is uh for Ms.

Carrie Adams to serve on the Human Relations Commission.

Uh all in favor, please say aye.

All right.

Any voting no or abstaining?

All right.

Council has elected Carrie Adams to serve on the Human Relations Commission.

Carrie, are you with us this evening?

All right.

Well, uh, if you are watching from home, uh, we congratulate you as well on your election.

Thank you for your willingness to serve.

Okay.

All right.

So next, we're moving into section F of our agenda, appointees and nominees.

This portion of the agenda shares all persons who are 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 elections and confirmations.

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

Chair Cash, your brief report, please.

No vote totals necessary, simply the name of those interviewed and for which seats, and then deferrals or withdrawals if there are any, sir.

Go ahead.

For the Arts Commission, the reappointment of Campbell West for term expiring February 24th, 2030.

For the Arts Commission, the reappointment of Mayra U for a term expiring February 24th, 2030 for the Auditorium Commission, the appointment of Mia Vickers for term expiring June 30th, 2027 for the bicycle and pedestrian advisory commission, the appointment of Matthew Cushing for a term expiring March 24th, 2027 for Davidson County Historian, the appointment of Dr.

Lee Williams Jr.

for term expiring December 16th, 2030 for the Greenway and Open Space Commission, the reappointment of Maury Hill for term expiring February 11th, 2029, and for the Procurement Standards Board, the appointment of Raheem Buford for term expiring October 4th, 2028.

All right, Chair Cash, could you share with me on item F6 regarding the Greenways and Open Space Commission reappointment there?

I had understood that that would be withdrawn.

Oh.

Is that F six?

Mr.

Hill.

Yes, okay.

I'm sorry, yes, we didn't do that interview.

Okay.

So that that um if you would just uh state um that the Greenway and Open Space Commission reappointment of Maury Hill is withdrawn.

Okay.

All right.

So that is withdrawn.

Again, these uh re-referrals are by rule.

Um so we're moving on now to Section G, confirmations.

Chair Cash, you're recognized again for your committee report on the appointees in the second step of your committee's two meeting process with vote totals this time and a consolidated motion for the confirmation of those persons or first for a deferral motion if there is any.

Go ahead, sir.

Okay, for the community review board, the appointment of John B.

Schrader for a term expiring October 31st, 2028.

Four in favor, zero against zero not voting.

For the community review board, the appointment of Tanisha Westbrook for a term expiring October 31st, 2028.

For the equalization board, the appointment of Bruce Pierce for a term expiring November uh 18th, 2027.

Uh four and four in favor, zero against zero not voting.

And for the hospital authority, the appointment of Dr.

Courtney Pitts for a term expiring September 6th, 2026.

Four in favor, zero against zero not voting.

And uh I move the nominees.

All right.

Uh there is a motion to confirm these four appointees uh in a consolidated vote.

Uh is there a second?

All right.

Does anyone wish to remove an item from this consolidated motion for a purpose of uh individual abstention or a no vote?

Okay, hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

All right.

Um so uh to our confirmed appointees.

Um I will read your names and if you are present with us, if you would please stand uh to be recognized uh collectively at the end.

Uh council has confirmed the appointment of John B.

Schrader to the community review board.

Uh council has also confirmed the appointment of Tanisha Westbrook to the community review board.

Uh council has confirmed the appointment of Bruce Pierce to the equalization board.

And council has confirmed the appointment of Dr.

Courtney Pitts to the hospital authority.

I'm so glad you all returned uh with us this evening.

Congratulations to you and thank you for your willingness to serve.

We appreciate you.

All right.

Um we are now moving into section H of our agenda, the public comment period.

Members of the public who are Tennessee residents wishing to speak during public comment may sign up at a table outside the council chamber from 5 to 6 p.m.

on the day of the council meeting.

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

Persons speaking on agenda items must be prioritized to comply with state law.

All right.

Um I will share uh the first uh three folks uh scheduled to speak, um, asking those folks to go ahead and come on forward um so we can uh move uh swiftly through our comment time.

Uh first will be Lindsay Lee, followed by Craig Bardo and Nader Daguerre.

Um Lindsey Lee is speaking on agenda item 35.

This is resolution 2025 1712 in support.

Go ahead, Lindsay.

We have two mics, uh, depending on uh the one that will work best for you.

There's an ADA mic as well.

And are you all set?

I believe so.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Hi, my name is Lindsay Lee, and I'm a resident of the Midtown neighborhood.

I'm also the chair of the mayor's advisory committee for people with disabilities.

I'm here today to express my support for the resolution being discussed about the boring company's music city loop.

In addition to all of the issues that are well outlined in the resolution, I'd like to add another concern to the list, which is the accessibility of this tunnel for people with disabilities.

Though almost no information has been made available about the accessibility plans for the tunnel, we can easily infer that there will be no accessible vehicles that someone like me who depends on a wheelchair could use.

Because as of today, they don't make wheelchair accessible Teslas.

Even if a wheelchair user is able to transfer to a vehicle, based on the tunnel dimensions that have already been reported, it's clear it would not be possible for the wheelchair user to safely exit the vehicle in an emergency.

The boring company has refused to answer basic questions about their plans for complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Over two months ago, our mayor's advisory committee of executive leadership sent a letter to the boring company through the mayor's office with a short set of questions about their accessibility plans with no response.

One would expect that if they had any plans to comply with the ADA, the answers would be readily available based on the fact that they already have a fully operational tunnel in Vegas.

The tunnel is almost certainly one massive, expensive, dangerous violation of the ADA.

By letting the boring company get away with this, we are undermining the legitimacy of the ADA overall, slipping us back in time when people with disabilities were segregated from public space.

Continuing to cooperate with the construction of this tunnel directly contradicts the values that this Metro government, including the mayor's office, claims to uphold.

Most clearly demonstrated recently with the disability audit resolution, and of course, our hosting of the 2034 Special Olympics.

Governor Bill Lee has said this tunnel will define the future of transportation in Tennessee.

Well, you can't call it the future if it leaves us in the past.

Oh, yes, for this resolution.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Next is Craig Bardo.

Mr.

Bardo, are you present?

Okay.

Um speaking on agenda item six, resolution 2025-1659 in opposition.

Um members in the gallery, uh, signs are allowed.

Um I will just remind you, please be very careful to make sure you are not obstructing the view or participation of anyone around you.

So sometimes that means you need to hold it kind of right in front of yourself and be mindful of who you might be blocking.

Okay.

Uh thank you very much.

Go ahead, Mr.

Bardo.

My name is Craig Bardo with the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

What's before you tonight isn't about public safety.

It's a response to the pressure created by the policies this body keeps advancing.

Policies that extract from working people and transfer public power to private interests.

You approve stadiums.

You approve East Bank redevelopment.

You approve corporate agreements that drain our wages and our taxes.

And that you present market speculation as housing policy.

Every one of those choices accelerates displacement.

As the people who built the city are pushed out.

And when the consequences show up, rising rents, unaffordable utilities, neighborhoods erased.

The response isn't support, it's it's control.

More stability, not more stability for people, more tools to manage and control the people, your policies displace.

And once people recognize one crisis, they begin to recognize themselves as one class.

That's what's happening in this city.

The working class of Nashville is finding itself and each other.

And as that continues, this chamber will not retain its position as the political center of gravity in this city.

All right.

Next is um Nader or Nader Daguerre.

Um after um uh whom will be Deluvio Palazzuolo and Stephen uh Watts, if those folks would go ahead and come on forward now.

Uh go ahead, sir.

You're recognized.

Thank you.

Uh good afternoon.

I am uh a proud member of this community, and uh I'm a professor of communication.

I've traveled around the world and I've seen that nobody tends to solve social problems as security problems more than uh in the United States.

My point is surveillance is not a social problem, a solution for a social problem.

I see surveillance only as an introduction to more political repression.

While you are hidden that way, remember that this will come back to all of us, and passing the agenda from the administration to the state to the city is no good for us.

Remember, you are representing us.

There's a contract between us and you.

You do not represent Washington or the state, you represent the people of Nashville, and that is your responsibility.

So this is not about keeping tourists safe.

It's about managing public funds, and public funds are a priority for, I mean, it should be spent as priority for the local community.

We have so many people who are not finding even a place to stay.

And so um uh replacing cameras with new modern cameras will not bring safety to our community.

I urge you not to follow, even though I understand that one of the council members told the news that the money will be dispersed to the to the partners no matter what the decision here is tonight.

So it's we are just given this session to maybe for you to vote and for us to comment, and the agenda will be passed on.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um just to clarify, and I should have indicated um Mr.

Dagair was speaking in opposition to 1659.

Uh next is Deluvio uh Palazzolo uh speaking on agenda item uh six, uh resolution 1659 in opposition.

Go ahead.

My name is Deluvio Palazzolo, De Vem.

I'm with the Black Alliance for Peace Solidarity Network, and we in Nashville live on the lands of the UC Shawnee and East Cherokee.

I'm here to denounce the MOU and plead it be changed after a public hearing.

This is surveillance.

The fact that a public hearing wasn't fought for the minute this was brought up is damning shame for all who didn't care to demand one.

The way it's written, along with some of Chief Gilder, Director Rosenberg, and COO Simpson's comments makes it clear that MMPD and the oppressive faction of the Nashville government were upset they didn't get all the money and tools they wanted between the LPR fusis and budget fights, so they buddied up to MDP to find things similar to what they wanted while being different enough to avoid double jeopardy and timing conflicts when they went to the state for the safety grant.

How on earth do armed vehicles, social media social media monitoring, and mass surveillance help improve our safety?

They don't.

The tools and technologies detailed in the MOU are declarations of war.

It is about getting any means possible to eradicate eradicate all deemed lesser, literally referred to in the MOU as a blight, which is traditionally defined as something that impairs or destroys one's hopes and plans.

The use of this term is terrifying, considering the claimed goal is attacking this blight, and the tools requested are for attacking humans, whose hopes require the ability to triangulate people talking on a bus, which COO Simpson himself referenced doing, or amplify SWAT rate ferocity.

These are the hopes of fascists.

Change the MOU.

Free service public restrooms, great.

Lighting, fantastic.

Outreach, outstanding.

Do more of that.

Repair the library, remove ableist and anti-houseless infrastructure to replace it with accessible and empathetic ones.

Renovate buildings for affordable housing and community resource havens.

Do the MOU over with the intention of actually helping out our community.

Leave the MNPD and corpocracy out, put the people in.

Weapons and wallets aren't Nashville.

We are all right.

Moving on.

Stephen Watts and uh Eureya Rodriguez will be after that, um, followed by Austin Forsyth.

Um Stephen Watts is uh speaking on agenda item six, 1659, the resolution in opposition.

Go ahead.

Stephen Watts, District 10.

Um uh Stephen Watts is uh speaking on agenda item six 1659 the resolution in opposition go ahead Stephen Watts District 10 the fact that this is not an automatic no is an indictment on the legitimacy of this deliberative body here are facts facts MMPD, mayor's office, NDP, and the state collaborated on a surveillance procurement process without involving community review board or city council.

Mayor's office is now insisting that you sign onto a document produced through this closed door process and calling that oversight.

If this is a document that attempts to limit the use of surveillance, then why does it not place any limits on the use of the surveillance items that it lists?

Why did it require the purchase of surveillance items and not limit the acquisition of any items to just those listed specifically on the MOU.

Questions remain and Freddie is not stepped in to provide clarity.

There are no messages from the mayor that is not only because this MOU process is the only way to allocate these funds through a process in which council would not end up with complete oversight it would also put counsel outside of the bounds of Metro law.

Metro Code chapter 13080 is clear entering any agreement to procure surveillance requires a public hearing upon entering an agreement passing this resolution without a public hearing is an ultravirus action outside this body's legal authority entering an agreement with this private entity without restricting that entity from its original purpose of passing money to Metro to acquire surveillance technology opens this deliberative process this delivered a body up to the kind of litigation a civil rights lawyer could only dream of this without even placing the opportunities for abuses within the context of the Tennessee Information and Protection Act.

So I am just so glad the the many of the opinions that have been given that are contradicted by law that their opinions are not law.

This is the most progressive council in Nashville's history and this resolution is a ticking time bomb.

Do not care about us care about you.

Thank you.

Next is uh Eureya Rodriguez speaking on agenda item six uh this is resolution 1659 in opposition again followed by Austin Forsyth and then Sean Witzel go ahead please good evening I am the Reverend Yuri Rodriguez St.

Augustine's Chapel and Noah and District 26 I am here to request that you defer for one meeting the approval of this resolution 1659 Council members this memorandum of understanding the language the vision that it casts and even the process by which it came into being it undermines the democratic process by which this council was elected to ensure that in any project that seeks the progress of our Nashville community the voice of this community would be taken into account this MOU lacks the integrity of due process and input from the community I know that because if it had the input of the community you would not be reading about militarized safety measures or AI surveillance you would be hearing of how to invest in the programs and organizations doing proven and efficient work to prevent violence and crime to build our community up and to build infrastructure that brings healing to our community council members to make all of our community feel safe we do not need to make some feel unsafe please grant this community the time and space to offer input and ask the mayor's office to receive this input and implement it in the amendments thank you thank you next is Austin Forsyth speaking on agenda item five resolution 2025 1655 in support go ahead my name is Austin Forsyth I'm a recent former employee of the Metro Department of Emergency Communications there is a deep longstanding toxicity in that department and it is being perpetuated by the director the mistreatment of employees is not a rumor it is not an exaggeration it is a documented pattern.

There's already been a private investigation done by the same private law firm that is doing the current investigation.

And I can tell you that since that, a couple of years ago, the behaviors have not changed.

Both the mayor's office and HR have ignored the employees' voices.

They've ignored the pleas, the warnings, and the cries for help from the workers who show up every single day to protect this city.

Just because the numbers look good, they look the other way.

Or worse, they gaslight the employees who keep the city safe.

These employees are our first first responders.

They protect the residents of Nashville, our visitors, and their for fellow first responder partners.

They hear the absolute worst moments in a person's life, every single shift.

And the 911 community, we say your worst day is our everyday, and that's what they live with.

Yet they continue to be subjected to a hostile environment created and maintained by their director.

Leadership should be held to a higher standard, never a lower one than the people they're supposed to guide and support.

So I'm asking you, please put aside personal differences, look past politics, stand with the workers who have been ignored for too long.

Support this resolution and help us finally hold this director accountable for his actions, just as any other employee would be held accountable for that.

Thank you.

Next is uh Sean Quitzel speaking on agenda item six, resolution 2025-1659 in opposition.

After Sean Whitzel will be Michelle Flynn and Elliot Perry.

Go ahead.

Hello, my name is Sean Whitzel with Nashville Organized for Action and Hope here in opposition to resolution 2025-1659.

This request is not an attempt to obstruct public safety efforts.

It is a request for clarity, integrity, and due process before Nashville commits significant public funds, authority, and policy direction that will shape house safety is defined and experienced downtown for years to come.

I am asking for a one-meeting deferral and a public hearing.

Based on review of the current draft language and discussion in recent meetings, several unresolved issues remain the remain that warrant council's pause.

Public safety must be human-centered.

Public safety cannot be measured only by technology, equipment, or enforcement presence for black, brown, immigrant, low-income, unhoused, disabled NAS Villians, these approaches have often resulted in increased harm rather than safety.

I ask that you defer for one meeting for time for a public hearing, more community way-in and reflection.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Next is uh Michelle Flynn, uh speaking on agenda item six, uh, resolution 1659 in opposition.

Go ahead.

Yes.

Um, this is a season when Kwanzaa is being celebrated by African American individuals in our community.

It is also this season of Hanukkah, where our Jewish members of this community are celebrating.

Um, yeah, right now.

We also have Ramadan with our Muslim neighbors are celebrating.

We also have for our Buddhist folks, I don't know if people know this, but it's a celebration for Bodhi, the time when um Siddhartha became um the Buddha because he became enlightened.

It's also the celebration of Jesus Christ.

Yes, we know many of us in here um hold to the Christian faith.

And so I want to draw your attention to one of the earliest times when surveillance was actually used and reported in the Bible by Matthew.

And Matthew talks about the moment when King Harod, um, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem, King Herod um went to surveil all the Jewish children under the age of two, and we're and it was an ordered that they be murdered, yes.

And the only reason why Jesus exists today in your hearts and in your history and in your faith is because the wise men on their way to visit Jesus were stopped, right?

Um, by the Lord, by the word of God, and then also by an angel, and told, do not tell Herod.

Because Herod came.

