Nov 30, 2020 Executive Meeting

[00:00:11]

TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER REGARDING HOLDING OPEN MEETINGS IN A FORM OTHER THAN AN OPEN AND IN PUBLIC, THIS GOVERNING BODY DETERMINES THAT MEETING ELECTRONICALLY IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF ITS CITIZENS DUE TO THE COVID-19 OUTBREAK. THEY HAVE 3 MEMOS OF COUNSEL THAT ARE ONLINE.

COUNCILMAN ALLEMAN, KATZMANN HOLLOMAN AND KATZMANN SMITH. I WILL KEEP LISTS IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THE VARIOUS ITEMS WE ARE GOING TO COVER TONIGHT.

>> MEHR? >> EXCUSE ME RARE. NEXT.

[1) PLANNING COMMISSION]

>> FIRST ITEM IS FIRST ORDINANCE 48 Ã2020 Ã21. >> GOOD TO BE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. I WANT TO MAKE SURE FOR THE MEMBERS THAT ARE ONLINE YOU CAN

N SEE THE SLIDES WE HAVE UP NLINE. >> CAN THE MEMBERS ONLINE SEE

THE SLIDES? >> YES MEHR, I CAN. >> YES.

>> GREAT, AWESOME. >> FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS DIFFERENT THAN OUR NORMAL REZONING REQUESTS. THIS IS AN ORDINANCE REQUEST TO THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE.

THIS IS OUR FILE NUMBER C04 2020. EMMONS NS CHAPTER R 9 CHAPTER OVER THE PAST YEAR AND 1/2, FEMA, ALONG WITH THE STATE FLOODPLAIN COORDINATOR THE CUMBERLAND AVENUE LIDAR PHONE FOR IT. THAT'S LASER ELEVATIONS.

WHAT IT DID IS IT HELPED CLARIFY THE ELEVATIONS OF BOTH THE RIVER AND PROPERTIES ABUTTING THE RIVER THROUGHOUT MONTGOMERY COUNTY AND THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE.HIS UPDATED THE INSURANCE RATE MAPS OR FOR MAPS. VERY MINOR CHANGES IN MOST CASES. SOME PROPERTIES GOT A LITTLE BETTER.

SOME PROPERTY HAVE MORE FLOODPLAIN THAN THEY DID. IT DIDN'T AFFECT MANY STRUCTURES. IN ORDER TO ALLOW OUR CITIZENS TO PURCHASE FLOOD INSURANCE WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS CODIFIED IN OUR ORDINANCE SOMEWHERE. IT'S BEEN ALWAYS CODIFIED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND NOW THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THE STATE GAVE US THE ORDINANCE AND MADE CHANGES AND SENT THEM BACK.

THEY MADE CHANGES AGAIN WE WENT TO OUR CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT THAT SAID WELL, IF THEY PROVIDED THE CHANGES WE GOTTA GO WITH THOSE CHANGES. JUST A LITTLE DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON SOME OF THE NATURE OF WHAT THEY CALL DIFFERENT OFFICES IN WHAT WE CALL SOME OFFICES. ANTICIPATE COMING BACK WITH A INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND CITY CODE DEPARTMENT TO CLARIFY WITH THOSE DIFFERENT TITLES IN THIS ORDINANCE MEANS GOING FORWARD. GIVEN THE WERE ADOPTING IT NOW WE HAD TO HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY JANUARY 15. FOR THE CITY REQUIRES 2 READINGS.

WILL BE RIGHT ON TIME WITHOUT. AGAIN THIS REPEALS AN ENTIRETY OLD CHAPTER 9.2 AND REPLACES IT WITH THE ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF YOU. AGAIN THIS IS REQUIRED BY JANUARY 15 SO OUR CITIZENS CAN HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL REGARDING THIS ORDINANCE? CANCEL LADY 'S TREATMENT YOU

RECOGNIZE. >> THINKING MAYOR. BUT THIS WOULD TO GO IN EFFECT AFTER THE 2 READINGS I ASSUME THIS WOULD GO OUT TO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE AFFECTED AND WOULD IT ALSO GO TO LIENHOLDERS INVOLVED WITH THAT?

>> THIS ITSELF WILL NOT GO WELL. TO THOUSANDS OF PROPERTY OWNERS. WE DO DO EARLIER THIS YEAR AND I THINK MAYOR PITTS IN HAVE BEEN AWARE OF THIS. WE ARE DURING BECAUSE A LOT OF THIS WILL GET ADOPTED AND IT SEEMED ENTIRELY IN THE COUNTY TO MONIES FROM NOW. WE PUT TOGETHER A MAP VIEWER ALWAYS TO HAVE IT UP ON OUR WEBSITE SO YOU CAN LOOK AT INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES AND IT WILL SHOW YOU GREEN AREAS THAT ARE GETTING BETTER AND RED AREAS THAT SUGGEST A SQUARE FOOT. WERE GETTING DOWN TO THE FINE MINUTIAE.

THE BIG IMPORTANT THING IS IF YOU WANT TO BE PART OF THE FEDERAL FEMA INSURANCE PROGRAM YOU NEED TO ADOPT AN UPDATED ORDINANCE FOR YOUR TOWN. AGAIN IT WAS SUPPLIED BY THE

STATE. WE MADE MINOR CHANGES. >> I'M IN NO WAY AGAINST IT.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS. >> WILL LEAVE THE MAP VIEWER UP FOR A WHILE SO PEOPLE CAN SEE WHAT CHANGES WERE. THOSE WHO HAVE PROPERTIES I'M SURE THEY WILL BE WORKING WITH

FEMA AND THEIR INSURANCE PROVIDERS. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU CANCEL LADY'S TREATMENT. I'M SORRY, DID SOMEONE HAVE A QUESTION. COUNCILMAN HOLLOMAN YOUR RECOGNIZE.> THANK YOU MARY.

WILL THIS INCREASE THE INSURANCE? WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE EFFECT ON THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE HOMES ALONG THE RIVER? R?

[00:05:08]

>>. >> OF TRY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

THE INSURANCE IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY ERS AND FOR THEM TO PROCURE INDIVIDUAL FLOOD INSURANCE. WHAT THIS ORDINANCE DOES IS THE MAJORITY OF IT TALKS ABOUT HOW WE PERMIT NEW STRUCTURES IN AND AROUND THE FLOODPLAINS AND HOW THEY HAVE TO BE A MINIMUM OF ONE TO 2 FEET ABOVE THAT FLOODPLAIN.

HELP ME COULD TRY TO DO LETTERS TO MY PROVISION. BY ADOPTING THAT IS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO GET PRIVATE FLOOD INSURANCE ON THE MARKET. CAN'T SAY WHAT IT WILL DO FOR THE RATES. THAT'S BETWEEN THE INSURANCE MARKET AND THE INDIVIDUALS.