Paris people came and said, You must tell us where this Christ Jesus is because his his being a king who's threatening to King Harod.

But the wise men did not report, they went the other direction.

And I'm asking you in your hearts to act out of wisdom today.

Do not surveil the people in this community.

You hurt, not the tourists.

The tourists are great with this.

The people who live here, you're dividing you.

Your time is concluded.

Thank you.

Next uh is Elliot Perry speaking on agenda item 54.

Uh, this is resolution 1006, uh, speaking in opposition.

Go ahead.

Council members, thank you for your time.

My name is Elliot Perry.

I live in District 21.

I'm also the president of the home builders' association's in Phill Council.

So I live in Davidson County, I build in Davidson County, and I work hard to bring affordable housing here.

I'm here asking you to defer this bill one month so we can examine the consequences of the heights restrictions.

On the surface, I love a lot of what is in this bill.

But the heights restrictions you're bringing to the table are making it incredibly difficult to bring affordable housing to Nashville.

I spoke last night on a lot of the different home types that this bill is going to block, but I'm gonna focus tonight on one.

It's a three-bedroom, two-bedroom house, two bathroom house with a one-car garage.

In downtown Nashville, that looks like a three-story building with either a rear or front loading garage.

If this bill passes the heights restrictions inside it, we'll take that building down to two stories.

It becomes one thousand square feet, and now it's a home for roommates, not a home for a family.

We are taking product off the table with heights restrictions.

I need to drive that home.

I'm not building these houses right now.

I don't have stake in this.

I just believe I live in the city and I believe in affordable housing, and I believe that we can do it together.

I'm just asking for more time so we can talk about how to how to address the pain points many of you have brought to me.

And I and I understand him.

I see him in my community.

Brandon can attest to some of the things that have gone on that are not appropriate.

That's there.

That's real.

I can understand that.

So I'm asking you to defer this bill for one month so that we can come to some standards that work for everybody as we move forward and keep bringing family homes into Nashville.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, with over um a minute of residual time uh remaining, we will go into our wait list, uh, one spot.

Um we have about a minute and a half of residual time.

Uh and uh Nick Wisnowski on agenda item 44, uh ordinance BL 2025 1192.

Uh Nick, are you present?

Okay, go ahead.

Go ahead, sir.

Good evening, council.

Uh, my name is Nick Rosnewski, and I'm a homeowner.

Uh I reside at 38 Railroad Court in Old Hickory, Tennessee.

I'm here to comment on the resolution line.

Item number 44 on your agenda resolution bill 2025-1192.

Uh remaining railroad court, renaming Railroad Court to Magnolia Shores.

Um, I'm a homeowner on the street, and I'm also the vice president of the homeowners association.

For y'all's consideration, um, I just like to note that all the homeowners in the community are on any unanimous vote to request the name change to Magnolia Shores from Railroad Court.

Uh the primary reason for this change is every homeowner has had issues communicating the name, spelling it, pronouncing it, um, receiving mail packages, and getting their loved ones and friends to their homes.

Additional, additionally, while while we haven't had any emergency services needed in the neighborhood to date, there's a huge concern with the discrepancies on how it's spelled and pronounced that would impact it in the future.

I'd also like to note that the neighborhood is marketed underneath the name Magnolia Shores.

Uh, the homeowners refer to it in that way as well.

The association believes the name Magnolia Shores is consistent with the historical nature of the area, which we would like to maintain.

So the name we've coordinated with Metro both aligns with what Metro has approved and fits with what the homeowners think is in the best interest.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much.

All right, that does conclude uh our public comment time.

Next on our agenda is uh section I uh regarding rules of procedure.

Uh there is a proposed amendment to the rules of procedure rule 9.3 regarding the introduction of legislation uh by council member Evan Siegel, and we take up these items uh much as we do uh legislation by rule when they are first appear on y'all's agenda.

Uh they are deferred.

Um and so this was on the last agenda for your consideration and is now uh up for discussion if uh the sponsor chooses to move it.

Uh Ms.

Evans Seal, you're recognized.

Uh thank you.

I we can move it, but I think we need committee reports.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh go ahead, Mr.

Cash, Chair.

Thanks.

We uh we moved deferral and uh it was four in favor, zero against the we're not voting, uh one meeting.

Okay.

All right, and much like rule eight point one um will be applied here uh just as for legislation, and that is a mandatory deferral uh by rule.

This will be taken up again uh at the next meeting, which is the first meeting in January, January 20th.

Okay.

All right.

Okay, um, council members.

At this juncture, uh, prior to moving into our public hearing items and without objection, and an effort to avoid potential confusion and conflation regarding our two agenda items that are related to C bids, and further in an effort uh that the public hearing specifically about the proposed establishment of a midtown C bid proceed clearly and efficiently.

I am going to move agenda item six, resolution 2025-1659 regarding a memorandum of understanding with the downtown C bid forward on the agenda.

All right.

Um, and so with that, um uh this is agenda item uh resolution 2025 1659 item six sponsor tombs huffman and Johnston.

This is a resolution approving a letter of agreement and memorandum of understanding between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County and the Nashville Downtown Partnership related to an application for the financial year 26 downtown public safety grant from the state of Tennessee.

Um sponsor Toombs, uh you are recognized, uh Chair of Budget and Finance to get uh this resolution uh before us for consideration.

Thank you, uh Madam Vice Mayor, uh move for approval.

Um let's get our committee reports, please.

Yeah, budget and finance voted to recommend approval of amendment one, nine in favor, zero against one night voting.

Recommended approval of amendment two, uh eight in favor, zero against zero not voting, and recommended approval of the resolution as amended.

Six in favor, zero against two night voting.

Okay.

All right, and next for the report of the public health and safety committee.

Chair Huffman, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Public Health and Safety recommended approval of amendment one seven in favor, one against none not voting.

Uh approval of amendment two, six in favor, zero against two not voting.

And uh on the late filed amendment two, eight in favor, zero against, zero not voting.

Uh as amended, the motion was recommended for approval.

Six in favor, one against, one not voting.

Okay.

And um, just to clarify, Chair Huffman, late filed amendment to being uh the second amendment of uh council member sepulvida.

Yes, ma'am, that's correct.

Okay, um thank you.

All right, um uh so it is back to you, uh Chair Toms, uh, for a motion to get the bill before us, please, ma'am.

Move for approval.

Is there a second?

Okay, so we are on uh to discussion now on resolution uh 16 uh 59.

Uh first in the queue is council member uh sepulvida.

You are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh I'd like to uh suspend the rule the rules to move uh the late filed amendment two.

All right.

Um uh there is a request uh for a suspension of the rules um to get all right um I am getting uh advice um from special counsel um as far as order of operations.

Um your amendment um if we were to consider it by suspending the rules contemplates um the uh passage of uh sponsor tombs amendment one um so they they speak to and work with each other.

Um you are recognized first.

Would you want to defer your time to Ms.

Tombs to go ahead and uh get that I'll defer my time.

Okay.

Um Ms.

Tombs, you are uh recognized.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

I move for approval of amendment one.

Okay, um properly moved and seconded.

We're on a motion uh to amend with amendment one.

Um is there anything that you want to share briefly about that amendment?

I would defer to Director Darby.

Okay, um, Director Darby, um, regarding uh Ms.

Tombs' amendment one, please, ma'am.

Oh, I'm sorry, special counsel, go ahead.

This amendment uh replaces the memorandum of understanding with a new version.

The new version contains a couple of changes.

One, it changes the tense of some of the statements from the previous MOU into past tense versus future tense.

Uh, that was a little confusing.

Uh it also adds a requirement that the NDP and Metro comply with all federal, state, and local laws, including section 13.08.080 of the Metro Code of Laws.

And if there are uh further changes to the amendment that I did not address, I would defer to um Mr.

Rosenberg.

All right.

Um, Ms.

Tombs, does that sufficiently cover the nature of the amendment?

Yes.

All right.

Um with that, um, we are on to discussion on the motion uh to amend.

Um, Miss Sepulveda, do you want to be recognized at this time on the motion to amend?

Uh Mr.

Nash on the motion to amend.

Anyone in the queue presently that wants to be recognized on the motion to amend, if you would raise your hand.

Okay, we will hold on the motion to amend, Miss Wara.

Um, okay.

All right.

Uh go ahead, ma'am.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh we'll refer everyone to the committee meetings vote for some of the comments, but I just want to go on record as saying that I'm not in support of this amendment.

I know that the intent is to clarify some of the misunderstanding uh from the original memorandum, which was very confusing in his states because it was talking about things that already happened.

And so I'm glad that that is doing that.

But like I said in committee, and I'm not asking question, and this one I'm just making those statements, is that I continue to feel like these memorandum of understanding should be with the DMC and not with the NDP.

Uh, and every time that I go back and look at it, there's always confusion about who is doing what and who got what.

I think after my question in the last committee, there was also uh a ref uh uh a reference to a letter of agreements that actually state all three entities in that as part of the reason why the NDP is the one we're doing things with.

I go back to if NDP, DMC, and Metro are all working together on this.

I believe that the substitute and the correction should have all three entities listed.

And since it's not with that, I would not be supporting this amendment.

Thank you.

All right.

Um we are continuing on the discussion uh for the motion to amend uh with Ms.

Toombs's amendment one.

Um anyone that is presently already in the queue, just making sure.

Um, Ms.

Allen, uh Ms.

Porterfield, Ms.

Allen is in the queue before you.

Um, and so I will recognize her on the motion to amend.

Go ahead.

Thank you, madam chair.

I'd like to speak in favor of this amendment.

I I understand uh the the concerns about the the MDP and the MD MPC and the alphabet soup of other organizations.

I think those can be addressed or they need to be addressed equally regardless of which of these versions of the MOU we have.

And I do appreciate the clarifications that are in this amendment.

It also mentions that um if cameras are installed, they will be installed by Metro, and that's important because that ensures um that that is subject not only to the accountability but also to the public hearing requirements, and we've heard from the public that that's a that's a very important piece of this.

Uh and it also um points out in a number of places where um this these uh pieces of equipment are either replacing existing stuff so that it clarifies to some degree that much of this is not new technology, it's just what has been used to keep us safe downtown and has not been abused in the past, and I think that's an important statement to make.

I think it is compatible um with making those changes to that.

I think it is compatible with the deferral if we decide to do that, but I believe that this particular amendment makes this a better starting point for all the discussion that we have from here.

So I rise in support of this.

Thank you, Ms.

Allen.

And now uh Ms.

Porterfield on the motion to amend.

Go ahead.

Oh, I'm sorry, ma'am.

Go ahead.

No worries, Vice Mayor.

Um, thank you so much.

Uh special counsel Darby, could you for the uh purposes of the viewing audience explain with that uh the code that you referenced earlier about basically about uh requiring a public hearing for any surveillance?

Can you uh please explain it for the record?

Go ahead, special counsel.

Certainly.

Uh Metro Code of Laws, section 13.08.080 applies to um surveillance technology and and the steps that Metro has to take if they are um doing a number of things with surveillance technology.

Um and the the number one thing that has to happen is uh public hearing would need to be held if Metro were acquiring.

So in the future, if the NDP decides to, or you know, the NDP and Metro decide that uh there's to be a donation or gift of uh any of these funds or any equipment that may have been purchased with these funds, then those uh donations and gifts would have to come to the council for approval, and if any of those donations or gifts involved surveillance technology, then there would need to be a public hearing before the council as well.

Uh thank you so much, Director Darby.

Uh we discussed this in both budget and finance as well as public health and safety, but I just wanted to make sure to get it on the record for today because I know we have a lot of people in this room and a lot of people that are watching that were not um in attendance for some of those conversations.

So I just wanted to make sure that that was very clear and on the record.

Thank you.

All right.

Is there any further discussion on the motion to amend with amendment one?

Ms.

Tombs' amendment.

Okay, just double checking.

No one in the queue.

That's on the main bill.

No one seeking to be recognized on the motion to amend.

Okay, with that, we'll move to the vote.

We'll try it by voice.

All in favor of amendment one, please say aye.

Aye.

Any voting no?

All right.

Uh that is recognized, but uh the amendment does prevail.

Uh, and so uh Ms.

Tombs, um, it is back to you, please, uh, for uh a motion uh to renew your approval as amended.

Move for approval is amended.

Okay.

Um all right, so now we are on to discussion of the resolution as amended.

And so we will go back to the top of the queue.

Uh and uh Ms.

Sepulveda, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd like to move to suspend the rules to take up uh late filed amendment two.

Is there any objection to the suspension of the rules?

Seeing none, the rules are suspended.

Go ahead, uh, Miss Sepulvita regarding uh your amendment.

Uh thank you, Vice Mayor.

So the amendment essentially takes out Leo site and FiveCast, and this is a compromise that um the parties uh came to, uh, which I do appreciate.

There were uh several concerns, and granted, there are still things that I am not entirely um comfortable with to say the least, but uh this is this is what we were able to come up with, so I uh I ran with it.

So if if you all could support this, I would greatly appreciate it.

And with that, I would move for approval.

Just about to ask you that.

I was like, I think we're talking about it, and we have not uh made that motion, but there is a proper motion uh to uh amend uh with amendment uh two slash four um Ms.

Sepulveda here as uh described and um it's properly seconded.

Um so we are now um on to discussion on uh the motion to amend uh with Ms.

Sepulveda's uh late filed amendment.

Um is there anyone in the queue seeking to be recognized specifically on that uh amendment?

Um Mr.

Nash is uh waving no.

Um anyone else in the queue at this time regarding the amendment.

Okay.

Um I'm just looking down the queue, making sure um Miss Swara, you are next in the queue seeking to be recognized on the amendment.

Uh go ahead, ma'am.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I just wanted to rise in uh in support of this amendment.

I thank the sponsor for bringing it in, all the parties for agreeing to it.

I think this is uh part of the uh uh old thing that people are really against, and the fact that uh we made an attempt to correct not all of it, but some of it is still is still very good.

I think someone uh one of the speakers tonight talk about uh how we define safety, and now we have to make sure that as we're talking about safety, we're not thinking about safety of some group at the expense of the others.

And I think this amendment does that by making sure that the part of this uh uh exhibit that is very uh prolific that can be misused is being taken out.

And so with that again, I uh rise in support and I ask everyone to please support this.

We have to look out for each other.

It's about the safety of all of us, not some of us.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Swara.

And next, Ms.

Allen, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I appreciate the the sponsor of this and and the the sections that are taken out.

I have a question about um the language that was inserted in amendment one, which uh think is important, um, that is not included in the top three items under technology of this.

Is there is this will overwrite that?

Is that correct?

Um I'm happy to defer to special counsel on the compatibility of the uh amendments.

Correct.

Um go ahead.

Uh the Sepulveda amendment will remove the um the two items for CSC software.

And that's and that that seems responsive to what we're hearing.

I guess my concern is that under safety cameras, it says video cameras installed to enhance public safety by monitoring activity and deterring crime.

That's language that was in the original version.

Amendment one had said video only cameras installed by Metro to enhance public safety by monitoring activity and touring crime.

Such cameras will replace or be replaced alongside existing cameras.

That language is not in if I'm looking at the right late filed amendment too, or maybe I'm not.

There were two.

Okay.

So in my mind, it was kind of one, two, three, four.

Um, so there was an initial late file amendment by council member sepulvita, and then there was a subsequent late filed amendment that was fairly late breaking.

So um special counsel, can you just clarify if that has the language from amendment one that we just approved in it?

Yes.

I need to pull up that's fine.

Maybe it wasn't.

And for example, it says noise noise camera devices installed by Metro that would record instances of executive noise and street racing to support noise ordinance enforcement and protect pedestrians.

That language is not in the version that I'm looking at, but maybe I'm not looking at the right one.

I'm just trying to it it is in this amendment, I believe.

Okay.

Um council member.

Is that correct?

Special counsel, can you just clarify?

The the draft that was circulated did not have the language uh from the tombs amendment at the top, it was intended to, and we can um we can quickly get that circulated to the body.

Okay, um, because that was absolutely the intent of Ms.

Sepulveda's amendment to amend the Tombs substitute, the Tombs amendment um by only removing the two software paragraphs, but so we can quickly get that circulated uh in order to um have that amendment be before the body.

Okay, I think that's if that was her intention, I think that's that's the best of all.

It's absolutely the intention.

All right, that's sufficient to clarify on the compatibility of the two.

Okay, thank you.

Uh okay, we are continuing on uh with discussion on uh council member sepulvita's uh second uh late amendment.

Um is there any uh further discussion on this amendment?

Seeing none, all in favor of the motion to amend, please say aye.

Any voting no?

Okay, even so uh the motion to amend does prevail.

Uh just requires a simple majority.

And um uh with that, um any abstentions.

Okay, so all right.

Yes, ma'am, go ahead.

And so I I should hear have heard this.

So what we just voted on is the quickly to be circulated version, or will that need to be that will need to be.

No, I I apologize as well.

The the body does have the late filed amendment.

What special counsel was indicating is the uh revised uh mo you that was attached to Ms.

Tombs's okay, uh special counsel, if you would clarify, please.

Point of clarification.

Go ahead.

So the amendment presented by council member sepulvita was intended to amend the tombs amendment simply by deleting the two uh the two provisions regarding software.

The amendment that was previously circulated included language from the original MOU attachment, not the tombs attachment.

So we are quickly making that change right now in order to circulate the intended version to the body.

Okay, as we proceed with discussion.

Do you seek to be recognized again?

Yep, go ahead.

Yes, thank you.

And so we have not yet voted on that one to be circulated or in this, since that was what we were voting on.

I'm just trying to make sure I understand.

I think it might be proper for a um uh a motion to amend the amendment to include the intended version.

The intended version that should be circulated.

Thank you.

I'll do that if someone else doesn't.

Thank you.

Okay.

So um where we are at this juncture, special counsel is um uh we have just voted on Ms.

Sepulveda's late amendment, and that vote uh did prevail.

And so I was going to go back to um Ms.

Tombs uh to renew her motion to approve um as amended with amendments uh one, her amendment, and Ms.

Sepulveda's amendment two.

Is that your intent, Chair, at this time?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Oop go ahead.

Well, I do have a point of parliamentary procedure.

Yep.

Go ahead.

Since we are doing a another late file of the late file, do we need to suspend the rules again to amend the late filed amendment?

Special counsel Darby.

Yes.

That will need to happen.

What point will we need to do that?

Shortly, we are trying to get the documents circulated to the body as we speak.

Okay.

Just all right.

Um so should I go ahead and move forward with the move for approval as amended or I think let's um if if you see fit, um you could renew the motion so that we could continue with discussion with the understanding uh by the body that when uh you do receive the accurate documentation at that time, um, then uh we can if the body will say uh suspend the rules to amend the previous amendment, um, and we'll just kind of stack it on in that way.

There are um four members that have been in the queue for quite a while, I think to discuss the bill more generally.

Um, and so I will inquire with them if they want to proceed uh with that discussion based on where the bill is now.

Okay, we'll move for approval um as amended with amendment one and the Sapoda amendment two.

Okay, all righty.

Um so we are on uh to general discussion um pending uh receiving it's been received.

Okay, um it is in your inboxes, council members.

Um so we are on to general discussion.

Um at this time, uh Mr.

Nash, or uh you don't want to be recognized at this time.

Does anyone in the queue uh for general discussion seek to be recognized?

Okay.

Uh Mr.

Coupen, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'd like to move to suspend the rules for my late filed amendment.

Okay.

Um uh Ms.

Darby, can you speak before we proceed with that to the compatibility of that light file relative to the one that you have just provided to the body, please, ma'am?

The uh late file presented by Mr.

Coupen will not conflict with the late late filed by council member sepulveda.

Um it amends the recitals and is actually intended to be consistent with the late filed amendment from Councilmember Sepulveda.

Okay, which means um that is a proper motion at this time uh for our consideration.

Is there any objection to the suspension of the rules to take up Mr.

Coupen's uh uh so Mr.

Koopin, I apologize.

This is not your proposed amendment too, but rather your late filed yes amendment I don't know the number.

Okay.

Uh your late filed amendment.

Um is there any objection to the suspension of the rules?

There is one.

Oh, okay.

There is no objection, seeing no objection to the suspension of the rules for consideration of this late file amendment, which members will find in their inboxes.

Uh the rules are suspended, um, and you can now make that motion, uh, Mr.

Koopin.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'd like to move the amendment with a brief explanation.

Okay.

Um is there a second for the motion to amend with the late filed amendment of Mr.

Koopin?

Okay.

Um we're on to discussion.

Go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Madam President.

So this uh the I'll explain the late filed nature in a moment, um, but most of this is the timely filed amendment that I had that described um kind of the process, what the party, how the parties were acting, what capacity they were acting with in where the money is going, what what it's intended to be spent on, what the NDP intends to keep, what the NDP intends to um gift to Metro but operate, and what the NDP intends to give to Metro and not operate, um, as well as codifying the um or clarifying that the any council, any gifts that are accepted have to go through council approval, anything with surveillance in it has to go through um the public hearing.

Um the late filed nature was um in response to councilwoman sepulvita's amendment that then changed where the money was being spent, so then this late filed amendment um also matches uh councilman sepulvita's amendment as far as where the dollars are going.

All right, is there any further uh discussion um on Mr.

Koopin's amendment as just described?

Um I am seeing uh folks that have held in the queue for quite a while now, um, but just in an abundance of caution.

Anyone in the queue at this time seeking to be recognized uh for Mr.

Koopin's amendment?

If so, would you please raise your hand just to make sure?

Okay, seeing none, we are on to the vote uh regarding that amendment.

All in favor, please say aye.

Any voting no?

Any abstaining?

All right.

Um that amendment um has the that motion to amend has uh prevailed.

Um Ms.

Tombs, um, if you could renew your motion for approval, and then I think uh special counsel at this time, all members of the body having received uh uh the appropriate documentation and due to a clerical error of staff.

I I will go back then, um special counsel to Ms.

Sepulveda, um, so that we can get that.

Um can you uh okay.

First, let's just renew um Ms.

Tims, thank you.

Move for approval as amended with amendment one, the Supulveda two amendment, and the Coupon amendment.

Okay.

Um all right.

So we are back on to discussion, and special counsel, can you um please opine on what we need to do next, please, ma'am?

Go ahead.

It would be appropriate for councilmember Sepulveda to move the corrected version of your late filed amendment.

Uh you would need to suspend the rules to do that.

There was a clerical error, but this uh the late filed amendment the the uh corrected late filed amendment has been distributed to all the council members.

It should be in your email.

Okay.

Um uh Ms.

Sepulveda, go ahead.

All right.

Uh move to suspend the rules on the new uh amendment.

Which is special counsel the same as the previous amendment, but with a appropriate um uh attachment, correct?

Yes, there are there are five items on the uh under technology on the um tombs amendment, and this will remove two related to software and the the three the three remaining match the language from the tombs amendment.

All right, is there any objection to the suspension of the rules for that purpose?

Kind of right back where we were earlier.

Again, seeing none, the rules are suspended.

Um go ahead, um Ms.

Pulvida.

Move for approval.

Okay, properly moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion uh on that?

Any additional discussion?

Anyone in the queue?

Um, Ms.

Bo, uh, you seek to be recognized on this amendment.

Uh go ahead.

You're recognized.

Thank you so much, Chair.

Um, I just want to be really um if we can get some clarification on the public hearing requirement.

Um, could Special Darby uh read specifically um 13.08.080 dot C dot two require like what requires a public hearing.

Can she read that section and then the following one as well?

Okay, uh special counsel.

Um uh can you share about 13.08.080, please, ma'am.

Right, if you'll hold just for a minute, um Ms.

Darby did speak to it earlier, but I recognize that your your ask is to basically to read it verbatim, just sort of for the record and for community understanding all right.

We appreciate the community and members' patience or a lot of moving parts on this one.

So uh go ahead.

13080 C is the section that requires a public hearing uh for several actions that the council would take.

Um installing, uh entering into agreements, accepting uh funds, acquiring new surveillance technology, entering into government agreements, uh and uh acquiring data captured.

So C two is what you've asked me.

So C2 is about entering into agreements with private entities to acquire, share otherwise use surveillance technology or the information it provides if such agreement includes exchange of any monetary or any other form of consideration from any source, including the assessment of any additional fees, interests, or surcharges on unpaid fines or debts absent approval of the Metropolitan Council.

Okay, thank you.

I just want to make sure that was clear for everyone.

Okay, I appreciate that.

Um is there any uh further yes, ma'am?

Go ahead.

I'm not sure that uh C three was read, or maybe I didn't hear it.

I heard C2, but I didn't hear C2.

Okay.

Um Ms.

Darby.

C2 is accepting state or federal funds or in kind or other donations for surveillance technology.

Thank you, Director.

Okay.

Um and uh so were you uh Ms.

Special Counsel?

Can you so C3 has been read?

Was that your ask?

Yeah, uh Councilmember Vaux ask was for C2 and C3, so I just wanted to make sure the C3 was read.

I know some of our constituents were asking for it to be, but she just read that subsequently.

Okay, I'm sorry, I heard C2 again, but that was C.

But she raised C3.

Okay, I appreciate the clarification.

All right.

Um we continue with discussion on the motion to amend uh with Ms.

Sipulveda's amended amendment.

Um is there anyone else in the queue that is seeking to be recognized on that motion to amend?

All right.

Uh seeing none, we'll move to the vote.

All in favor, please say aye.

Any voting no?

Any abstaining?

All right.

Um, so Ms.

Tombs, it is uh back to you.

I think at this juncture, um we have taken up all the amendments, all the late amendments, all the amended late amendments.

Um, and if you could just restate um where uh we are on your bill um as amended.

Um go ahead.

Move for approval as amended.

Do I need to name the amendments?

That's fine.

It's it's amendment uh one.

Uh suppose amendment two, late five files, support the amendment, yes, and the coupon amendment.

That's correct.

Okay.

Um uh you've heard uh restatement and renewal of the motion to approve as amended.

So now all those of you who are very patient in the queue waiting for um the general uh discussion.

Um uh top of the queue uh and very patient uh is Councilmember Nash.

You are recognized, sir.

Thank you, madam chairman.

I uh hate to belabor the issue.

Um but hopefully it's it's kind of clear now that by approving this MOU, we're not automatically approving anything that's in it.

All listen, all those items, all those items.

The restrooms would have to come back before council before we could accept the money to fund those for endot or water, whoever's gonna install those.

Likewise, the money going to hire people if if if there will working for the downtown business.

But likewise, the surveillance has to come before council, has to have a public hearing.

So all the folks that are wanting a public hearing, you're gonna get them.

If that money comes to us, if that gets offered to us, you'll get your public hearing and you'll get your input.

Uh I think uh the uh people who have amended this bill have worked hard to make sure that that's clear and and we should move forward.

Thank you, Mr.

Nash.

Next in the cues, Councilmember Welsh.

You're recognized, ma'am.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, I would like to move a one-meeting deferral and require a public hearing.

Okay.

Y'all please don't yell out in the middle of the meeting.

Okay, so there is a motion to defer.

Uh it is properly seconded, and so we are on uh to discussion on the motion to defer.

Uh would you like to say something at this time regarding the deferral?

Um yes, thank you.

First of all, we just received um a link to a public records request about how this came together and how surveillance was added.

So I'd like time to review that.

I also feel that um the community has more to say about this bill and they need to be heard, and we need to make proper amendments as necessary before we move forward.

As you can see tonight, there was a lot of confusion about what was happening here with this bill, so I think a deferral is right and proper, and I ask my uh colleagues to support it, and along with the public hearing.

Okay, initial motion.

Are you amending your motion?

No, that was part of my original motion.

Okay.

A one meeting deferral and a public hearing.

Okay, it needs a date certain.

Um if to be a proper motion, um, you can combine a deferral and a request for a public hearing.

Um, but it needs to be um both for the deferral and the public hearing.

You need to state the dates that you want those to happen.

Um I move to defer to the meeting of January 20th and have a public hearing on January 20th.

Okay.

Is there a second for that motion?

Okay.

Um right.

Uh so we are on uh to discussion on that deferral uh of one meeting um with a public hearing at that same meeting on January 20th.

Um Mr.

Bradford or anybody else in the queue, um, is anyone in the queue presently seeking to be recognized on the motion to defer?

Um yes, okay.

So um uh with that, um Mr.

Bradford, you don't seek to be next recognized on the deferral, but other than that, members, it looks like we're just gonna go in order of the queue, okay?

Um first there is uh Mr.

Koopin, your recognized sir.

Thank you, Madam President.

And this has really been been a tough um kind of decision and thought process for me with this legislation.

There's really some great things in here.

We've got public restrooms, homeless outreach, lights, um, and downtown safety we know is incredibly important.

I've worked hard with um when Riley Strain lost his life, um, getting fencing up there.

We worked with Red Frogs to bring them to downtown, getting countless people home safely.

Um the Office of Night Life Um has worked with one box saving 14 lives with Narcan and Safe Bar and so many things.

Um and when I when I first saw this legislation, I was troubled because those pieces were not incorporated as someone who works hard on downtown safety.

I didn't know that this was happening.

I wasn't part of this conversation when I asked around to others, um, they weren't as well.

And so, you know, again, but but money for downtown safety is important.

So I kind of went forward with it and was have been working through it.

Um, but every every page that I turn on this thing, it gets more and more convoluted and complicated.

Um, as somebody that has worked, you know, works with deals in my in my day job.

I still can't reconcile how a grant contract that was submitted that says only DMC and an MOU that says only NDP and a letter of intent that says DMC and NDP, how they all reconcile.

And you know, again, I'm supportive of downtown safety.

I work hard for downtown safety.

It's my district, I care about it, I care about keeping the people safe there.

Um, but we also hear that this that this um MOU without it, the money still flows, NDP gets the money, Metro could still get the money, NDP could bring even before January 20th, we could bring the actual grant contracts to the council um to be voted on to be discussed.

And so I just think that there, and then and then lastly, I think that the fact that we are now trying to vote on late filed, late file versions of amendments that the public hasn't seen that are being passed around on a 15 million dollar grant for downtown safety.

Um it's just it's such an important piece of legislation, it's an important amount of money, and it's the core of our city, and I think we owe it to the public, and we owe it to us, and we owe it to the body to be to be thoughtful and thorough, thorough uh with this.

So I will be supporting the one meeting deferral.

I think it gives us time to clean this up.

I think it gets time to give it right.

We may not even need it by January 20th.

We may be able to just bring the actual items to us.

Let's get it passed.

The money's still gonna flow to my understanding.

I see limited limited downside here and a lot of upside.

I think it's important for good governance to to get this right.

So I will be supporting the one meeting deferral.

Thanks.

Uh knowing that Mr.

Bradford does not want to speak on the deferral motion, I'll go next to Ms.

Hill.

Uh your recognized chair Hill.

Go ahead.

I think my vice mayor.

I was gonna stand up and ask for deferral myself anyway, because I'm a I'm against this of how it is overall.

Uh, but I I think a deferral would give an opportunity with all the confusion of the late filed and the different amendments to get out to the public, make sure everybody understands what's going on, and maybe we can change some things and make this better.

Uh, as it sits, I'm against it 100%, but I think with maybe the deferral, we can maybe do something to change it.

All right.

Uh, next in the queue is council member Parker, your recognizer.

Previous question.

All right.

Uh Mr.

Parker uh has called the previous question.

Is there a second?

Okay.

This is a non-debatable motion.

It requires two-thirds of those voting.

Uh uh to uh uh pass.

Um if you are in favor of the previous question, that means uh you want to end uh discussion and move to the vote.

Um is that how you want to proceed at this point, Mr.

Parker?

We we are proceeding with the previous question.

I'm gonna withdraw my motion.

Okay.

Um right.

Uh the previous question uh is withdrawn.

Um uh and uh Mr.

Bradford, you do not seek to be recognized.

So next in the queue is Councilmember Porterfield.

Uh you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thank you, Councilmember Parker.

Um can we um get MPD on the record that they will not spend this money prior to any MOU or any before this comes back to the council when we talked about the effects of a deferral in both public health and safety and in budget and finance?

Uh what we were told at that time that if we deferred, there's nothing stopping MPD from spending this money.

So can we get in a commitment from MPD?

Because my assumption is that they would want to be good partners with the city and with uh the council.

So can we get some type of commitment from them that they're not going to spend anything until we come back and have a public hearing and vote on the uh whether there's a revised MOU or whatever it is that will be voted on in January?

Um okay.

So um this is your time for discussion.

You have posed a question uh towards the administration.

Obviously, this is not like committee.

We don't kind of elevate uh random members of uh different departments to address things, um, but we can acknowledge uh the administration um in that regard.

Is that the same question one that you want to direct generally to the mayor's administration?

I would like to direct that to their mayor's ministry, uh, the mayor's administration, and I would love if the mayor's administration can get it a commitment from MPD.

Okay.