THIS ALLOWS THE TOWN TO BE COMPLIANT IN ORDER FOR THE RESIDENTS TO GET INSURANCE.

>> DO YOU THINK THE INSURANCE RATES WILL CHANGE BASED UPON THIS RESOLUTION?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THAT. >> OKAY GOTCHA.

>> I HAVE A QUESTIONNAIRE. >> I'LL GET TO YOU CANCEL LADYSMITH.

>> HOW DOES THIS ÃIF IT DOES PASS. I'VE A QUESTION ABOUT MY PROPERTY ON THE RIVER. YOU MIGHT KNOW ABOUT IT AUTOMATICALLY? OR DO I SEEK THIS OUT TO FIND OUT WHAT PROPERTY IS AND WHAT PROPERTY ISN'T ON THE

FLOODPLAIN. RIGHT? >> WE DO HAVE THE STATE FLOODPLAIN COORDINATOR TO GO THROUGH. THIS WAS DONE AS A LARGE SHOULD CORE NADER EFFORT. EVEN THE COUNTIES AROUND US, CHEATHAM COUNTY ALSO AS PART OF THE CUMBERLAND RIVER HAS THIS DONE FOR THEM AS WELL. THEY WERE OBTAINING REALLY THE FLOOD MAP ÃELEVATIONS ON THE MOUNT. WHILE THEY DID THAT THEY LOOK BACK AT THE ORDINANCE IT SAID WELL, NEED TO ADOPT THIS NEW OR UPDATED ORDINANCE WHICH INCLUDES THE NEW MAP NUMBERS BUT A LOT OF OTHER WATER ITEMS IN THERE.

WE DID RUN A COMPARE WITH OUR OLD ORDINANCE. IN THE NEW ORDINANCE.

WE WANTED TO SEE WHAT WERE BRINGING FORWARD TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

IT WAS A LOT OF MINOR CHANGES. SOME THERE IS A STATE OF BOWS CHANGES.OME PUNCTUATION.

FOR THE MOST PART IT'S THE SAME ORDINANCE JUST UPDATED FOR 2021.

>> IF THEY HAVE A QUESTION TO THE CONTACT YOUR OFFICE? >> YES THAT'S WHERE THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WILL COME OUT. RPC WE ARE THE KEEPERS OF THE FLOOD MAPS. THE ACTUAL AMOUNT. WE HAVE AN ONLINE HUMOR AND THE PAPER MAPS IN HER OFFICE. HOWEVER THE INTERPRETATION OF THE MAP IS UP TO THE CITY AND BUILDING A CODES DEPARTMENT THE ASSISTANCE OF THE STREET DEPARTMENT.

AT THE COUNTY IS THE BUILDING AND CODE DEPARTMENT ALONG WITH THE STORM WATER MANAGER.

THEY HAVE THE HOME STORM WATER MANAGEMENT. AN ARTIST OF THE STREET DEPARTMENT. LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THERE. WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY. AS LONG AS THE STRUCTURES AREN'T IN THE FLOODPLAINS THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ENSURING. IT'S NOT YOUR PROPERTY AS FAR AS THE STRUCTURES.

THAT'S WHAT NEEDS TO BE INSURED AND YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE MAP WITH YOUR OWN INSURANCE

PROVIDER. THANK YOU. >> CAN THANK YOU COUNCILMAN.

>> THINKING MAYOR. I WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT THE FLOOD INSURANCE.

BEING A PROPERTY OWNER WHEN I WAS TRYING TO GET FLOOD INSURANCE I WAS TOLD BY MY INSURANCE PROVIDER THAT I DIDN'T NEED FLOOD INSURANCE BECAUSE MY PROPERTY WAS NOT IN THAT AREA OF FLOOD INSURANCE. O EVERYBODY MAY NOT NEED FLOOD INSURANCE DEPENDING ON YOUR PROPERTY AS MR. TYNDALL SAID. AND WHERE IT'S LOCATED.

THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO ADD. >> THAT'S A GOOD POINT. GOOD POINT.

I GUESS THE STEEL WOULD BE INCLUDED UNDER THE FLOOD ORDINANCE BY THE RIVER.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING ITEM 1 Ã48. >> BECAUSE IT'S A FIRST READING IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS EMAIL THEM TO ME AND I'LL TRY TO GET YOU THE INFORMATION FROM

THE STATE OR ARE OTHER OFFICERS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THIS. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

NEXT ITEM NUMBER 2, ORDINANCE 50. MR. TYNDALL.

>> THANK YOU. THIS IS FILE NUMBER C 47 2020. THE APPLICATION SHALL BE PHYLLIS GENERAL PARTNERSHIP. THE AGENT IS DANA BACK BAGUETTE.

IT'S SONAR 3 AND THE REQUESTED GO TO OUR 6. IT'S NOTED FOR THIS APPLICATION THAT THE SHELBYVILLE PARTNERSHIP HAS OWNED AND EITHER REHABBED OR BUILT NEW HOMES YOU WILL SEE THEM IN THE PICTURES HERE OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. THE MAJORITY OF THIS AREA AS YOU SEE IN THE LETTER YELLOW OR THE MEDIUM YELLOW IS OUR Ã3. OUR Ã3 IS INTERESTING ZONE IN

[00:10:03]

IF IT'S 9000 SQUARE FEET YOU CAN BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE HOUSE.

OF ITS 11,000 YOU CAN BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY OR DUPLEX AND IF IT'S 12,000 SQUARE FEET YOU WILL BUILD SINGLE-FAMILY DUPLEX OR TRIPLEX. EVERY NEW LAW OF OUR Ã3 MUST BE TRIPLEX. THAT'S CODE WORKING THROUGH AND WE WANT TO GO BACK TO THE OLDER INTERPRETATION OF HAVING THAT AS A FLOATING ZONE. THIS PROPERTY IS BIG ENOUGH TO HAVE A TRIPLEX ON IT. HOWEVER, ON THE PROPERTY NEXT TO IT THEY BUILT A DUPLEX IN A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME SEPARATED EVEN THOUGH IT'S ON THE SAME LOT.

YOU WILL SEE IT HERE IN A SECOND. THIS IS THE PROPERTY QUESTION.

IT'S A SECOND TO LAST PROPERTY ON THE RIGHT. IF YOU GO DOWN SHALL BE STRAIGHT. THIS IS ONE OF THE STREETS WE'VE BEEN ENCOURAGED BY OVER THE LAST YEAR TO YEAR AND HALF WITH A LOT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT. PIERCE'S 2 STRUCTURES.

THERE ON THE SAME PROPERTY. GIVE A DUPLEX ON THE LEFT AND SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON THE RIGHT. YOU COULD SEE 2 DIFFERENT ENTRANCES FOR THE DUPLEX UNIT.