Uh council member Rosenberg, um, do you want to respond?

Um, you're not a council member friend.

I mean, we sat on the back row together for eight years.

Sometimes my brain just goes there.

Um Mr.

Rosenberg uh for the mayor's office, your recognized sir.

Thank you, Madam President.

Uh David Rosenberg for the mayor's office.

You're asking about NDP.

Yeah, what did I say?

MPD.

Yeah, I thought I was like M NPD, NDP.

We have a whole lot of acronyms, yeah.

Yeah, and I would ask the body, especially on these matters if you if you would just say the Nashville Downtown Partnership NDP.

Do we know that?

Okay.

Mr.

Resberg.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, I cannot speak for the Nashville Downtown Partnership.

Understood, but can the and I know that typically we do not allow anyone outside of council members or administration or someone sitting up here to be able to speak, but I think that it would be prudent for us to have this information so that we can know the you know good or bad, what could potentially happen if we move forward with the deferral.

Um you have spoken that request in to the universe.

Um I believe the Nashville Downtown Partnership can um hear that, and I would suggest that if they want to be on the record in that regard, um they can uh email the body.

Um, but I I cannot begin to now recognize members of the audience and representatives of that.

That is what we do in committee.

I I do appreciate the concern.

The administration could likewise, if they so chose, confer with that entity, but I can't require them to do so.

It the ask has been made.

Um, and we can see if that can be achieved in the context of this discussion time.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

They can also meet me at the back sidebar if they want to have a conversation with me.

Thank you.

That uh hey, everybody, please, let's let's not yell.

Okay.

All right.

Um council member Swara, um uh you are uh uh recognized thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um I rise in support of the deferral for every reason that everybody's mentioned and for the questions that I've been trying to ask for the last uh two weeks.

Uh and like I said, every time that I get an answer, it makes me more confused.

Every time that I open something, it's something else.

And I think it's very important uh for all of us to be clear on this.

A lot of us read all of this over and over and over and over again.

Uh and if we're not being able to to make any sense of it and we're getting in the document, uh then it makes sense that the public will want something better as well.

So with that rising support, I also wanted to say that if I understand uh correctly, uh with the uh grants notification that went out, the purpose of this is for NDP DMC to work with the metro entity to work with metro government.

That's the that's how the grant was put out by the state, and that's why the state requires that if one is applying, the other should not be applying.

So I don't see NDP or DMC buying something now without Metro knowing about it.

I just want to put that there, but I want to um amend uh the defer motion if that is possible and tell me if that's possible to also add that we require that the uh administration work with NDP to make sure that or talk to NDP, make it formal require request as part of that uh motion if we can do that in one we're deferring it, but we're also asking the administration to work with NDP to not do anything until January 20th.

Um can you opine on whether such a motion to amend the current motion is proper.

Is your request, Miss Swara, to specifically constrain the spending of the money?

Um okay, special counsel.

I don't I don't think that we can do that.

The the motion before us is a motion to defer with which is a proper motion with combined with a request for a public hearing on January 20th, which is also a proper motion pursuant to our rules and um both are pursuant to Robert's rules.

What you are trying to do is add a substantive element to that motion, which is ostensibly the same thing as some of the the substance of the underlying piece of legislation.

So you're trying to uh I would uh I would draw that, but I I uh just like my colleagues book it into the universe, then I'm I didn't need an Amaski the administration and the DMC and the NDP to not spend any money uh until this agreement is formalized.

So yes, until this agreement is uh approved by uh uh council and allowing that defer to take place.

So thank you.

All right, so noted.

Uh next, um, council member Harrell.

Um we are on a motion uh to defer uh with a public hearing.

Go ahead, sir.

Um so first I'm gonna leave I'm always gonna be against surveillance.

Um however, I I have concerns with this deferral.

Uh based off of the information we received while we were in the budget committee yesterday.

It is my understanding if we defer this, the funds move without any consent.

Um also it is my understanding, and please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but if we also defer this, this MOU no longer have any power, so they can do what they want with these funds.

And so if we want to be the body that our people elected us to do to do the job that they elect us to do, I think that we need this MOU.

Now I don't agree with what's in it, but I rather have some control versus no control.

Thank you, Mr.

Hurrell.

Uh Councilmember Evan Siegel, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Madam President.

I um following along those lines and the lines of um the council member who is next to me, I think and I caught up on budget and finance people trip your pipes, otherwise you might miss work.

Um yeah.

Um I just I think my understanding is that the Nashville Downtown Partnership can get the funds.

They can choose to spend the funds.

What we can't do is we can't take the funds.

So any funds in here that were for things that Metro was going to do, we will not be able to do.

But I was hoping that either Metro Legal or our special counsel can confirm that that is a correct understanding.

Okay.

Um special counsel, uh, can you speak to that please?

Yes, that's my understanding of the grant program from the state is that it was a grant offered to either the uh local government, the C bid, or the organization uh managing the C bid.

All right, thank you.

Special counsel.

I think with that, I think I agree with my colleague who has worries about it being deferred.

I think we've made it infinitely better, but I still think there's money that we would like to control how it's spent in here, and I would hate to think that all 15 million is gonna go for things that we don't want to support, even if it is not to us.

Um, but um I'm gonna listen to the rest of the debate before I decide.

Okay.

Um the debate on uh the deferral uh with a public hearing uh continues.

Next in the queue uh is Councilmember Benedict, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

Um I think my question is for Director Darby.

If we don't if we vote this down or if we vote to defer this, um, and we lose control and the money could be spent.

Um in the court of public opinion, clearly the public uh wants, you know, they're here tonight.

They're talking to us, they're emailing us, they're telling us, um, and they'd like us to take action that protects them.

Um certainly in public comment, we heard a lot of uh very good information.

So my question is if the timeline runs out for this, um would a new grant application need to be made, or um, would this if again hypothetically if we vote this down, would a new grant application be able to be made and would it be by the city, would it be by the NDP?

Would it be by the NDP?

Can you walk me through that?

Special counsel Darby recognized.

The grant application period was in October, October 2nd, I think the 24th.

So that period has run, the grant application was made, the award has been made to uh the applicant.

Okay, thank you.

So um, thank you, Chair.

So um, you know, I think this needs to be deferred.

I'm supportive of a deferral, and I think I want to go back to the court of public opinion.

You know, if we talk about building trust with the public and listening to the public and the their lack of trust in government and in organizations that work with the government today, uh, we see that at all all levels.

And at the local level, people have the loudest voice.

They have the you know, most connection, right?

We're I'm far more accessible to my constituents than our senator and our governor and our president, right?

So um what I'm hearing from people is that you know they want this to be worked on more.

I think we could come back with a better solution on January 20th.

Um we've got a lot of time to work on that between now and then, and I would just um again I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of the wrath that we're seeing.

And so I think the NDP has the opportunity to go along with what this body wants, which is to find a way to make this work um for the public as well as for the work that they want done with these with these funds.

I want them to get these funds.

I just want to make sure that we're doing it with the right, you know, um doing it for the right purpose.

So I think this gives us the time to get that right.

And I would just again reiterate asking the NDP, don't spend the money yet.

Um, you know, we need you not to.

Let's keep the trust with the public and allow us to work with you over the next 30 days to find a solution that works for you and that also works for the public.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh next in the queue, uh, public health and safety chair Huffman, your recognized sir.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh I've been going back and forth in this in my head on a deferral.

Uh understand that this has been a very confusing process.

It was a confusing committee meeting.

There's been a lot of amendments added for sure.

You get no argument from me that it has been a lot of information.

Information overload, some would call it.

However, everybody in this room, when we took an oath, we took an oath to protect the city.

We pertook we took an oath to protect our constituents and the interests of the city of Nashville.

So I I've said this over and over for the last few weeks, but I'm gonna speak it into the record too.

We're one incident away from the economic engine of this state turning off.

One incident.

That's one car flying down Broadway and taking people out.

That's one bombing, which we've already had.

There is precedent for this city, and this city has a giant target on it.

My constituents elected me to ensure that I have oversight and that all of us have oversight.

And that's what this vote's about, y'all.

This is about oversight.

This is about whether we want to say in this, or if we just say, you know what, we're gonna let the downtown partnership do whatever they want with this money.

I'm gonna choose oversight.

I'm gonna choose transparency, and I'm gonna choose public safety 100% of the time.

It's what we're elected to do, it is the responsible thing to do.

I I don't think this is a hard one, y'all.

I I I really don't.

I understand if you have concerns about surveillance.

My colleague, uh Councilmember Harrell said it uh very eloquently, you know, he's he's an individual that's not necessarily for surveillance.

You don't have to be surveillance to be for transparency in this instance.

I encourage my my colleagues to uh just really think about this because it's a gamble that we're taking.

And the gamble that we're taking on top of all the public safety things that I've already covered is real simple.

We don't even know if this is gonna be an option in January.

Because this isn't just the partnership, there's a lot of entities involved, and if we turn this down, then we're cutting our own noses off of our faces.

And if something bad happens, God forbid the downtown partnership uh starts to uh implement facial surveillance, God knows how mad that would make the people in the back of this room.

I'm voting for transparency.

I encourage all of y'all to.

Thank you.

All right.

Um debate continues on the motion uh to defer to the meeting of January 20th with the public hearing.

Next in the queue is Councilmember Eastlick.

You're recognized, sir.

Previous question.

Okay.

Um Councilminister Eastlick has called the previous question.

Um I have heard a second.

This is a non-debatable motion that requires two-thirds of those uh voting uh in an abundance of caution.

Uh Mr.

Clerk, uh, would you please uh load the vote?

If you want to end debate and move to the vote uh for the deferral, um uh you would vote in favor of the previous question.

If you want to continue debate on the deferral with a public hearing motion, you would vote against the previous question.

Uh please vote promptly, Mr.

Clerk, if you would please open the vote.

You vote in favor of the previous question, you end debate on the deferral motion.

If you want debate to continue, you vote no all votes are in.

Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

Okay.

The uh motion uh for the previous question prevails with 28 votes in favor and eight against.

So now we will move to the vote.

Um we will do this uh uh by machine as well.

Um, Mr.

Clerk, uh the vote that is before us is a motion to defer to the meeting of January 20th with a public hearing at that same meeting.

Uh yes, uh the threshold for this vote is 27.

Two-thirds, two-thirds of those voting.

Which is less than 27 this evening, as we have uh some absences.

Um yes, uh Ms.

Porterfield, a point of order.

Thank you, point of order.

Um, does this require 27 votes because of the request for a public hearing?

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

Uh two-thirds, again, two-thirds.

Okay.

How many people do we have?

Uh um uh Madam Clerk.

There are 36 people in the room.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

It is two-thirds.

I apologize, I misspoke.

Two-thirds of a 40 member body is 27, but it is a two-thirds of those voting present and voting.

Correct.

Ms.

Hancock, please stop speaking.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um all votes are in.

Uh Mr.

Clerk, uh, please show the vote.

The motion fails uh with 20 votes in favor, 15 against, and one abstention.

And so what that means is we go back to the underlying motion, which was um a motion to approve as amended.

I will not restate all those amendments, but we have um so we continue with discussion on the motion to approve uh as amended.

Uh first in the queue on that, um, Ms.

Vogue, do you seek to be recognized?

Okay, go ahead, Ms.

Bo.

You're recognized.

Yes, thank you, Chair.

I just wanted um uh Vice Mayor, sorry, um, clarity because uh wasn't the MOU part of the grant, and so I wanted to understand that I know it's probably because we already voted, but I still wanted that to be clear um for the public uh we regarding the MOU.

So if it's part of the grant, how can they accept the funds if there has to be an agreement?

Can either the mayor's office a representative speak to that or uh special counsel derby.

Whom would you like to speak to that?

Sure, the mayor's office.

Okay.

Uh um Mr.

Rosenberg, um did you hear the question of Ms.

Bo?

Okay, uh, you are recognized uh thank you, Madam President.

Council member the MOU is not part of the grant application.

The grant application requires some coordination, but it doesn't require an MOU or anything like that.

Okay.

Is that clear?

That is clear, yeah.

Thank you so much.

Um, I like to motion for a deferral um of the resolution.

Well one meeting deferral.

Okay.

Um is there a second?

Okay.

Um Ms.

Darby, could you opine?

Is this I would believe a substantively different deferral motion because it does not include uh the public hearing?

Okay.

Um and so uh there is a motion properly seconded for a simple one meeting deferral.

Okay.

So we are on uh to discussion on the one meeting deferral motion.

Ms.

Swar, do you seek to be recognized on a one meeting deferral motion?

Okay.

Uh Mr.

Eastlick, do you seek to be recognized?

Go ahead, sir.

Previous question.

Okay.

Um is there a second?

Um for the previous question.

Um debatable again requires two-thirds of those voting.

Pardon?

Okay.

Uh these does not require two thirds, right?

Because it's just a simple defer.

The previous question motion, um, which Mr.

Eastlick has made and was properly seconded, does in fact require two-thirds of those voting as well.

Um, that was true too of uh the other vote that was just taken relative to the public hearing application.

Okay, so there's there is a similarity here.

Um so um uh Mr.

Eastlick has called uh the previous question, it has been properly seconded, and that is to end debate on the motion for a one meeting deferral.

Um if you want to end the debate on uh the deferral motion, um subsequent to which we will just be back on the main bill.

Okay.

Um uh then you would vote in favor of the previous question.

Um if you want to continue to debate a deferral, uh you would uh vote no for the previous question.

Okay.

Just to be in keeping with how I did it the first time, though I think this one might be a little bit closer and easier by voice.

I will ask Mr.

Clerk to please load the vote um on the motion for previous question.

Right all votes in, Mr.

Clerk.

Uh please show the vote.

Okay, the uh motion uh for the previous question uh to end debate on the one meeting deferral motion fails with 23 votes in favor and 13 against.

So at this juncture, uh we continue uh on discussion for the one meeting deferral motion.

I see no one else in the queue, however, does anyone seek to be recognized on uh the motion to defer uh one meeting?

Ms.

Porterfield, Ms.

Porterfield, do you seek to be recognized on the one meeting deferral motion?

That was a motion for the previous question on the deferral motion.

Okay, so this is on the deferral motion.

Yes.

So um okay.

So is anyone else seeking to be recognized on the one meeting deferral motion?

Okay, Miss Porterfield, you're recognized.

Sorry, yeah, this is a stressful night.

Um if this um if this deferral passes, do we know um can we hear from the administration on whether or not they plan to uh move forward with this in January?

Um, Mr.

Rosenberg for the administration, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Madam President.

Council member, I don't know where we go from here.

Um this is an MOU that if passed says that the only money from the grant that can be spent is on lighting restrooms and outreach and anything else would have to be approved by council.

And if that's something the council doesn't want to pass, then that's I mean, certainly the council's prerogative.

So we would have to have conversations and see if you know if you'd rather roll without the MOU.

Um, that's you know, I I don't know.

All right, Ms.

Porterfield.

Thank you.

I think that's just important information for us to um, I think that is important information for us to have.

Um this is um, this is extremely this is on the deferral.

This is extremely um, this is extremely hard.

Like once public trust is broken, it is so hard to get that trust back, and and the public has lost trust in um various uh safety issues and safety initiatives.

And um we heard when there was a fight against fuses.

We heard from so many people that had these public safety concerns, and I think that it would be prudent for us to do things to work to rebuild the trust instead of um and I I and people may not agree with me, but I do wholeheartedly believe that the intention was for this to be a trust-building thing, but that is not the way that it is being perceived and being received by the people, and it that makes this um incredibly incredibly hard.

And I do fear I don't know how I'm gonna vote on this deferral because I do fear if the deferral goes forward, I there's no guarantee that MPD is going whether or not they're gonna spend the funds.

There's no guarantee whether or not this MIU is gonna come back before.

So I'm gonna listen to the next few speakers while I try to think through this, but I don't know what I'm gonna do.

All right.

Um so we are on a one-meeting deferral motion.

Uh Miss Swara, do you seek to be recognized on the deferral?

Go ahead.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um I'm gonna speak again in support of the deferral.

I'm gonna ask all of you to support the deferral.

I live in a world where people use fear to intimidate people.

Um, I think the idea of if we don't vote for this, it may not happen.

We're gonna change our mind.

I don't think is the right tactic.

And let me tell you, if NDP or DMC decide to not wait till January 20th and go ahead and buy something they're not supposed to buy, then they just prove the point they're not supposed to be trusted.

Period.

And so if and if if if I'm with NDP DMC, and I'm trying to tell people trust us, we had issue with homelessness.

There's been a lot of stuff with NDP DMC that the people are not happy with, and to now go say to heck with it, we just do whatever we want.

I don't think that would be the right move.

And I don't think they would do that.

I don't think they would do that.

This grant is president on a joint working together.

Not this last budget, but I remember two weeks ago in budget when we were discussing this bill.

And I remember then we haven't even got some more confusing stuff.

But one of the questions that was asked was can they go and buy this surveillance stuff without MMPD?

Ms.

Darby, and I want to quote you, but if you don't remember, I won't put you on, says that they cannot.

A lot of people say, what are they gonna do with it if they buy it?

I don't think they will.

I uh and if you didn't say that, that's fine.

Uh uh, my apologies.

Uh but that was my understanding.

So what I'm trying to say is that to anyone that has any leg with NDP and DMC for an organization that is walking downtown, and when we spend a whole lot of time discussing about the C beat for downtown, when people were pushing back and we were able to pass it because we have faith in an organization to do what the people want.

I think them going out and and and and and just doing what they want would not be the right move.

I'm also going to challenge the administration as a partner in this uh uh MOU to talk with them and to to encourage them that this is this is what the people are asking.

It's not gonna change anything.

It's not gonna make any difference, it's just gonna make people feel like when we're talking about safety, we're not just listening to the downtown or few people on the boat, we're listening to the community.

That's what it's gonna do.

So I'm gonna encourage all of you.

Please don't let fear of what could happen, which I don't think would happen, uh uh uh uh uh stop you from listening to the people.

And so into the NDP people, I'm gonna say it again.

This is about building trust.

You've all you all I've spoken to this organization many times.

I know the conversation that we had over the CBD.

And if you want us to continue to walk together, then it means we walk together.

We're saying give us more time.

And I hope that you will.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, Mr.

Easlick, you are next in the queue on the one meeting deferral motion.

Go ahead, sir.

No.

I find it very rich that I keep hearing we can't break the public trust through this resolution or this this piece of legislation.

We've been working over the past month with four up zone bills that had way more people opposed to it than this.

But we do not seem to give their voices very much merit or very much weight.

But we have a few people come out over some surveillance stuff that's actually protection for the engine of our city, and all of a sudden we're listening.

And now we don't want to break the public trust.

I think this is a very simple, simple vote.

It's one that's gonna replace a lot of existing security measures with better cameras.

They come along all the time.

If you've got an old phone, you get a new phone, it's way better.

So if we're gonna worry about the public trust, we should make it equal across a lot of different pieces of legislation, not just ones that seem to fit fit the surveillance uh disliking people.

So with that, I will be voting that we vote on this tonight, and that we do get this MOU.

That way we do have some guardrails and some ability to oversee this.

But if we don't want to and they just do what they want, I'm good with that too.

All right.

Uh please don't interject or speak over when council members are speaking so that the public can hear the order of the debate, please.

Um uh, Mr.

Nash, uh, you're recognized on the deferral motion, sir.

Uh everyone, please do remember to address the chair.

I would like to speak against the deferral.

Yes, sir.

Uh this reminds me an awful lot of the zoning bill.

And you'll remember at that time, I said I didn't get emails from my district.

I got a bunch of them from a well-organized group out in West Nashville.

And so we agreed, Councilmember Porterfield and I got to share a vote.

It's the same thing tonight.

We've got a very well-organized group here, but they don't represent the people that I speak to at my district.

They will have lots of opportunity if we ever get back the bill, the grant, if we ever get it before us, they'll have lots of opportunity to speak against it again.

We don't need it for it now.

We need to move on.

Who wants to go through this again when we're gonna have to go through it numerous times when these items come before us?

All right, debate continues on the one meeting deferral motion, Ms.

Vowe.

Do you see point of order?

Uh, Miss Porterfield?

Thank you.

Do I get to speak since I was referenced by name?

No, it is only if you are impugned.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, Ms.

Vowe, um, you're recognized on the one meeting deferral motion.

Okay, thank you so much, Vice Mayor.

Um, you know, for me, I am of course asking for um the body to vote in support of the one meeting deferral.

Um, just regularly speaking to department heads, they were sharing how it was already difficult for Nashvilleans to spend time and come downtown, whether it's the cost of parking, whether it's the things that are coming um, you know, downtown.

And so for me, when I was looking at this MOU and this grant, it's like, is this gonna help Nashvilleans you know come downtown or not?

And you know, for me, uh, with surveillance, I I'm against surveillance, and I think I've been very clear on that.

But it's like, how are these things going to help individuals and Nashville and are they gonna come downtown more?

And when it's not when we can choose other items, we can choose other things.

I and I would say, you know, that I'm a bit concerned why um, you know, one meeting deferral is so problematic because I would say if we are all trying to work together, why would um the NDP just immediately spend funds between now or at the end of the year and three weeks into the new year?

So I mean, I know we don't have clarity and we can't hear from them directly, but uh I would ask that question, and I think that when we are here and elected to serve the people, I don't think that, you know, when there is a push only from one entity, and if it seems an NFD uh and NDP, excuse me, you know, downtown partnerships.

Yes, national downtown partnerships.

Oh, and an acronym clarification.

Thank you.

Um, you know, is willing to work, and if they are, then why can't we spend that time to do that?

I um, you know, for me all the time we're hearing different information.

We've already heard like a million, several amendments tonight.

I know several of the committees have been very long, and I still think that it's still unclear.

And I think that building trust is building and making sure that there is clarity.

And I do think that having a deferral will give us that time, and I think we should all be working towards a real solution and not, oh, because of um, you know, if we don't have this, if we don't pass this, um, they're just gonna use the funds.

And I think that if they are about um utilizing improving downtown, then what is the issue with getting more feedback for more voices?

So thank you.

All right.

Uh Councilmember Coopin on the one meeting deferral.

Thank you, Madam President.

I still remain supportive of the one meeting deferral.

Um, I've done a lot of work with the Nashville Downtown Partnership.

Um, and happy to do a uh downtown acronym class after this.

Um, but you know, they continue to say that they're partners, and they continue to say that they're good partners.

And so to me, if a one-meeting deferral to clean up um problematic and concerning legalies, hear more from the public, figure out where some of the money um is allocated and candidly, the downtown partnership side um really hasn't been the concern.

The bathrooms, the lighting, um homeless outreach, the the questions and concerns really have been on the the metro spend, and so to have some more time for Metro to figure out where that money goes.

Um, I would hope that the downtown partnership would be good partners and would remain working with us, you know.

I mean, over the Christmas break, the quiets down, and then we're back in early January.

My hope would be that they would be partners, they would work with us if they choose to not do that.

Um, I'd be personally disappointed.

I think that we want to keep this partnership going.

I don't think anybody here is saying that we don't want downtown safety.

I don't think anybody here is saying that we don't want money spent.

We may disagree on which place to put it or surveillance or not surveillance or what what gets spent on what, but my hope is that they would still be part of the conversation um in a month from now.

Um, but again, I I've got concerns with the legalese and the documents.

I've got concerns with late file amendments flying around.

It's 15 million dollars.

We shouldn't be allocating it lightly.

Um, and so if if taking a month is problematic, um, then that's you know, then I would hope it's not.

Um, you know, and that's and as I'll be supporting the supporting the deferral motion, I think that a little bit more time um again shouldn't shouldn't harm should only help, and we've been told through multiple committees um that a deferral would not be problematic other than the downtown partnership would then get the money.

Um so my hope is that and they will if this does defer that the park partnership will still work with us to partner on where the money goes.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Gamble on the one meeting deferral, you're recognized, ma'am.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I I have a clarifying question, and I'm not sure if it's for Director Darby or the administration, but I believe Director Darby, when she read the um charter uh for uh or the code for the uh surveillance equipment that she said that any spend that Metro would do for the any camera equipment would have to come to the council.

Is that correct?

We can clarify that special counsel, you're recognized.

Yes, if Metro is uh going to be accepting or spending funds to get the surveillance technology, then that would require a public hearing.

Any uh, you know, grants or donations uh given to Metro require council approval, but those don't necessarily require public hearing.

So is it correct to say that aside from this MOU, which it seems that the MOU is an attempt to uh provide guide uh uh guardrails to address concerns of the public besides this MOU, is it correct to say that before any spend of this 15 million dollars goes to MMPD, the council would have to have an opportunity with the public to review that uh monetary request and have a public hearing before it could be spent.

Um special counsel, I think um I'll I'll just let you respond again.

Yeah, I think they're sort of separate.

I mean it's gonna have to come to the council, but it's only if surveillance it has the hearing, right?

So uh are we about but I thought you director Darber already confirmed that this camera equipment would be considered surveillance.

Any surveillance technology that Metro acquires would have to come to the council for approval with a public hearing.

Is it correct to say that be prior to Metro spending any of this 15 million dollars, it would have to come to council because for it for this surveillance equipment that we have declared to be surveillance equipment, then the bill would have to come to the council to approve that spend and it would also require a public hearing.

It would have to come to council because for it for this surveillance equipment that we have declared to be surveillance equipment, then the bill would have to come to the council to approve that spend and it would also require a public hearing.

Special counsel.

Well, that's what the MOU says.

If the downtown partnership, the the downtown partnership would be receiving the funding, if they spend it on equipment, that initial spend would not need the approval.

But if Metro is the recipient of whatever is purchased, or if Metro is the recipient of those funds for the purpose of acquiring surveillance technology, then it would require a public hearing.

If Metro is just the recipient of funds, it will require council approval.

So either way it would come to the council.

Well, I guess that's my point because I I don't know that that's been made clear when we're talking about a deferral for for the MOU in order to clarify what monies are going to be spent, what what monies Metro are going to spend within this partnership.

So I just I and I guess I want to make that clear, and if that is the correct clarification, I want to make that clear because it the the it sounds like to me what I'm hearing is that there's an assumption that with this deferral of this MOU that that's gonna allow time to figure out what monies MMPD is gonna receive and how that money is gonna be spent when we're gonna have opportunity to do that when that decision is made.

This MOU just basically um confirms the partnerships and provides those guardrails as to how this surveillance material will be used.

And I just want to clarify that.

So thank you for that.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Porterfield on the one meeting deferral.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, my wonderful colleague, Councilmember Nash, is gonna um mess up my street cred talking about we voting together.

That was on the last, that was on the housing legislation, Councilmember Nash.

Um but I did want to um I did want to comment on on something that was just stated with regards to um the a comment was made about about breaking public trust, and um you know, you can't compare trying to build affordable housing in the midst of a housing crisis with working people coming out with real concerns about surveillance, and people are afraid and people are concerned, and for people who've been on this council for a while, we've seen like unintended consequences when things happen.

We saw when um I believe it was the LPRs that when the vote happened and it was supposed to be in different quadrants, and we did all this stuff to try to make sure it was equitable, only to find out that those LPRs were clustered in um low-income areas in minority communities, even though they were equitable amongst the clusters.

So sometimes we think that we have like worked out something to make something a little bit safer, and there could still be unintended consequences.

So I would hope that there is not any type of inference that any group of people are more important than any other group of people when our constituents are coming out here saying that they have concerns about this legislation.

I would hope that that was not the intent of my colleague.

So I just wanted to stand up to thank the people that came out here tonight.

We don't have to agree on everything that our constituents say.

Sometimes we gonna agree with them, sometimes we not, but they all have the right to come up here and tell us how they feel about legislation.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, Miss Welsh on the one meeting deferral.

Yep, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, as you know, I am in support of a deferral because I always think it is better on something like this when um we are giving up um a modicum of control on things that we should bring in more of the public and have um uh you know as as much public input as we can on these things because these affect the everyday lives of people.

Um I I want to remind our colleagues that we have a lot of power in this, and I think in this discussion, sometimes we feel like we don't have power.

And when it comes when so many things come down to this, if we don't do this, somehow we are just gonna come to regret it, and the the tidal wave's gonna come in and take it away, and we're just going to be, you know, um overwhelmed and we're just going to regret it.

But the fact is we as a council have power.

Uh the downtown partnership doesn't act in a vacuum.

None of these things act in a vacuum.

They depend on Metro for a lot of things, and they need to know that uh we have control over those things.

So it's really a partnership, and it should be a partnership, and they need to listen to the people when they say in this partnership, we want to make sure our voices are heard and we're getting the best deal because there are other options that we have that uh they might come to regret themselves.

So I support this deferral motion um and ask my colleagues to support it because I think it's good for us, but uh we will deal with wherever the chips fall.

Thank you.

All right.

Um on the one meeting deferral motion, Miss Benedict, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

The hat's over my microphone because I don't plan to speak on much tonight, so I keep putting it back, but I keep having to speak.

So um I want to look at some facts, and that's that the DMC needs us.

We oversee their budget.

Um, and also though, a fact is that we need them to provide services downtown.

Another thing is that we don't need this to be adversarial.

Um we can support them, and we can also ask for a deferral, and they can support us and honor the requests that we're asking tonight, not in a way where we're demanding it, but rather where we're saying, hey, this is a resolution, this is one reading.

We need a little more time.

Yes, the little more time is at a time where we have holidays and where we only have one meeting in January, so it's a month.

But I think that we can this to the Nashville Downtown Partnership would be let's approach this as partners, which we are.

Help us out so that we can make sure we get this right for you.

Um I believe that in all relationships we have we must have trust, and I view trust as a bank account.

Um, when I first know you, do I trust you?

Do you trust me?

Well, not necessarily so.

So we begin to make deposits of trust, right?

Every time I do something and take an action and it builds trust with you, I'm putting trust in that bank account.

The goal is to never overdraw, right?

Sometimes we have to do something that's not what we intended, and we have to make a withdrawal out of that bank account, that trust account.

The important part is not to overdraft on that trust.

Neither of us are doing that here tonight.

What we are trying to do is work towards a solution.

Um, none of us like to have our backs against the wall.

We've had administrations where that happens on this body.

We had one, we've had but things come to us in the past where you have to vote on it right now, or the contract pricing is going up.

Um, this is a a resolution.

We have one shot at it unless we have a deferral.

And so I believe that um cooler heads will ensure that we spend this money that that NDP spends this money as we're asking them to do, that they can pause on it until we reconvene on January 20th.

Um again, not in an adversarial way, not as us saying you gotta do this, as us saying we need more than just two weeks or one reading on this.

We need to get together, meeting of the minds.

We've got 30 days to do it, and we're gonna make this great if you give us that amount of time.

So I'm in favor of the deferral.

Thank you.

Uh next is public health and safety chair Huffman, your reconnaissance.

Thank you, uh Vice Mayor.

Uh a couple of clarifications that uh I want to make that I've I've heard as we continue debate.

Uh, number one, Voss Mayor, we've we as a city are not allocating any money.

Zero dollars, we're allocating.

That is a very important point to make.

Also, I I want to point out the fact that in the state of Tennessee, we've had cities that are very comparable to us politically that have that have already accepted this.

And uh, and that's just something to point out because it's it's cities that have realized that public safety trumps politics.

And I just I can't reiterate that enough, y'all.

We are please don't speak over council members speaking, please.

Their constituents need to hear their words, please.

And my constituents sent me here to vote for public safety every single time.

And I'm gonna stand up and vote for transparency every single time.

If you want to cede your oversight on this, vote for this deferral.

If not, if you actually want to do something and go back to your constituents and say, hey, we held the state to a standard, then vote no on this deferral and let's get an up or down vote.

Let's just do this.

Thank you.

No, please, please do not yell out from the gallery.

Okay.

I'm sorry, Miss Poveda.

Go ahead, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um I'm gonna be supporting the one meeting deferral.

I was hoping that we would have a commitment from the downtown partnership that they would not spend uh this money and that they would be bringing back the MOU in January, but now I'm hearing reports that they won't be bringing back the MOU and that they're going to do whatever they want.

And I and I think that's that's not a good partner.

And I I hope that these reports that I'm hearing are wrong, right?

Um, because that upsets me.

And um that uh makes me want to make sure that they never receive a single dollar from this city again.

And I I think this was a lesson in itself, right?

To everyone involved, that it was not a good idea to try and go around the council, right?

When you did that, this is what happened, right?

Um people were upset, not just the council members, but um many constituents, and um people um felt unheard, not just the council members, but the city of Nashville, because there were several um aspects of safety that were never addressed.

So my hope is that the downtown partnership becomes a good partner, that if this MOU is deferred and the deferral goes through that the MOU comes back in January, that they come to the table, and um we are able to have good dialogue and good input, because if that does not occur, then the remainder of my term will be to make sure that we have that money used in other ways.

Um, and that the downtown partnership um is someone that we do not do business with.