VERY MODEST HOUSING BUT PROVIDING MUCH, A BIG NEED IN THAT AREA IN TOWN AT A GOOD PRICE POINT AND GOOD-QUALITY DEVELOP IT.F YOU LOOKED UP THE STREET MAJORITY THE HOMES ON THE RIGHT HAVE BEEN REHABBED OR ARE NEW CONSTRUCTION BY THE SAME PARTNERSHIP REQUESTING THIS REZONING. HERE IS THE PROPERTY ON THE LEFT LOOKING BACK UP THE STREET. THIS IS LOOKING DOWN THE STREET.

THE REZONING WOULD BE ON THE RIGHT. THE STREET DOES NOT HAVE A CUL-DE-SAC. HOWEVER THE CITY DOES ON THE PROPERTY DOWN ON THE LEFT.

THE OWNER DOES OWN THE PROPERTY ON THE RIGHT AND THEY INDICATED THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO DONATE SOME LAND IF THE CITY IS WILLING TO CONSTRUCT A MODEST TURNAROUND.

IT MAY NOT MEET THE FULL REQUIREMENTS BUT BIG ENOUGH FOR OUR FIRETRUCKS THAT SERVICE AREA. CITY COUNCIL NUMBER 4 IS CURRENTLY VACANT LOT LATE LIKE TO BUILD ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES VERSUS THE TRIPLEX TO IMPROVE THE AESTHETICS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AS YOU SAW MOST OF THE HOMES WERE DUPLEXES OR SINGLE UNITS.

WE ESTIMATE THAT THIS WOULD BE 3 UNITS. YOU'RE EITHER TALKING TRIPLEX OR 3 UNITS. IT'S A WASH WHEN IT COMES TO THE DENSITY.

IT'S IN THE NEW PROVIDENCE PLANNING AREA. WE RECEIVED THE ONLY COMMENT WE RECEIVED WAS BY THE STREET DEPARTMENT AND THE TURNAROUND AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WOULD LIKE ONE AND I THINK WE CAN HAVE THAT WORKED OUT. IN THE FUTURE.

PLANNING STAFF OR COMMENCE APPROVAL. THE PROPOSED ZONING REQUEST IS FOR OUR Ã6 ZONING AND IS NOT OUT OF CHARACTER. QUIT FOR MASS TRANSIT, RETAIL, SIDEWALKS WILL BE REQUIRED OF ONE OF THESE LOTS ARE THE ARE 6 ZONING.

NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED WITH THIS REQUEST THE PLANNING COMMISSION

ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ORDINANCE 50?

CANCEL LADY STREET MEN. >> THANK YOU MAYOR. THE COMET THAT THEY WOULD DONATE PROPERTY TEVA CUL-DE-SAC OR TURNAROUND FOR THE FIRETRUCKS IN THE AREA.

MY WOULD BE OUTCOME IT CAN WE MAYBE THINK HEAD FOR TRYING TO CREATE LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN THAT TRUCKS THAT SERVICE AREA IN CASE WE WERE TO GET LARGER TRACTS FOR THAT AREA THAT NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO TURNAROUND AND IT'S JUST A THOUGHT PROCESS FOR FURTHER PLANNING THERE.

>> WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE DEVELOPER ABOUT A MONTH AGO. AND DISCUSSED SOME OF THE ONGOING PRODUCTS DOWN THERE. WE'VE GOT A PLAN TO ADDRESS THAT.

OUR CHIEF WAS THERE AS WELL. > ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. >> SURE, GOOD QUESTION.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? GO HEAD CANCEL LADY SMITH, YOUR RECOGNIZE.

>> WHAT ABOUT SIDEWALKS. WITH THAT WE IMPLEMENT IT? >> MR. TYNDALL SAID THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED IN FRONT OF THE UNITS. AS PART OF THE R Ã6

REQUIREMENT WHEN THEY PULLED THE BUILDING PERMIT. >> SO JUST IN FRONT OF THE

PARTICULAR COMPLEXES THAT WILL BE BUILT. >> IT WILL BE 3 HOMES AND IN

FRONT OF THOSE 3 HOMES ON THE LOT IN QUESTION RIGHT NOW. >> HOW IS THAT GOING TO FIGURE

OUT THE REST OF THE LOTS IN THE SAME AREA? >> WHEN THEY APPLY FOR THEIR PERMITS THEY WILL HAVE TO ALSO SHOW THE SIDEWALK ON THE PLAN AT THAT TIME THE STREET DEPARTMENT WILL DETERMINE WHAT THE APPROPRIATE DISTANCE AND WITH FROM THE ROAD WILL BE.

>> SO FOR THE WHOLE AREA, THE WHOLE ROAD? >> THE STREET DEPARTMENT KNOWS ABOUT THE WIDTH IF WE WERE TO IMPROVE SHALL BE STREET. AND/OR PUT UP CURB AND OR

[00:15:02]

LUCKILY IT'S A STRAIGHT SHOT FOR THIS MORNING AND NOT CURVED.

IT MAKES IT EASIER. >> YOU'RE SAYING THERE ARE ALREADY SIDEWALKS IN THE AREA

BUT YOU'RE JUST MAKING SURE PUTTING SOME FOR THE COMPLEX. >> THERE NOT SIDEWALKS SHALL BE STREET. THERE'S SOME SIDEWALK OUT ON NEW PROVIDENCE BOULEVARD THERE.

IF ANY SIDEWALK WERE TO GO BACK HAVE TO BE A CITY PROJECT AT THIS MORNING. 3 UNITS HERE, THERE'S NO NEXUS TO REQUIRE THEM TO DO THE SIDEWALK FOR THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> I THINK WE DO NEED TO THINK ABOUT PUTTING SIDEWALKS IN THERE BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF CHILDREN, I'VE SEEN CATCHING THE BUS AND WALKING UP THAT STREET AND I'VE BEEN DOWN THAT ROAD AND IT'S DANGEROUS. WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT PUTTING SIDEWALKS IN THAT AREA.

THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING

ORDINANCE 50? >> HEARING NONE AND SEE NONE. MR. 10 DON'T WORK READY FOR

ITEM NUMBER 3. ORDINANCE 51. >> PLANNING COMMISSION C 48 2020.

IF THE APPLICATION OF RAYMOND SHEPPARD CHRISTOPHER EBERT IS THE AGENT.

THIS IS POINT-EAT JUST UNDER ONE ACRE OF OUR Ã2. VACANT AND WISHES TO GO TO OUR Ã6. IT IS NOT AN EXTENSION OF THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION. THE PROPERTY IS WEST OF SOUTH ROSEWOOD DRIVE IN TURNER REYNOLDS COURT INTERSECTION NORTH OF 41 8 BYPASS.

CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NUMBER 7 THEY WISH TO DEVELOP UP TO 4 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS.

IT IS NOTED THAT THE CURRENT R Ã2 ZONING ON THIS PROPERTY WHICH IS THE DOMINANT ZONING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD ALLOW 2 OR 3. 3 WOULD BE VERY THEY COULD SQUEEZE POTENTIALLY 3 LOTS AND IF THEY GOT A VARIANCE THEY COULD DELEGATE 3 LOTS AND.

2 OR 3 UNITS WITH THE CURRENT ZONING OUR Ã6 WOULD AFFORD THEM FOR LOTS THAT WOULD FRONT ROSEWOOD. CITY STREET TO PERMIT SAID ACCESS WOULD BE OFF ROSEWOOD AND YOU SEE THE COMMENTS FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE SCHOOL SYSTEM REGARDING THE CAPACITIES OF THE SCHOOLS MENTIONED THERE. THERE WERE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS. IT IS IN THE HILDALE PLANNING AREA.

I'LL SHOW YOU THESE. THAT DRIVEWAY ON THE LEFT THERE IS A SMALL BUSINESS THAT'S CHANGED HANDS A FEW TIMES. I THINK IT MOST RECENTLY WITH THE CHILD'S CONSIGNMENTS OF .

REFERENCE THE BYPASS BUT HAS IN EXCESS OF THE SIGN. THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY BEHIND THAT C1 PROPERTY THERE. THIS IS LOOKING ACROSS THE STREET.

THAT'S PRETTY INDICATIVE OF THE OF THEIR HOUSES IN THE AREA. UP THE STREET.

THEN OACROSS IS ANY RESECTION O THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS BUILT IN THE LAST 20 OR SO YEARS.

THERE IS THAT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO THE LEFT OF WHERE THIS REZONING REQUEST IS.

PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS DISAPPROVAL. THE PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE PLANNING. THE PRESENT ARE 2 ZONING IS ASSUMED TO BE CORRECT UNLESS THE PROPOSED ZONE IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE. THE PARCEL IS EITHER INCORRECTLY ZONE THE FIRST PLACE OR MAJOR CHANGE OF ECONOMIC PHYSICAL OR SOCIAL NATURE IT WAS NOT CONSIDERED IN THE CURRENT PLAN. OR WHICH HAS SUBSTANTIALLY ALTERED THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA. THE POTENTIAL FOR INCREASED DENSITY WITH HIS TRUCK ALREADY EXISTS WITH OUR DESTITUTE SINGLE-FAMILY CLASSIFICATION.

THE PROPOSE OUR Ã6 IS NOT IN CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE AND DOESN'T SERVE THE SITE AND NO ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WERE RELATED. DEMENTIA WITH OUR Ã2. THEY CAN SUBDIVIDE IT 2 OR 3 TIMES ALREADY AS IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED. PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO

RECOMMENDS DISAPPROVAL. >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL REGARDING ORDINANCE 51?

>> A QUICK QUESTION. YOU'RE SAYING BASICALLY LIKE THERE'S GONNA BE 3 STRUCTURES.

THEY BEAT SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES? OR, ONE IS THE PLAN? >> OUR Ã2 IN OUR Ã6 ARE BOTH SINGLE-FAMILY HOME DETACHED HOME ZONES. THE DIFFERENCE REALLY IS THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF LAND PER LOT AND THE SIDE SETBACKS ON THE FRONT SETBACKS ON THE PROPERTY ARE SMALLER IN OUR Ã6. WHICH WOULD ALLOW THEM TO SQUEEZE OUT 1/4 LOT.

[00:20:01]

>> MORE HOME. GOT YOU. OKAY SO, ALREADY.

I WAS CHECKING. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU COUNCILMAN HOLLOMAN.

YES COUNCILMAN ALAN. >> I DIDN'T SEE ANY OF THE RESTAURANTS THAT COMPLAINT OR ANYTHING ABOUT. DID I MISS IT OR WORSE OR NOT ANY?

>> SURE COUNCILMAN ALAN. IN YOUR POCKET RIGHT AFTER THE MAP THERE'S A COPY OF THE LOCAL PETITION THAT WAS SUPPLIED BY, WHAT'S HIS NAME. MR. DON LAWRENCE.

THERE IT IS. IT'S ALSO ASSIGNED BY SEVERAL OTHER RESIDENTS OF THE AREA.

CITING INCREASED TRAFFIC AND LOWERING OF PROPERTY VALUES IN THE AREA.

AND HE DID COME TALK AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >> OKAY SO YOU'RE REALLY LOOKING AT IF YOU DO OUR Ã60 COULD POSSIBLY DO WHAT 5 OR 6 HOUSES CLOSE TO 3?

>> ACCORDING TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT YOU COULD PROBABLY AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ESTIMATED UP TO 9. THAT WOULD REQUIRE PUTTING IN ALLEY AND AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE.

IF ALL THE UNITS FRONT OF OF ROSEWOOD WHICH IS WHAT THE CITY STREET DEPARTMENT SAID THAT IN

FORCE. >> OKAY. OKAY, THANK K YOU.

>> THANK YOU COUNCILMAN ALAN. ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT ORDINANCE 51?

>> HEARING NONE WERE READY FOR ITEM ORDINANCE 52. CERTAIN DULL.

>> PLANNING COMMISSION C 49 2020. THE APPLICATION OF BRYANT AND SOUK COMMUNITY PROPERTIES. AGENT IS RITA BALDWIN. IT'S 7.23 ACRES CURRENTLY ZONED C5 AND THAT REQUESTING TO GO TO OUR Ã4. IT IS AN EXTENSION OF OUR FORCE TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTIES ON THE WEST SIDE OF FORT CAMPBELL BOULEVARD AND LEADING MARION DRIVE EAST OF THE WEST FORK CREEK. IT IS CITY COUNCIL BOARD NUMBER 3. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS MAP THE DARK BLUE IS ALL C5. DARK ORANGE IS OUR Ã4. BACK WHEN SONY WAS ORIGINALLY DONE IN THIS AREA YOU COULD SEE JUST SHOT AN AREA 250 TO 300 FEET BACK FROM FORT CAMPBELL BOULEVARD. THIS WILL BE COMMERCIAL AND BEHIND IT WILL BE MULTIFAMILY. THE PROPERTY HAS NOT DEVELOPED EXCEPT FOR SOME OLDER COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN THE FRONT WHICH YOU WILL SEE. THERE WISHING TO TAKE THE R Ã4 FROM THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED AND DEVELOP A PORTION OF C Ã5 WHICH IS UNDER THEIR OWNERSHIP. THIS IS THE PROPERTY ON THE LEFT.