Um so I will be supporting the deferral tonight.

All right.

Um Chair Huffman and Ms.

Porterfield both.

I will remind you both that you have already spoken on the deferral.

Um, and I would ask us.

Okay.

All right, Mr.

Okay, you don't need to call the question because there's nobody else in the queue.

Well, just us, yes, but just for for clarification.

You're out.

Okay, we're good.

Is everyone ready to move to the vote on the one meeting deferral motion?

Okay.

Um, Mr.

Clerk, if you would please uh load the vote.

Colleagues are voting on a simple one meeting deferral motion, um, such that this matter would be uh deferred to the meeting of January 20th, which is the first and only meeting in January.

All votes are in.

Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

The deferral motion prevails with 19 votes in favor, 17 against.

This resolution will be on the agenda uh of January 20th.

All right.

Um we move into our matters on public hearing.

Uh we thank the public for their patience.

First among those is agenda item in section J 1, uh resolution 2025-1686, sponsor cap.

This is resolution exempting lost and found, located at 3104 Gallatin Pike from the minimum distance requirements for obtaining a beer permit pursuant to the section of the Metropolitan Code.

Um uh yes, and let me just share generally um Mr.

Cap, if I may, regarding our our public hearing items uh for both uh Section J and subsequent uh K.

Um Spanish interpretation services are provided for all Metro Council public hearings.

Council office team member Karina Valdez is here as the interpreter.

Um uh Ms.

Valdez, will you please share how you can help?

Loserwisos in interpretación in Español saran disponibles in audiencia publica.

Gracias.

Okay.

Gracias.

We appreciate you.

For those wishing to speak this evening as part of a public hearing, uh, please do state your name, but it is not required for you to provide your exact address if you do not wish to do so.

You may want to tell us in what neighborhood or area you live, your connection to the agenda item or project, or who your council member is.

All right.

With that stated, now we'll go back.

Um and having already read the caption, um, I will recognize the sponsor, council member Capp.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I've got a late filed amendment on this one, but I think I need committee reports first.

Um let's uh get we can get committee reports, and then what I would suggest is that we move to the public hearing first, subsequent to the closure of the public hearing.

We can um move that substitute.

Um, I move to open the public hearing.

Okay.

Um chair, we'll do the we can do it after.

Okay.

Um I declare the public hearing open.

Um uh would all members of the public hear in support of council member caps uh resolution 1686 regarding lost and found uh in support, please raise your hand.

Thank you, sir.

Um would all members of the public hear in opposition to this bill, please raise your hand.

Seeing no one here in opposition, does the gentleman in support seek to be recognized?

He does.

Okay, go ahead, sir.

Uh thank you, Madam President.

Ryan Mercurio, Belcher Side Sarrington Law Firm here before you uh again on uh another beer permit variance resolution request tonight on behalf of lost and found uh here in support.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, sir.

Um seeing no one else seeking to be recognized on this resolution.

I will declare the public hearing closed and it's back to you for your committee reports.

Ummittee reports, please.

Uh Chair of Government uh operations and regulations, Chair Hill, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor Vice Mayor.

We uh heard a substitute and voted five in favor, zero against uh zero not voting.

And then uh the resolution as a substituted five in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Okay.

Um all right, it's back to you, Mr.

Cap uh, for a motion on your bill.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

There is a uh late filed substitute due to an omitted address, and I'd ask uh my colleagues to permit a suspension of the rules.

If you would sir, if you would just move um your bill first to get it before us, and then we could move to that suspension of the rules.

Then I move the bill.

Okay, all right.

Um I've heard you you don't have to re-articulate it.

Um there is a uh a late filed substitute that I understand to be housekeeping.

Colleagues, it is a substitute because the caption has changed.

It merely adds an address.

Is that correct, Mr.

Cap?

Yes, Vice Mayor.

Okay.

Um is there any objection uh to the uh late filed uh uh substitute?

Um and the suspension of the rules to get it before us.

Seeing none, the rules are suspended, and you may now offer your substitute.

I move the substitute, vice mayor.

Okay, um uh we've heard a previous uh discussion of it.

You've heard uh the committee reports.

Is there any further discussion on the motion to substitute?

Seeing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any voting no or abstaining?

Um right, and if you would renew your motion uh to approve is substituted.

Yes, vice mayor.

Move to or to approve as substituted.

Okay, is there any discussion on that?

Seeing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any voting no or abstaining?

All right, you have adopted this resolution as substituted.

All right.

Um next on public hearing section K, a bill on public hearing.

This is uh ordinance uh BL 2025-1113.

Sponsors Coupin, Cash, Alan, Huffman Hill, and Styles.

This is an ordinance amending title two of the Metro Code of Laws authorizing the creation of a mid-town CBID, Central Business Improvement District, and appointing a corporation to act as an advisory board to the district with the necessary powers and authority to carry out the purposes and intent of the district.

Council member Koppen, uh you are recognized, sir.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'd like to open the public public hearing, please.

Okay.

Um I declare the public hearing open um on council member coupen's ordinance uh one one three.

Um this item is on its uh third reading um as required by uh state law.

We have a public hearing at this time.

Uh would all members of the public hear in support of uh this bill, please raise your hand.

Okay.

Would all members of the public here in opposition to this bill please raise your hands?

All right.

Um those persons um uh uh in opposition um will speak after those uh speaking in support.

Uh so if those persons in support uh would please come forward uh to speak first.

Um you're welcome to remain uh in seats or line up as you see fit.

Um persons in support will be speaking first.

Go ahead.

Yes, ma'am, thank you.

Long long night for you all.

But it's great preparation for my upcoming faith practice of sitting in the church pew for a few hours.

So I gotta go on.

My name is Mike Mike Combs.

I'm a resident of 1803 Broadway, otherwise known as a Bristol on Broadway.

I'm the vice president of the HOA and have been volunteering uh with uh uh councilman Koopin's effort on this proposal, and we're very much in support of it.

The one thing is I pointed it out before, this is a high interest from residents in the area.

It is something that just we want the work in our neighborhood.

And all I want to say, and I'm gonna end it with this, is that just please allow our neighborhood to help you help Nashville in the effort to improve our neighborhood.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh additional uh comments and support.

Go ahead.

Um, hi, my name's Emily Schneller, and I live in the rhythm on Music Row, and we are asking for the council's support.

I'm representing the rhythm of H the Rhythms HOA board and our 105 homeowners and residents.

Uh many of our owners work in health care, music, and our students, and we started these meetings to clean up DeMumbrian Hill and Division in Midtown over 18 months ago.

Our goal is to help provide a safer place to live and work due to some issues that we've had in the area, even as of last week.

Um our hope is to have a cohesive neighborhood voice to partner with Metro on beautification and safety in our high growth, high traffic area that we live and work in every day.

We love our neighborhood, we love the growth, but we have concerns that it needs to be well planned and positive for all those living, working, and visiting the area.

We support the bid as it allows the neighborhood involvement and voices that partner with the city for the safety and beautification of the area.

We ask for the Metro Council's support of this effort, and thank you guys very much.

Thank you.

Continuing in support.

Go ahead, you're recognized.

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name is Lisa Haller.

I live in District 17 and within the boundary of the proposed MBID.

Thank you all for advancing BL 2025-1113 to establish a midtown business improvement district to third reading tonight.

Also, I'd like to thank the vice mayor, the entire council and administration for your service to Nashville.

We appreciate you all very much.

And I'd also like to thank the lead sponsor, Councilmember Coupen and fellow sponsors, Councilmember Cash, Alan Stiles, Huffman, and Hill, and congratulations to Councilmember Hill on your engagement.

Um for the better part of 18 months.

That's over 6656 days.

The MBID steering committee comprised of community stakeholders, has been on a thoughtful and disciplined journey to study the benefits of a bid for midtown.

Throughout this process, the committee formulated a comprehensive and sustainable blueprint to improve the mixed-use entertainment corridor along DeMarbill Division, Upper Broadway, and 21st Avenue South, while still aligning with and supporting the goals of the city.

This neighborhood-driven model is based on highly successful bids in urban and cultural communities across the country and led by a group of dedicated stakeholders in our community.

Tonight we ask you to support the NBID to vote yes and allow this great initiative to be established in our beloved midtown.

Thank you very much for your consideration and to the service and your service to the people of Nashville.

Happy holidays to you and to your families.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is anyone else seeking to be recognized in support of this legislation?

Seeing none, we will move to opposition.

Um those wishing to speak in opposition should come forward at this time.

Go ahead, sir.

You recognize.

Yes, this is Steve Ryder.

I just wanted to say with uh the Central Business Improvement District, they don't call it the partnership, which I think is really interesting.

But I think what I'd like to, I don't know if Koopin has introduced this, but uh their proposed budget that's taxpayer money.

That should go before you to make sure that the money's being spent properly.

What happened with the partnership when they spent that money to go and get solar to go and shoe people, not just shoe people, basically arrest people on Lower Broadway was inexcusable.

We have to get beyond this fear mongering.

There's way too much of this in the city.

You want to know something?

If you want to go out there and if you meet some poor people, if you go out and volunteer at Rumuth Yen or at the mission, don't be scared of people.

And that's that's where we have to get in this society.

We have to do better.

Every time I hear that we need to have more police, we have to have more surveillance, we have to have more everything.

You know, the person that did the Christmas bombing downtown, surveillance cameras won't have done anything on that.

If somebody's gonna go out there with a gun and shoot a bunch of people out in the public, they're probably gonna commit suicide themselves.

But we have to get over this fear mongering.

Now, if we can go out there and if this is taxpayer money, and if they're gonna spend it wisely, and in a public hearing, by the way, so that they can go out there, the people that are having their taxpayer money in that district can go out there and make sure the money's allocated to what they feel is in their best interest of their community rather than maybe just having a small group of people, and we've never done that before.

The downtown partnership is supposed to come down here and have their budget approved on a regular basis.

It has never been done.

And you talk about transparency, you talk about a partnership.

Where is that?

If you would have gone out there and said found out that they were gonna hire solarium to go out there and hire the Tennessee Mr.

Rider, be sure to have a Merry Christmas.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, Mr.

Hall, please be sure to keep it on the midtown business improvement district.

Go ahead, sir.

Yeah, um, for me, it's like we hear a lot about how the community in the neighborhood wants it.

And yet they can create a business improvement district by voting.

The property owners can create the district on their own, and they don't have to come through council.

And so when I hear that everybody in the neighborhood is in support, I question that.

Because if that was the case, why don't they just vote it?

Why come to council and go through this process that, in my opinion, is undemocratic when every property owner in their area could create it on the themselves.

And I also think it's odd that y'all have the ability to create it, but not get rid of it.

Um but that they could get, you know, 60% or whatever of the property owners in that area to get rid of it.

So it seems like we create these and they exist in perpetuity.

And um, you know, it's 1.5 million now, but we still don't they don't have bylaws.

Who's gonna elect these people who are gonna be in charge of the who's gonna be in charge of these funds?

That seems to be a black box to me.

I am disappointed when we when we do that with our tax dollars.

Um I think, you know, as we heard previously, you know, bids um could or bid management corporations could, you know, work with all the business owners in the area and and do fuses on their own.

Um, I think what'd you say?

Oh, okay.

Sorry.

Um, I just I and this is on it because as you know, we we discussed property owners can do whatever they want with their cameras, and if there's an organization that is working together with all these business owners and wants to do fusis if wants to do surveillance at a business improvement district level, they can.

And I um support and uh post this bill.

Thank you.

All right, next again on the uh legislation specifically about the midtown business improvement district, please, sir.

Go ahead.

I think a thing that we really don't like talking about openly is power, though it's obviously what's underlying everything that happens in here and in this building every day, whether it's in the mayor's office or in council chambers or in the courtroom downstairs.

And this council hasn't been holding up its power correctly for the past 21 years.

So it's definitely a big ask for you to say with confidence that you can have another business improvement district when you haven't been reviewing the budget and exerting the actual oversight on the existing ones.

And I think we've seen recently some of the worst-case scenarios of what that can look like.

And part of that is also power accumulates very concentratedly when you aren't stepping into the power that's given to you and you are going along with the way things have been for a long time.

Power accumulates in such a way that it is extremely hard to get conversations about what's gonna happen in these districts.

So I was just saying be very mindful of if you believe you actually are going to do your duty if you create this.

Are you actually going to have this back and forth deal make sense?

Because what this is, right, is it's called coercive revenue.

A lot of people say it's not taxes, and that's technically often correct.

It's coercive revenue where the power of the state says you have to pay this or else.

But the other side of that is the state has to act responsibly and to not just hand that money over year after year after year, no matter the performance of those entities.

So as you're creating a new one, remember we have big messes in a broken parking garage from the last ones.

So please be careful.

Thank you.

Somewhat, yes.

Okay.

I'm Michael Shears, uh, I own property at uh 1907 West End Avenue.

And uh I wanted to go on record that I was unaware of this uh improvement district being set up until last week when I received notification of this meeting.

And uh I can understand these wonderful people that live in the neighborhood wanting it to be improved, and I don't have any objection to it being improved myself, but uh I do object, I think, to my property being included because I've run on West End, they've just you have, or the city's just raised our taxes considerably this year, and now we just find out that this is another increase to fund this group.

So I'm just wanted to go on record that I don't think we're getting very good notification.

I tried to go on uh on the uh planning commission or the city's website and find a map to get a better understanding of the boundaries of this.

And you know, I'm fairly capable, but I couldn't find anything.

So uh I just want to say I don't think uh commercial property that fronts West End Avenue, we're being taxed pretty heavily already that we should be excluded from this and be able to contribute to our neighbors in another manner.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, sir.

Um, I know Mr.

Koopin has um heard your uh concerns and he can um address those um uh relative to the map and and and so forth.

So um you should find that attached to the the legislation itself um with the applicable parcels just for for the record.

Um it is within our legislatar system.

So um uh is there anyone else seeking to be recognized uh uh to speak on the matter of the midtown business improvement district.

Seeing none, um, with that I will declare the public hearing closed, and I will go back uh to the lead sponsor uh for a motion on this bill.

Oh and um sorry, bless you bless you.

Thank you, madam president.

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

Is there a second?

Okay, back to you.

Well, I appreciate again.

This has been um over 656 days of work, countless meetings, countless people involved in it.

A steering committee, I could not have done this without.

Um, and really to me, this is how legislation should be.

We started with an idea from community members and it built into a steering committee, bringing together a boundary and bringing together a budget.

And all that together then came to council.

And then at council, we made it better.

My colleagues had feedback.

They had suggestions.

We are continuing to work to make bids work the way we want to see them as extensions of Metro and not antagonistic to them.

And so the efforts, I think, have made this bill even better.

I've talked to a number of colleagues who are interested in bids in their own district.

The council members have oversight over the board.

So this really is something that creates a tight relationship between our Metro Council and this bid.

And at the end of the day, this is about neighbors.

Neighbors want to do this.

They want to put some money into their community.

They want to be part of the part of what shapes it.

And again, the people have asked me, well, who gets to decide?

The stakeholders do the people that are that are owners and renters that live in this bid that work in this bid get to decide where the money goes.

I think at some point that state law maybe we should look at because it does kind of unnecessarily tighten the legislative process, but I think we really did a good job as a body working quickly pulling this together.

And so I hope my colleagues will uh will support this legislation and uh yeah, move approval.

All right.

Um we are on to discussion on the motion to approve.

Um is there anyone who seeks to be recognized on discussion?

All right.

Um seeing none, um uh we will move to the vote.

Uh do we have anything in committee relative to no's and so forth?

Okay, well, we're gonna uh try this by uh voice.

It is on its third and final reading.

Um it does require 21 votes.

Um if it is unclear, uh I will move to a roll call.

Okay.

Um all in favor of this legislation on its third and final reading, please say aye.

Any voting no?

No.

Okay, so um it's on its third and final reading um with the no's.

We will have to do a roll call.

Yep.

Um Mr.

Clerk, would you please load the vote?

This bill requires 21 votes for passage.

All votes in.

Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

This legislation passes with 30 votes in favor, two against, and one abstention.

All right.

That concludes our matters on uh public hearing.

Um next we're gonna move into our uh consent agenda.

Um uh agenda uh section L, our 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 by me.

Members of the council may then remove any item from the consent agenda by request before the consent agenda vote is taken.

Okay.

The first item uh proposed for the consolidated consent agenda is agenda item eight.