IT'S AS YOU CLIMB THE HILL AFTER YOU GO OVER TO WEST CREEK.

THIS IS BEHIND THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT WERE STANDING IN THE AREA THAT WOULD BE REZONED TO OUR Ã4. THERE'S OLD COMMERCIAL PADS AND PARKING LOTS BACK THERE AND VACANT LAND. IT'S LOOKING BACK TOWARD FORT CAMPBELL.

BUT ON THE TREE LINE. THIS IS PROPERTY ON THE RIGHT LOOKING BACK ACROSS ON THE LEFT AT THE TOP OF THE HILL. THERE'S A HOME BACK ON THE PROPERTY NOW THAT IS PART OF THE ZONING REQUEST. THERE SHOULD BE NOTED IN THE FIRST PICTURE AND I WILL GET BACK TO THAT. IT'S ASK BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH WHITE TRUCKS COMING OUT WOULD BE THE ACCESS TO THE SITE. PROPOSED TO BE APARTMENT/TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT ALL ON ONE LOT VERSUS INDIVIDUAL LOTS.

AGAIN, THAT WAS FOR TESTIMONY AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION. HERE IS MORE OF THOSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. HERE'S A GOOD PICTURE OF THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. FAIRLY LEVEL FOR THAT AREA OF TOWN.

CURRENTLY THERE IS NO SEWER AVAILABLE THAT WILL BE WORKED OUT IN THE SITE PLAN PIECE WITH GAS AND WATER. WERE NO TRAFFIC ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY STREET DEPARTMENT. IN THIS CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT. MYSTICAL ESTIMATES WOULD IT BE 86 UNITS. THE STRESS FOR THE AREA OF ZONING IN QUESTION.

I BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT HUNDRED 15 TOTAL UNITS INCLUDING THE AREA THAT IS ALREADY OUR Ã4. THAT WAS FAST AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

IT'S IN THE AIRPORT PLANNING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

[00:25:01]

THORNE Ã4 MULTIFAMILY ZONING REQUEST IS EXTENSION OF THAT ESTABLISHED OUR Ã4 TO THE REST AND MAKES MORE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE BACK OF THE C5 ZONING DISTRICT.

THE POOR ARE FOR DISTRICT IS AN AREA WHERE HOUSING NEEDS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO GOODS AND SERVICES AND MASSIVE TRANSIT AND ADD FORT CAMPBELL.

ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE SERVES THE SITE OR CANCER OF THE SITE WITH GAS AND WATER AND NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ARE IDENTIFIED. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS

APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU MR. TITTLE. ANY MEMBER OF COUNSEL HAS

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON ORDINANCE 52? >> YES MARY.

>> COUNCILMAN ALAN YOUR RECOGNIZE. >> THERE SEEMS TO BE A SMALL AXIS HERE FOR SO MANY HOMES. IS NOT GOING TO BE ADDRESSED AT THE SITE?

>> THE SCALE WERE AT I BELIEVE IT'S 50 OR 60 FEET WIDE. IT WILL ACCOMMODATE ONE LANE IN OR POTENTIALLY 2 LANES OUT, ONE RIGHT AND ONE LEFT FROM THE OUTSIDE.

THE STREET DEPARTMENT DIDN'T HAVE ANY ACCESS ISSUES AT THAT TIME.

ONCE WE GET THAT SITE PLAN WE WILL DO FURTHER ANALYSIS OF WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING HOW

MANY UNITS ARE BACK THERE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU COUNCILMAN ALAN. COUNCILMAN ERB YOUR RECOGNIZE. >> THANK YOU MAYOR.

I HAVE SIMILAR CONCERNS. TRAFFIC, GETTING ON FORT CAMPBELL BOULEVARD GOING TOWARDS FORT CAMPBELL BOULEVARD. IT WILL BE RIGHT OR NOTHING.

JUST LIKE ON MY STREET. YOU TAKE A RIGHT OR YOU DON'T GO LEFT OR YOU SIT THERE FOR AN HOUR AND 1/2. I REALLY HAVE SOME CONCERNS WITH TRAFFIC PROBLEMS ON THEM.

I HAVE TO LOOK INTO IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU COUNCILMAN ERB.

ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENTS ABOUT ORDINANCE 52? >> I DEMAND.

COUNCILMAN RICHMAN. >> COUNCILMAN RICHMOND YOUR RECORD EYES.

>> I JUST STOPPED TO GET A TACO DATE AND THAT WAS MY CONCERN. ONCE YOU'RE FACING I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S NORTH OR SOUTH BUT YEAH, IF YOU'RE GOING WITH ONGOING TRAFFIC THAT RIGHT THAT COUNCILMAN ERB SAID WAS EASY RIGHT.OING BACK LEFT IS MAJOR PROBLEM.

MAYBE THE STREET AND THE DEVELOPER CAN LOOK AT HOW TO ADDRESS IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE COULD BE SEPARATE DIFFERENT ENTRANCE. CORRECT ME IF I MISS HER JUDE MR. TYNDALL THAT WILL BE THE ONLY ENTRANCE. I'M LOOKING AT THE RED C Ã5 AREA. IS NOT THE ONLY ENTRANCE AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT ELEMENT?

>> YES, I ASKED THAT QUESTION OF THE ENGINEER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHETHER ENTRANCE WOULD BE AT THE INDICATED IT WOULD BE WHERE YOU SEE THAT HATCHED AREA TOUCHING FORT CAMPBELL BOULEVARD. AGAIN, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 100 AND HUNDRED AND 20 UNITS AS

THEY GET IT WORKED OUT. WOULD BE ANTICIPATED BACK HERE. >> OKAY.

I'M LOOKING AT, I DON'T KNOW HOW EMERGENCY VEHICLES MAY ACCESS THAT AROUND TRAFFIC, AND ALL THAT. THAT'S A HUGE CONCERN OF MINE. AS WELL.

IF THE DEVELOPER AND MAYBE THE STREETS DEPARTMENT CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT AND FIGURE SOMETHING OUT.

IT JUST LOOKS LIKE A DEATH TRAP. >> ALL RIGHT, I WILL PASS ALONG

THAT MESSAGE.> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU COUNCILMAN RICHMAN.

GOOD QUESTION. ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION? >> MAYOR ABBA COMMENT.

TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WAS GESTATED. ALSO IS THE FIRE TRUCK CODE.

WHEN THE TRY TO GET IN THERE IS HER TURN AROUND IN THERE? >> WON'T BE A PUBLIC STREET.

IT WILL BE A PRIVATE MOMENT. LIKELY WITH THIS THEY WILL HAVE SOME SORT OF A LOOP PARKING LOT. OR YOU CAN TURN AROUND IN THERE OR GO IN A LOOP.