Uh resolution 2025-1661.

the consent agenda vote is taken okay all right the first item uh proposed for the consolidated consent agenda is agenda item eight uh resolution twenty twenty five dash one six six one agenda item nine resolution twenty twenty five dash one six six three agenda item ten resolution twenty twenty five dash one six eight seven agenda item eleven resolution twenty twenty five dash one six eight eight agenda item thirteen resolution twenty twenty five dash one six nine zero agenda item fourteen resolution twenty twenty five dash one six nine one agenda item 15 resolution 2025 dash one six nine two agenda item 16 resolution 2025 dash one six nine three agenda item seventeen resolution twenty twenty five dash one six nine four agenda item eighteen resolution twenty twenty five dash one six nine five agenda item nineteen resolution twenty twenty five dash one six nine six agenda item twenty resolution twenty twenty five dash one six nine seven agenda item twenty one resolution twenty twenty five dash one six nine eight agenda item twenty two resolution twenty twenty five dash one six nine nine agenda item twenty three resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero zero agenda item twenty four resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero one agenda item twenty five resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero two agenda item twenty six resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero three agenda item twenty seven resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero four agenda item twenty eight resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero five agenda item twenty nine resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero six agenda item thirty resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero seven agenda item thirty one resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero eight agenda item thirty two resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven zero nine agenda item thirty three resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven one zero agenda item thirty six resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven one three agenda item thirty seven resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven one four agenda item thirty eight resolution twenty twenty five dash one seven one five agenda item thirty nine resolution twenty twenty five one seven one six moving on to items on second reading proposed for the consolidated consent agenda first among those is agenda item 50 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one five seven agenda item 51 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one five eight agenda item 52 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one five nine agenda item 53 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one six zero now on to items on third reading proposed for the consent agenda agenda item 55 ordinance BL 2025 dash one zero eight nine agenda item 56 ordinance BL 2025 dash one zero nine zero agenda item 57 ordinance BL 2025 dash one zero nine eight agenda item 58 ordinance BL 2025 dash one zero nine nine agenda item 59 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one zero eight agenda item 60 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one three zero agenda item 61 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one three one agenda item 62 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one three four agenda item sixty three ordinance BL 2025 dash one one three five agenda item 64 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one three six agenda item 65 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one three seven agenda item 66 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one three eight agenda item 67 ordinance BL 2025 dash one one three nine agenda item sixty eight ordinance BL 2025 1140 agenda item 69 ordinance BL 2025 1141 and lastly agenda item 17

Agenda Item 66, Ordinance BL 2025-1138.

Agenda Item 67, ordinance BL 2025-1139.

Agenda item 68, ordinance BL 2025-1140.

Agenda item 69, ordinance BL 2025-1141.

And lastly, agenda item 70, ordinance BL 2025-1142.

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

If so, members will please join the queue to request that.

Councilmember Swara, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um agenda number 37 and 59, please.

Okay.

Um council member Swara has requested uh removal of agenda item 37.

That's resolution 1714.

Um that will be removed from consent.

And then after that, Miss Suara, something in the 50s, you said, ma'am, 59.

Okay.

Uh next, uh Councilmember Swara has requested uh agenda item 59.

Uh that is ordinance 1108.

Um and that will also be removed from consent.

Thank you.

Are any other members uh seeking to be recognized to remove an item from the consent agenda?

All right, seeing none, is there a motion for approval of the consent agenda?

Okay, uh properly moved and seconded.

All in favor, please say aye.

Council has passed all items on the consent agenda.

All right.

Um now we will go back through in agenda order um from items that were not on the consent agenda.

So back to resolutions we go.

Uh Ms.

Tombs, uh if indeed the intent is to withdraw, I'm just gonna say that these can be taken together.

Is it okay?

All right, so I just need to read them into the record.

Agenda items three and four, um, uh sponsored tombs.

Uh the first uh is a resolution uh 1533, approving a homeland security grant program application from the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency to the Metro government acting by and through the Office of Emergency Management to fund efforts to prevent, prepare for, protect against, and respond to acts of terrorism and other catastrophic events, and somewhat of a related companion, uh resolution 1534, also sponsor tombs, which is a resolution approving an urban area security initiative, UASI grant application, uh also from uh TEMA, the Tennessee Emergency Management Organization to the Metro government acting by and through OEM to fund costs related to enhancing security uh and the resilience of high risk urban areas by building sustaining and improving capabilities to prevent, prepare for, protect against, and respond to acts of terrorism.

Ms.

Tombs, you are recognized.

Thank you, madam vice mayor, withdrawal.

Okay.

Um agenda items three and four, 1533 and 1534 are withdrawn.

Next is agenda item uh five, a resolution 2025-1655, sponsors Styles, Evans, and Welsh.

This is a resolution calling for the mayor's office and the Department of Emergency Communications to enact various reforms relative to departmental leadership and workplace culture.

Um, Miss Styles, you are recognized.

Thank you very much, Vice Mayor.

I do have a substitute that.

If you could please ask for your committee reports, yes, ma'am.

For the report of the public health and safety committee, uh, Chair Huffman, you're recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, public health and safety recommended approval as substituted.

Five in favor, one against one not voting.

Okay.

Um all right, it is uh back to you, Miss Styles, uh, for a motion on your bill.

Yes, if I may give a brief explanation of what the substitute.

If you would just please make a motion to approve to get it before us.

I would like to motion to get the bill before us, please.

Is there second?

Okay, and now it's back to you on your substitute.

Awesome sauce.

So what I changed in this resolution is taking out the three.

Okay, okay.

Is there a second?

Go ahead, ma'am.

Okay.

I took out the three violations that the director has committed.

I took those out, and I merely asked that this administration could just continue the process of holding the director accountable for his actions.

Uh, also removed the language to create a method for filing complaints electronically for tracking purposes.

And so what's left uh are two requests of staff that came out of the Ogletree Dinkins report in terms of having an FAQ page within their system that they can go to on a regular basis and also a way to know when and why policies are changing because one of the complaints that we were presented with is that staff policy changes were happening too frequently and and people weren't understanding why.

Um this has been ongoing for quite some time.

This is a non-binding resolution, but there's been an incredible amount of pushback from this administration for Metro Legal in regards to holding someone who has been so terrible to his staff accountable.

Um I would like at this moment to read an email.

I read this in public health and safety.

This is from a current employee.

This is the young lady who actually had the courage to come and do the press conference last month and share that the current conditions are as bad as people have shared.

Give me one moment.

Counsel, my name is Hannah McGuire.

I'm a dispatcher and a trainer at the DEC where I've worked for almost two and a half years.

Some of you may have seen me on the local news a month ago.

I am not with you today as I am currently at work and training a peer.

I will try to make a long story clear and concise.

I was sexually harassed by a co-worker while in a romantic relationship with him.

The offenses were not done to me in person, but instead when I was not around.

Due to a lack of training, professionalism, and basic care, what should have been a standard HR complaint instead further traumatized me.

I filed my complaint in November of 2024.

I followed up with DEHR.

I informed Central HR that my investigation was being neglected in March of 2025.

I met with the assistant director regarding my concerns.

No disciplinary hearing was scheduled until after my abuser's personnel file was requested.

The hearing was November 18th, over a year after my complaint was filed.

As of 2026, I will be forced to work three days a week with my abuser.

If you would please just read up the final sentence if you want to complete that.

All right.

Um, so we are on the motion to substitute.

Um we are on to discussion.

Um, Mr.

Spain, you are first in the queue on um the motion to substitute.

Go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Madam President.

I was gonna yield my time to Councilmember Styles if she'd like to finish.

That's very kind.

Okay.

Um uh Mr.

Spain has yielded time to you, Miss Stiles, to um finish uh the much, Councilmember Spain.

I appreciate it.

I was not given an opportunity to switch to a different shift, and my requests to do so were denied twice since our schedules were published.

This is not the only occasion of Martini's leadership and culture failing me.

I filed a grievance against a supervisor regarding three violations of civil service rules.

I filed the grievance per civil service on October 31st.

DCHR has completely disregarded civil service rules by not completing the grievance in the defined time.

I was not notified that there would be a delay until I emailed to request an update a month after filing.

I still have not received the result.

The requirement in civil service rules is to provide a result in 10 days.

It has now been a month and a half.

Actions speak louder than words.

Mayor O'Connell, do not tell me that there is a zero tolerance policy for sexual harassment unless you are going to hold Director Martini to that standard.

Counsel, do not tell me you appreciate my service unless you speak up to make my work environment safe.

Please vote to protect your first responders.

Some of what I have heard from the administration in Metro Legal has been a Michigasque of how civil service rules work.

But the reality is until a supervisor or a director provides a punishment, civil service doesn't get involved.

So you have their rules and their violations, but someone has to offer a suspension, a write-up, a termination.

That is when that employee goes to civil service to fight that result.

We are waiting and we are calling for with this resolution for that step to be taken by the mayor's administration.

We have enough evidence to show that this individual is not doing right by his employees.

And so therefore we have spent, I think we've spent over 20,000 to get him career coaching.

And the outcome from 2023 is the same as this year with the surveys that we got in July, where a hundred and four people out of 214 said that this environment is toxic.

So processes matter, but if people are unwilling to implement the process, it doesn't matter that it exists.

Right?

If you've got a Christmas gift and it needs to be wrapped, it doesn't get wrapped if you don't wrap it.

It's the same thing.

So he's yelled at staff, he's used retaliation.

Those bids, that shift that she mentioned, having to work with our abuser, those shifts just came out.

That bid just happened about two weeks ago.

They all of the staff has mentioned to us that intimidation retaliation has been a problem.

Please approve this resolution.

Okay.

We're on a motion to substitute.

Is there any further discussion on the substitute?

Mr.

Harrell, do you seek to be recognized on the substitute specifically?

No.

Okay.

Um I appreciate that, Mr.

Harrell, but um Miss Stiles, are are you okay having spoken on um?

I can recognize you again once we've uh gotten the substitute on the bill.

Okay.

Um Ms.

Tombs, you seek to be recognized on the substitute specifically.

Miss Swara on the substitute specifically.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I rise in support of the substitute, and I want to speak to the fact that I think initially many people are worried about this resolution not being necessary because the process is in place already, and we're not letting civil service do what it does and all of that stuff.

And so, but with this substitute, there's a lot of languages that's been taken out, and there's a lot of discussion with the uh director Dietz uh in the last uh public and safety meeting.

Uh uh and reading out loud, it's not in fact I said, and I'm happy that this was filed because it allows us to get a lot of update from Director Dietz and the administration on what the administration is being doing.

And so this is standing with the employees.

This is saying that we want the process that is set up to do what he's supposed to do.

It's not saying this is a new process, he's not doing anything else.

If there's an investigation going on yet, yeah, let it go on.

But this is after two years of asking and just making sure that we now say we hear you, something is being done.

People don't know what's being done, but this allows to be able to voice that publicly.

And so with that, there's nothing in the uh the director also says that it's a request, it's a request.

That's what it's it's saying.

It's not jeopardizing anything.

But what he does do, uh, and the reason why I support the substitute or the original was because it's not second vengeing any process, he's not creating any legal thing, but he does tell our employees that we are with them, we listen to them.

And what about that process that we create that we wanted to work and we ask in the administration not just to discipline, I think to also investigate.

So I think the director was worried about saying him discipline.

I don't know if he did.

If he did not, um that's not what this is saying, but this is saying do what you need to do, do all your investigation and take the necessary action at the end of the day.

And so with that, I ask for your support.

All right, thank you.

Um, Miss Evans, do you seek to be recognized on the motion to substitute?

Okay, uh, Miss Evans, you're recognized.

Um, thank you, uh Vice Mayor.

Um, so I spoke about this in in committee, um, but I am in support of the substitute.

I've signed on to this, even though I know it probably seems a little bit different.

That um I would uh basically want to go outside and kind of a process or maybe make recommendations on alternatives to a process.

Um, but we have you know been navigating kind of these challenges since I was chair last term, my first time being chair of public health and safety.

That's when we first started getting the emails.

And so I think it's important, even though I know that you know we're we're going through the real process now, so that's happening.

Um, and so I anticipate that we'll have, you know, um, there'll be input um after the investigation, but I'm in support of the substitute, and I hope that uh my colleagues will support it as well.

All right, is there any further discussion on the motion to substitute with Ms.

Styles' substitute?

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

Aye.

Any voting no or abstaining?

Okay.

Um, Miss Stiles, do you wish to renew your motion to approve as substituted?

You you can just say so moved.

So move by just one to say something.

Yeah, I'll recognize you.

Um is there a second?

Okay, go ahead.

If we could do a roll call vote on this vote, if we may, please.

You may request a roll call, yes.

Um, so uh there is a motion uh to approve uh with a roll call vote.

Um is there any uh further discussion on um the motion to approve as substituted?

All right.

Um Mr.

Clerk, if you would please uh open the vote, we've all done it before, council member.

I know it hurts.

Been there.

Okay.

Um all votes are in.

Uh Mr.

Clerk, if you would please show the vote.

Okay, uh this uh resolution has uh been adopted as substituted with 35 votes in favor, uh zero against and one abstention.

All right.

Uh moving on, uh next is uh agenda item seven, uh resolution 2025-1660, sponsored tombs.

This is an initial resolution determining the issue of typo general obligation bonds of the metropolitan government of Nashville in Davidson County, also known as the Capital Spending Plan or CSP resolution in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed five hundred and thirty-one million dollars nine hundred and twenty-five thousand.

Uh Ms.

Toombs, you are recognized.

Thank you, madam vice mayor.

Uh committee report, budget and finance.

Um voted to not recommend amendments one, two, and three, zero in favor, eight against, zero not voting for all three, and voted to recommend approval of the resolution.

Eight in favor, zero against, zero not voting.

And move for approval.

All right.

Um second.

Okay.

Um there is a motion uh to approve uh the capital spending plan uh resolution, as you all know by rule it was uh previously deferred for additional consideration.

And so now we are on to discussion.

Uh councilmember Bradford, you are recognized, sir.

Thank you, madam chair.

I'd like to move my amendment with a brief comment.

Okay.

Um there is a motion to amend with Mr.

Bradford's amendment three.

Is there a second?

Okay.

Um go ahead, sir.

Thank you.

I'm asking my colleagues to approve this amendment, which out which reallocates five million dollars of funding from the East Bank Infrastructure Fund to help with land acquisition and design for a new library in my district.

Something I've been fighting for since 2019.

This is an opportunity for us to invest in an existing established neighborhood made up of low-income and immigrant families, many of which are working in the downtown and uh potential east bank construction and hospitality.

I'd rather see us invest in that community than throwing money into a community that does not exist and giving a brand new neighborhood all the bells and whistles when we have existing neighborhoods that are begging for investment from this city.

As then Councilmember O'Connell always stated when he was running for mayor, he wanted us to be more Nashville and less now less Nash Vegas.

By prioritizing our existing neighborhoods over a non-existent neighborhood, we are showing that we agree with that sentiment.

Libraries are essential public infrastructure that support education, workforce development, and community connections.

And this modest investment moves us a long way and moves this project forward and showing that this city that this council supports our neighborhoods and supports libraries.

So again, I ask for my colleagues to support this amendment.

Thank you.

All right.

We are on to discussion on the motion to amend uh with amendment three.

Uh Councilmember Bradford's amendment, which he has just described to you.

Uh Councilmember Swara, do you seek to be recognized on the amendment?

Um Mr.

Druffel, do you seek to be recognized on the motion to amend?

Uh Ms.

Tombs, do you seek to be recognized on the motion to amend budget and finance chair?

You're recognized.

Thank you, madam vice mayor.

I stand in opposition of the amendment and any amendment to the CSP.

Um there's a lot of uh collaboration that goes into putting the CSP uh together.

And if we start doing amendments where council members can pick off parts of the CSP and allocated to other things, we all have very important projects.

Uh as the chair of the minority caucus, I have led amendments on to add money to libraries and all types of um very important uh projects and issues.

Um I we have a lot of obligations as it relates to the East Bank, and I don't think that we should be reducing the funding for all the infrastructure needs that are on the East Bank.

And though I firmly support the libraries and think we should have more of them, they're very important.

I would ask that we not uh remove any funding from the East Bank at this time.

All right, is there any further discussion on the motion to amend with Mr.

Bradford's amendment three?

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

Um uh any voting no.

No.

Okay.

Um uh Mr.

Clerk, if you could please put that on the board.

I will remind colleagues it's about number, not volume.

Um, and that was not sufficiently clear to me.

So, in an abundance of caution.

Uh let's please put this to a roll call vote.

All votes are in.

Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

The motion to amend fails with 10 votes in favor, 25 against, and zero abstentions.

So uh we uh continue um on discussion of the approval uh motion.

Um, Miss Swara on the uh main resolutions approval.

Go ahead.

You're recognizing the question.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I have a question for finance.

Uh I know that uh every time we get into this financing, we have uh uh a rule that took us about our debt ratio, and I wanted to check with those these amounts, this new debt put us in time so uh uh debt ratio.

All right, I'm happy to acknowledge the administration on the question regarding our uh debt ratio.

Um, whom for finance, um uh if you would please introduce yourself, Mary Joe.

Um, you're recognized.

Oh, I'm sorry, ma'am.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh Mary Joe Wiggins, Finance.

Um, yes, and I apologize.

I think you just have it in your inbox tonight.

Um, so I apologize for the delay in delivery.

The um letter that you have is the standard that came up um about five years ago when we said we would give you projections of how the CSP and our overall debt would impact um the budget and other statistics.

So the primary one in that letter is the debt service to expenditures, and we um have been striving to keep that under 15 percent.

You'll see for this year it's actually 11 and a half percent, which is the lowest we've had in the last five years.

Um, but probably more importantly, um, some of their there's a table of some other statistics, and um the finance department is a little bit more focused on our per capita, so our debt service per capita.

Um, that's really what a lot of our rating agencies are tracking more than um the debt to expenditure.

And so this CSP was meant to keep us in line with the best practice of that um per capita and to have no impact on our um ratings.

You know, we want to negatively impact our ratings.

And this plan does that, not impact.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Wiggins.

Um, all right, Miss Swara.

Um, next in the queue uh is Councilmember Druffel.

Uh, you're recognized, sir.

Yeah, thanks, Chair.

And this is to put this in line in the same context.

But uh we built this about five years ago because we're just approving our capital budgets, not realizing the context relative to the general services uh spending.

And uh we built this uh five years ago to put it at one time we're going from eight to fourteen point five percent as a percentage of our general services budget.

Uh going the wrong direction.

We put this, and we've seen some great uh success going the the other way.

But I think it's really important to always monitor this, and every year we should uh take a close look before we approve this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Druffel.

Uh next, Councilmember Evan Siegel, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Madam President.

I I've gotten a lot of questions about the CSP.

Um, and I just wanted to clarify something on it.

In particular, a lot of people were concerned with the sort of lack of greenways funding outside of bridges and boardwalks on the CSP.

Um greenways are exercise and they are transportation, so they serve a really important dual purpose.

Um I the finance department was able to help some people may not realize, but CSP funds, it's not like we allocate them this year, and they are spent this year.

These are big projects that take a long time to build.

So one of the questions that I was drilling into with them, which I really appreciated, is overall parks and greenways combined with the CSP will still have a hundred about roughly 114 million dollars of capital spending funds, 34 million of which is actually for greenways that is still unspent.

So I didn't want people to see this and think, well, we're not building new greenways, and we're not putting a lot into parks in here.

There is still over a hundred million dollars that that department is spending, um, almost a third of which is for greenways um on ongoing projects right now.

Thank you, Ms.

Ball.

Uh Councilmember Stiles, you are recognized.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I wanted to know if I could move my amendments.

Yes, ma'am.

You can make a motion to amend.

Um that's always a proper motion during discussion.

So I would like to make a motion.

Can I do them both together?

I well, no, I have to go separately.

You have to do them separately.

I was talking out loud.

Um could it make a motion to move my first amendment?

There is um Miss Styles is making a motion to amend um with amendment one.

Is there a second?

All right, uh, we are on to discussion on uh the motion to amend with amendment one.

Um would you uh please describe your amendment?

Oh, could I get committee reports on that?

Um they were provided earlier.

The report was zero votes in favor and eight against and budget and finance committee.

Thank you very much.

Um this project, the proposed amendment I should say, is in regards to the global mall, which as you know the city purchased in 2022 and since August of 23.

Uh really has been stuck, has not moved forward.

And the last communications that I had with previous chief development officer Bob Mendez said that investment was needed on infrastructure on the entire site to the tune of four to seven million dollars.

Without that, the administration didn't want to move forward in any way.

As we just voted on a resolution in regards to the Department of Emergency Communications, while I understand that this building would be shared with OEM, then let's give nine million dollars to OEM to get started and not reward someone who is currently walking around the building, telling staff he's doing such a great job.

The mayor is giving him a new building.

Um I think it will be an indictment on us if we support that.

Um and after just having a great vote when we were all in solidarity, it it will not have a good look.

My constituents are constantly asking me about this site and what's happened, why no movement is taking place.

This would give the Southeast an opportunity to get a blighted site moving again.

So I would love to have your support in moving these funds.

Thank you.

All right.

Yep, yep.

We're on to discussion on the motion to amend uh with amendment one.

Um Ms.

Tombs, do you seek to be recognized?

Go ahead, budget and finance chair.

Thank you.

Uh Madam Vice Mayor, I'd like to ask the administration uh in regard to the funding for the new building.

Uh to give some a brief summary of of what that funding is for and and what department it it benefits.

All right, uh, for the administration, uh Mr.

Rosenberg, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Madam President.

Uh Councilmember, this is a um uh ECC OEM facility.

It'll serve um our emergency operations center, which is currently on a leased property, um, as well as our 911 operators, also ITS infrastructure.

Um, it's a badly needed project um that is uh ready to move forward.

Um currently there's 750,000 already in uh the CSP for global mall.

That's all the money that's been earmarked.

That's what infrastructure planning is going to cost uh per Mr.

Mendez.

Um it's really unclear what the other $7 million would possibly go to in lieu of emergency operations.

All right, uh Ms.

Timbs, back to you.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

I stand in opposition to this amendment.

Um I think that we should take care of our departments and make sure that they have proper facilities in which to operate.

I understand the concerns about um director martini, however, it's not as if this building will exist tomorrow.

Uh it takes a while for a new building to come into fruition, and the current director of DEC may not be there by the time it comes into fruition.

So I don't do not see it as an award for any improper behavior.

I see it as taking care of our employees, making sure they have the proper facilities so that we can uh provide appropriate services to our constituents, and so I would um ask my colleagues to vote against this amendment.

All right.

Um we continue with discussion on the motion to amend with uh amendment one.

Council member Nash, you're recognized.

Thank you.

I'd like to uh second uh uh council member uh tomb's uh uh address.

Uh that's an old facility.

I I was there when they opened it back uh 40 some years ago, and uh it was you know it was prior prior to that prior to that um it was uh just to kind of across the street in the old white building here uh uh but they have to say that it was quite a time ago.

The city has grown a lot since then.

That building has no windows in it.

It'd be great for the employees to have a new modern building, maybe a little different design with some windows and and and give them some support.

I'm sure they need more room and and better facilities.

So I I uh speak against uh the motion.

All right.

Um Ms.

Stiles, you did have a little residual time um when you first spoke on your amendment.

Um so if we could uh pull it to a close, please, ma'am.

You're recognized again.

Thank you very much, Vice Mayor.

Colleagues, uh, we should take issue with the fact that we're being lied to that Bob Mendez said it would cost 750,000.

If there's an email that says it would cost four to seven million, I would love to see the evidence where he said it was 750,000, because that would imply that Bob Mendez is either an idiot today or he was an idiot when he gave me the information.

And we would have to assume that that is correct.

Numbers should not be that different.

750,000 for the site versus four to seven million.

That is a massive discrepancy.

So while Mr.

Rosenberg asks about where's the extra money going to, great question.

Uh according to Mr.

Mendez, it's four to seven million to do the infrastructure study for the entire site, and that site planning infrastructure.

There are other portions of this entire plan.

There's a transit center, they want to work on roads, all of that connectivity that's going to cost money, and it's gonna cost more than $750,000.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Stiles.

Uh Ms.

Porterfield, you're next in the queue on the motion to amend with amendment one.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh I'll be super brief.

I know it's been a very long and contentious night, and we're all extremely tired.

Um we can make our points without disparaging um our constituents.

I just don't think it's fair to disparage someone who's not here to defend themselves and whether there is a miscommunication, misinformation, whatever that is, it's not fair to disparage somebody that cannot be here to defend themselves.

I appreciate the point.

Thank you.

All right.

Um is there any further discussion on the motion to amend with amendment one?

Okay, we are gonna try this by voice again, again, member number, not volume.

Um all in favor of the motion to amend with amendment one, please say aye.

Aye.

Uh pardon?

All those in favor.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

I've lost track of how the volume of who said what.

Mr.

Um Clerk, if you would just put the motion to amend on the machine, please, sir.

Just an abundance of caution.

So this is just the motion to amend with Ms.

Stiles' amendment one.

All votes are in.

Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

The amendment fails with four votes in favor, 29 against, and one abstention.

All right.

We continue with discussion on the capital splendid plan resolution.

Generally, Ms.

Benedict, you are recognized.

Previous question.

All right.

Ms.

Benedict has called the previous question.

Is there a second?

Okay.

This is non-debatable and it requires two-thirds of those voting.

If you vote in favor of the previous question, you want to end debate on the CSP and move to the final vote.

If you vote no, you want to continue discussion.

All in favor of the previous question, please say aye.

Aye.

Any voting no.

Motion of the previous question prevails.

And so we have ended debate, and we will move to the primary vote on the motion to approve the capital spending plan.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any voting no?

Truly, are you voting no?

Okay.

So that means, Mr.

Clerk, that we need to go on the machine.

This is a resolution, colleagues.

If there is a no vote, it only has one vote.

We must be a roll call vote.

Mr.

Harrell, do you wish do you seek to vote?

Are you are you having an issue with your tablet?

Oh, no, I can.

Okay.

All votes in.

Mr.

Clerk, please show the vote.

The Capitol Spending Plan Resolution has been adopted with 33 votes in favor and two abstentions rather than no's.

All righty.

Okay.

We have adopted the capital spending plan.

Next item is agenda item twelve.

This is resolution 2025-1689.

Sponsors Coop and Tombs Horton and Hill.

This is a resolution to approve the 12th amendment to the lease agreement between the Metro Government and Square Investment Holdings LLC for office space in the Washington Square Building located at 222 2nd Avenue North.

Mr.

Coopin, you're recognized.

Mr.

Coopin?

All right.

Could you please request your committee reports, please?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

Thank you, ma'am.

Vice Mayor, Committee Reports, Budget and Finance voted to recommend approval.

Nine in favor, zero against, zero not voting.

All right.

And for the report of the planning and zoning committee, uh, Chair Horton, um, this is sixteen eighty-nine regarding Washington Square, an amended lease agreement.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Planning and Zoning.

Consider this resolution voted in favor, a recommended approval, ten in favor, zero against zero not voting.

Okay.

And for the report of government operations and regulations, Chair Hill, you're recognized.

I think maybe Vice Mayor.

We voted uh five in favor, zero against zero and I voting for one meeting deferral.

Oh, okay.

Um right, uh then by rule eight point one.

Um that is a mandatory deferral.

Um to the meeting of January 20th.

favor a recommended approval ten in favor zero against zero not voting okay and for the report of government operations and regulations chair hill you're recognized I think maybe vice mayor we voted uh five in favor zero against zero not voting for one meeting deferral oh okay um all right uh then by rule eight point one um that is a mandatory deferral um to the meeting of January 20th all right um moving right along 34 agenda item 34 resolution 2025 one seven one one sponsors Welsh Huffman Evans Vaux Ewing Swara GAD and Cupin this is a resolution urging the Office of Homeless Services to allocate funding to ensure that no Nashvilleans lose their permanent housing due to the changes in the federal continuum of care funding priorities Ms.

Welsh you're recognized I'm sorry thank you vice mayor committee reports um for the report of the budget and finance committee chair tombs budget and finance voted to recommend approval six in favor zero against one not voting okay uh for the report of the public health and safety committee chair huffman you're recognized public health and safety recommended approval seven in favor zero against zero not voting all righty it's back to you miss Welsh uh for a motion on your bill moved to approve all right properly moved and seconded we're uh on to discussion uh anything that you want to say um miss Welsh as long as you have the floor um what this resolution does is um encourage oh um oh s to use monies that we allocated in our last budget cycle the extra monies that we allocated uh to use them towards keeping people in Nashville housed that we people that who were formerly homeless who are now housed um so that when uh federal money is running out the the federal government has um pulled back on the funding for the last two years and they have not reinstated that yet and so people are in danger of losing their housing um because all organizations within the COC as their funding runs out it's not going to be replaced so this is um encouraging OHS to uh use the monies that we have to help keep people housed all throughout this entire system through the COC and to provide a report to the Metro Council by March 3rd uh laying out the plan for how we're going to use those monies to assure that people um can stay in their housing um as we pivot towards keeping people housed as opposed to housing new people all righty um uh there is a motion to approve it's properly seconded and you've heard an explanation of the resolution by Ms.

Welsh and so we're on to discussion council member swara do you seek to be recognized okay you are recognized uh thank you vice mayor I'm not going to say a whole lot a lot a lot was discussed in committee but I just wanted to add another clarification I think there's uh concern over uh the reporting part of this piece or the plan uh as required by the uh resolution it's not asking uh OEHS to do any separate reporting for what they're already doing is not asking for I think they're doing something eleven million is not asking for another one in the four million is just one reporting one plan on what they're doing with all the all of their funds and now they're using all the available funding to ensure that people do not lose their homes thank you thank you Miss Swara is there any additional uh discussion on this resolution seeing none uh we'll try it by voice all in favor please say aye aye any voting no any abstaining all right you have adopted this resolution uh next is agenda item 35 resolution 2025 1712 sponsors porterfield tombs voara parker Welsh Bradford Ewing Cap and GAD a resolution opposing the boring companies proposed tunnels within Nashville and Davidson County condemning the company's lack of transparency inadequate community and metro council engagement and troubling labor and safety practices affirming that public land and public infrastructure decisions must prioritize the welfare safety and expressed needs of Nashville residents and reiterating the Metropolitan council's commitment to real equitable community driven transit solutions council member porterfield you are recognized thank you vice mayor committee reports for the report of the rules confirmations and public elections committee chair cash we voted we voted to defer one meeting four in favor two against okay um a recommendation of one meeting deferral I apologize four in favor two against okay um all right um by rule uh eight point one that is a mandatory one meeting deferral point of order could uh could there could I ask for a suspension of the rules to have the legislation heard tonight um Ms.

All right.

I objected.

Thank you.

All right.

So the rules are not suspended.

Uh rule 8.1 um uh prevails in place.

Um, and that is Can we get on the record who objected?

No, ma'am.

There were there were there were multiple, there were multiple.

Okay.

Thank you.

Colleagues, there were quite a few across the body, Ms.

Porterfield.

Okay.

Um you can watch the replay if you desire.

All right, so that is deferred one meeting um to the meeting of January 20th.

All right.

Uh next is agenda item 37.

This is resolution 2025-1714.

Sponsor Swara, Ewing Porterfield, Ellis Styles, Kimbrough Lee, and Coopin.

This is a resolution honoring the 160th anniversary of First Baptist Church, Capitol Hill of Nashville.

Ms.

Swara, you are recognized on your resolution regarding First Baptist.

Uh thank you, Vice Mayor.

Committee reports, please.

For the report of rules, confirmations and public elections, Chair Cash.

Six in favor, zero against.

Zero not voting.

Okay.

Back to you, Ms.

Swara, for a motion.

Um, I'll like to move for approval with a brief comment.

Is there a second?

Okay, go ahead, ma'am.

Uh thank you.

And I'm gonna make it brief.

I know it's been a long night.

Uh, but this is a resolution recognizing Force Baptist Church uh Capitol Ill.

Um I know that according to the Constitution, people have the right to religion or no religion, but a lot of people that have religion do know that most places of worship is not just uh for worship only, they do a lot in the community.

And this is a church that has been an integer part of Nashville for so many years, uh, doing so many things.

Uh and of note is the church's rule in the civil rights movement uh under the leadership of uh Reverend Kelly Miller Smith.

Uh when we talk about civil rights in Nashville and we talk about what took place in those days, uh First Baptist Church was intrigued uh to that uh on the leadership of uh Reverend Kelly Miller Smith.

And so I'm not gonna read all the resider uh sixty years of providing services, of supporting the community.

We know that as a government we cannot do it all.

We cannot provide all the services, all the comforts, all the support that our community needs, we rely on the on our public support and our churches, our synagogue, our mosque, our places of worship, uh a big part of this.

And so with that, I want to move for approval.

And I want for some reason tonight, I don't know, maybe it's all the conversation.