A COUPLE BUILDINGS AROUND THE PARKING LOT IS WHAT I WOULD EXPECT.

>> I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE EMERGENCY PROBLEMS. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS.

ALSO, WHAT IS THE PROXIMITY OF HOMES OR APARTMENTS BEING FELT NEXT T TO I WOULD SAY

BUSINESSES AND ND ANIES. >> HOW CLOSE WITH THIS BE TO OTHER BUSINESSES?

>> YES. >> WE HAVE REQUIRED SETBACKS. 20 FOOT FOR THE OUR Ã4 AND AT LEAST 20 FEET OFF THE BACK OF THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. THAT'S RIGHT THERE 40 FEET.

THEN THERE'S BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW COMMERCIAL AGAINST OUR Ã4.

OF TREES AND FENCING. THERE ARE SOME REQUIREMENTS OF SEPARATION OF THEM.

OUR ÃFORMS A GREAT MIX. MULTIFAMILY NEXT TO COMMERCIAL PROVIDES INSTANT CONSUMERS AS WELL AS RENTERS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE AFTER A SO IF THEY DON'T LIKE THE AREA OPPOSED TO FOLKS BUYING AN AREA. WOULD YOU LIKE MULTIFAMILY

AROUND MORE OF OUR CORE COMMERCIAL AREAS. >> SOUNDS GOOD.

THE ONLY CONCERN I HAVE IS EITHER SPEAKER SAID IS THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES MAY NOT BE

[00:30:07]

THIS COULD BE TOTALED 150 UNITS. I DON'T THINK I CAN APPROVE THIS IF THERE WON'T BE ENOUGH ROOM FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES. THERE NEEDS TO BE AN ADDITIONAL

ENTRANCE AND EXIT. >> I WILL PASS ALONG CONCERNS TO THE ENGINEER.

HE WILL HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING NEXT WEEK. I HOPE THEY CAN GET BACK TO

BEFORE THAT.> THANK YOU. >> AND Q CANCEL LADY SMITH. ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT ORDINANCE 52? WE ARE READY FOR ITEM 5 RESOLUTION 41.

MR. TYNDALL? >> THIS IS ANOTHER ABANDONMENT. YOU HAD ONE A MONTH OR 2 AGO.

ALSO FROM MR. CORLEY IT WAS ACROSS THE STREET. THIS ABANDONMENT FOR WEST AREA OF WHAT WE CALL MORALITY. IT'S OFF OF EIGHTH STREET. A VERY SHORT SECTION CURRENTLY YOU WOULD KNOW IF IT WAS PART OF THEIR BUSINESS THERE OR NOT. BUT, THE REQUESTING AN ABANDONMENT OF THAT SO THEY WOULD THEN OWN THE ENTIRE BLOCK.

THE ONLY COMMENTS MADE WAS FOR GAS AND WATER TO RETAIN WATER AND SEWER EASEMENTS IF NECESSARY. THERE IS RIGHT THERE. LOOKS LIKE THE DRIVEWAY NOT NECESSARILY LIKE A PUBLIC STREET AND THE REQUESTING AN ABANDONMENT OF THAT.

THEY'LL BE UP TO CARRY ON NEXT WEEK. >> ANY QUESTIONS.

>> YES MAYOR. >> COUNCILMAN ELLEN. >> DISCUSSING WATER HEALTH ANY

STATIONS DOWN THE ALLEY?>>. >> IS LOOKING IN HIS PURPLE FILE SO IT'S SERIOUS.

>> GUESS WHAT HIS COMMENT WAS RETAIN PUBLIC UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

THAT WAS HER ONLY COMMENT ON THIS. I WILL GET CLARIFICATION IF

THEY HAVE ANY STRUCTURES DOWN THERE OR NOT. >> OKAY.

YEAH, IN LOOKING AT IT I'M SURE THEY WORKED IT OUT. IN LOOKING AT IT, IF HE'S GONNA MAKE THAT CONNECT GAS AND WATER NEEDS TO GET DOWN IN THERE. THAT WILL BE A PROBLEM.

>> WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER ONE OF THEM. >> YEP, SURE DON'T.

GOOD LORD. DOES THIS HAPPEN TO BE IN MY AREA.

>> CANCEL LADY SMITH. >> IS A SUM AWARD. >> YES THAT'S RIGHT THE BACK OF

THE PICTURE THERE. >> CAN WE MAKE SURE THE GAS AND WATER IS SITUATED AND PUT IN THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE SO I DON'T HAVE TO BE FIGHTING WITH LAWYERS.

>> YES MA'AM WE PROMISE WE WILL. >> I'LL GET THOSE ANSWERS FOR YOU. > REASON THAT COMMENT IS THERE IS A RUN OF HE ILL, WILL WE HAVE EASEMENTS OR WE WILL RETAIN AN ASEMENT OF THE GAS LINE IT'S OVER LINE THAT GOES

DOWN THE E AISLE. LIMITATION IS HE CANNOT BUILD A BUILDING ON >> THANK YOU MARK,

THAT MAKES SENSE. >> YEAH.

>> WHEN I HEARD T IT JUST KIND OF A RED FLAG ABOUT THE EASEMENT.

IF THE PIPE GOES THROUGH I'M SURE IF YOU HAVE TO DIG IT UP OR SOMETHING THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO MOVE EVERYTHING AND YOU HAVE TO GET ACCESS TO FIX THE PIPE.

>> GUESS THAT IS CORRECT. THEY CAN LEAVE IT PAVED. I CAN CLOSE IT OFF AND PUT IT CURVE UP AND KEEPING AS PARKING FOR THE RESTAURANT. IF WE HAD TO GET IN IN THERE.

WHATEVER CONDITION IN THE BEGINNING WE WERE TO GET UP AND REPLACE IT.

>> OKAY. >> THANK YOU MAYOR. >> THANK YOU COUNCILMAN ELLEN.

CANCEL LADY SMITH THAT SATISFY YOUR QUESTION. >> THE EASEMENT, IT BELONGS TO

THE CITY, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES MA'AM. >> OKAY AS LONG AS THEY KNOW THAT. AND THEY KNOW HOW THEY CAN USE IT.

I'M ALL RIGHT WITH IT. >> YES MA'AM. >> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR.

[00:35:06]

>> IN THE RESOLUTION IT DOES RETENTION OF UTILITY EASEMENTS. >> OKAY.

GREAT. >> COUNCILMAN HENLEY RECOGNIZE. >> THANK YOU WHERE TO THE CITY

PURCHASE IS PROBABLY OR WAS IT GIVEN TO US? >> IS LIKELY AN OLD EXISTING ALLEY. PERSONAL ALLEY BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT USED TO RUN THE LENGTH OF COLLEGE STREET ON ON THERE. WHEN MR. LEY ACQUIRED THE BUSINESS HE PROBABLY HAD ABANDONMENTS OVER TIME AND THIS IS A REMAINING STUB OF ELEGANCE OF THIS PROPERTY. SINCE HE OWNS A WHOLE ROPERTY IS PROBABLY LOOKING AT ASSEMBLING AT ALL SO HE COULD DO WHAT HE NEEDS TO OUT THERE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT IS BUT HE'S REQUESTED ABANDONMENT WHICH IS HIS RIGHT. AND IT'S FOR YOU TO HEAR.

>> SO THE PROS OF US GIVING IT AWAY IS WE DON'T HAVE TO MAINTAIN IT ANYMORE?

>> CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

ASK EVERY LITTLE BIT HELPS. THANK YOU SIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING RESOLUTION 41? OKAY MR. TYNDALL. I SEE WERE FINISHED WITH YOU

[2) CONSENT AGENDA]

MADAME CLERK. >> ORDINANCE 40 Ã2020 Ã21. SECOND READING.

MONDAY THE OFFICIAL CODE RELATIVE TO ADOPTION OF THE UPDATED CODES OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL ORDINANCE 41 Ã2020 Ã21. SECOND READING.

MANY OF THE OFFICIAL CODE RE-APPORTIONING THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELECTING PERSONS FOR THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCILMEMBER FOR ANNEXED TERRITORY OF BRITAIN SPRINGS ROAD NEAR CENTER ROAD. ORDINANCE 43 Ã2020 Ã21. SECOND READING.

AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE A MAP OF THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE APPLICATION OF MARK HOLLOMAN AND JOHN HAMPEL. HOUSTON SMITH ÃAGENT, FOR ZONE CHANGE PROPERTY OF LOCATED ON THE INTERSECTION OF GOLF QUOTE IN COLONIAL COURT.N THE INTERSECTION OF PARADISE HILL ROAD AND HIGHLAND CIRCLE FROM OUR ÃONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO OUR Ã6 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. ORDINANCE 44 Ã2020 Ã21.

SECOND READING. AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE. APPLICATION OF AVA HOLMES, LLC /EMPEROR FREDERICK EMPEROR FREDERICK AND BRICEBURG WIDTHS ÃAGENTS, FOR ZONE CHANGE A PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF DOG STREET FROM OUR Ã3 3 FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO OUR Ã6 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. ORDINANCE 45 Ã2020 Ã21.

SECOND READING. AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE, APPLICATION OF CHRISTOPHER COLBURN FOR ZONE CHANGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH STEPHEN WHILE FERRY ROAD AND ASHLAND CITY ROAD FROM OUR Ã ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO SEE Ã2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

ORDINANCE 46 Ã2020 Ã2021. SECOND READING. AMENDMENT THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE, APPLICATION OF R E4 E HOLDINGS, LLC, A CLINIC PROPERTY GROUP, LLC AGENT, FOR ZONE CHANGE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF HICKORY GROVE BOULEVARD AND HICKORY HEIGHTS FROM OUR Ã2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO OUR ÃSINGLE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

RESOLUTION 37 Ã2020 Ã21. IMPROVING A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR SALE OF WINE AT POP SHELF, 2819 WILMA RUDOLPH BOULEVARD. RESOLUTION 42 Ã2020 Ã21.

APPROVING APPOINTMENTS TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE AND ROXY REGIONAL THEATER BOARD OF DIRECTORS. ADOPTION OF MINUTES:NOVEMBER 5, NOVEMBER 10.

>> THINKING MADAME CLERK. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA?

[3) FINANCE COMMITTEE]

CHAIRMAN BURKART. >> BECAME MAYOR. WE ARE 5 ITEMS THIS EVENING.

RESOLUTION 35 Ã2020 Ã21 AUTHORIZE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE TBI RELATED TO TO MOBILE IDENTIFICATION DEVICE PROPERTY, PUBLIC SAFETY AND ON ITS COMMITTEE APPROVAL. WHAT THIS DOES IS LET'S BE OFFICERS IN THE FIELD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY VICTIMS AND OR SUSPECTS BEFORE BRINGING THEM DOWNTOWN.

IT'S A BLEAK GREAT TOOL FOR THEM. IF ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS I CAN

TRY TO ANSWER THOSE. >> ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT RESOLUTION 35?

>> YES MAYOR. >> CANCEL LADY SMITH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

[00:40:01]

>> I THINK WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS THE CHIEF AND I. MY QUESTION CONCERNED THAT THIS WOULD BE FOR HOMICIDE ONLY. NOT FOR THE ENTIRE CITY. HE KIND OF AGREED WITHOUT STARTING OFF WITH USING THIS DEVICE. TO TAKE FINGERPRINTS.

THIS IS WHAT WERE TALKING ABOUT? I THINK I'M ON THE RIGHT TRACK?

>> I THANK YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK. THIS WOULD GIVE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THE ABILITY TO DO MOBILE FINGERPRINTS AS ARE OUT IN THE FIELD INSTEAD OF

BRINGING THEM TO THE VISTA LANE LOCATION. >> THAT'S FOR THE HOMICIDE TO

START OUT WITH, RIGHT? >> I'M NOT SURE ABOUT JUST HOMICIDE.

>> I'M HERE MAYOR. THE ANSWER THE QUESTION IS YES. ONLY CAN HAVE ONE DEVICE.

PRIMARILY CANCEL LADY SMITH THIS IS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION FOR THE DECEASED.

AND UNFORTUNATELY WE COME ACROSS INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE DECEASED WITHOUT NOTIFICATION.

THIS PIECE OF EQUIPMENT WILL BE HOUSED AND CHECKED OUT PRIOR HOMICIDE DETECTIVES ONLY.

>> THANK YOU. THAT SOUNDS GOOD TO ME. >> YES MA'AM.

>> THANK YOU CANCEL LADY SMITH. >> RESOLUTION 36 Ã2020 Ã21 AUTHORIZE A MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT WITH AUSTIN P STATE UNIVERSITY FOR POLICE SERVICES. FINANCE COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE APPROVAL. I THINK BECAUSE WE HAVE A NEW CHIEF MAYBE THAT WERE GOING TO COME WHERE THEY HELP US THEY HELP THEM KIND OF THING. IF THEY NEED US WE COULD GO HELP THEM AND IF VICE VERSA. I THINK IT'S A MUTUAL AGREEMENT.

>> ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT RESOLUTION 36? >> YES MAYOR.

>> IS AT COUNCILMAN ELLEN? >> YES. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE IN A

BARREL. >> CAN HEAR ME NOW? >> JUST BARELY.

TRYING AGAIN. ASK HOW ABOUT NOW? >> AT THE LITTLE BETTER.

KEEP GOING. >> OKAY. >> THERE YOU GO.

OKAY NOW YOU RECOGNIZE. >> HOW OFTEN DO WE RENEW THESE? WE'VE DONE THEM IN THE PAST.

IS THERE A TIME LIMIT THAT WE HAVE ON THESE? >> THAT'S SUCH A GOOD QUESTION

WILL HAVE OUR LEGAL COUNSEL ANSWER IT. >> WE OFTEN RENEW THESE WHEN THERE'S A CHANGE IN THE TOP LEADERSHIP AT AUSTIN PEAY OR AND CPD.

WE HAVE SIMILAR TYPES OF AGREEMENTS WITH PORT CAMPBELL AND EVERY TIME THERE IS A CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP. THE LEADERSHIP TEAMS HAVE REQUESTED TO UPDATE THEM BUT, TECHNICALLY THESE AGREEMENTS ARE IN TO RETAIN UNTIL ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER DECIDES THEY WANT TO IN THEM. JUST BECAUSE THERE'S A CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP, TECHNICALLY THERE'S NOT REALLY A REQUIREMENT TO RENEW THEM. BY THEIR OWN TERMS. IT'S DEVELOPED CUSTOM PRACTICE WHEN THERE'S A CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP.

I THINK IT MAKES EVERYBODY FEEL BETTER AND IT'S ALSO PROVIDES WHEN THERE'S A CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP IT'S A GOOD TIME FOR THE LEADERS TO READ LOOK THESE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS AND SEE

IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT DOES NEED TO BE CHANGED.>> THANK YOU.

COUNCILMAN ALLEN DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> SURE DID.

THANK YOU. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING

RESOLUTION 36? >> JEFF BURKART. >> RESOLUTION 38 Ã2020 Ã21.

RECOMMENDING BANKING SERVICE CONTRACTS UNDER REEVALUATE LANGUAGE AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. WE REEVALUATE THESE EVERY 4 YEARS.

WE GOT QUOTES FROM DIFFERENT BANKS. THE TEAM SENT OUT SOME RFPS.

LOOKING AT THOSE IT WILL BE THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE KEEP THE CURRENT COME CONTRACT THAT RUNS THROUGH NEXT YEAR AND TO SEND OUT AN RFP AT THAT TIME AND SHE PROBABLY DIDN'T THIS TIME BUT SHE GOT SOME QUOTES FROM DIFFERENT BANKS IN TOWN AND PUBLIC NEXT YEAR WE PROBABLY NEED TO TO SEND OUT SOME RP'S TO GET SOME NEW QUOTES ON THE BANKING SERVICES.

>> THINKING CHAIRMAN BURKART. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT RESOLUTION 38?

>> MAYOR. I WILL HAVE A QUESTION. >> THINK IT MAYOR.

I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABSTAINING FROM VOTING ON THIS DUE TO MY EMPLOYMENT.

>> CANCEL LADY SMITH THAT YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> I JUST WANTED ASK WHAT

[00:45:02]

WHERE REQUIRED TO RE-EVALUATE OUR SERVICES. SO THIS IS WHAT WERE DOING.

THERE WILL BE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR ANY CHANGE TO THE BANKING RELATIONSHIPS WE CURRENTLY HOUSE. ACCORDING TO CHAIRMAN BURKART WILL BE DOING AN RFP NEXT YEAR.

MOST LIKELY TO GET A BETTER PRICE FROM SOME OF THE LOCAL INSTITUTIONS.

>> IS SET ON OUR LOANS? >> IT'S BASICALLY FOR OUR DAY-TO-DAY ACTIVITY.

>> ,OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION? CHAIRMAN BURKART.

>> ACUTE. RESOLUTION 39 DECLARING INTENT TO REVERSE $40 MILLION FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS EXPENDITURES WITH PROCEEDS OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, NOTES, OR OTHER DEBT OBLIGATIONS FINANCE COMMITTEE APPROVAL. THIS IS SIMPLY WHERE WE WILL TAKE SOME OF THE MONIES WE'VE SPENT OUT OF CITY GENERAL AND PARASOLS BACK WITH BONDS.

LONG-TERM BONDS AND ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT PROJECTS. I HAVE A LIST OF THEM HERE FROM THE STREET DEPARTMENT, PARK SUMMER, FIRE DEPARTMENT, POLICE.

WE HAVE SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THIS. THIS IS JUST SOMETHING WE SIMPLY DO JUST TO GET THIS ON A LONG-TERM BASIS. TO PAY BACK.

>> ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT RESOLUTION 39? CHAIRMAN BURKART.

>> THINK IT MAYOR. RESOLUTION 40, APPROVING A LEASE WITH ROXY REGIONAL THEATER FINANCE COMMITTEE APPROVAL. WERE ENTERING INTO A LEASE MUCH LIKE THE MUSEUM OR THE SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER. THE HIGHLIGHTS WILL BE A DOLLAR A YEAR. AFTER 3 YEARS WILL GET SOME ADDITIONAL RENT ON TICKET SALES AND OTHER REVENUE. 25 YEAR LEASE. RENEWAL BUT WITH MUTUAL AGREEMENT IN 5-YEAR INCREMENTS. CAN TERMINATE THE LEASE UPON MUTUAL AGREEMENTS.

THIS IS SOMETHING I THINK MAYOR AND OTHERS HAVE WORKED ON. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS I'LL TRY

TO ANSWER THEM OR MAYBE MAYOR. >> THANK YOU CHAIRMAN BURKART. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT RESOLUTION

40. >> YES MIRROR. >> COUNCILMAN ELLEN.

>> YES HOW DOES THAT PLAY INTO THE EVENTUAL PERFORMING ART CENTER? I I KNOW BEFORE PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE WE NEEDED TO

HAVE CONTROL OF THE ROXY. >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. HIS IS A CONTINUATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP PRIOR TO PURCHASING THE PROPERTY. WE NEEDED AN OPERATING AGREEMENT FOR A LEASE TO KNOW WHAT EACH PARTY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR UNTIL WE GET A NEW BUILDING BUILT. THIS LEASE JUST COMMEMORATES IS THAT.

AND MAKES IT OFFICIAL. >> OKAY. BUT, WE CAN GET OUT OF IT

ANYTIME. >> MUTUAL AGREEMENT, WE CAN GET OUT OF IT.

YES. >> OKAY, ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU MAYOR.

>> COUNCILMAN NORCIA RECORD EYES. >> MAYOR WHEN WE DISCUSSED MY SERVING ON THE BOARD I THOUGHT WE HAD DECIDED THAT THAT WOULD'VE BEEN JANUARY 2021 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2021. IF LEAVE IT LIKE IT IS REALLY PROBABLY WOULD NEED TO

ABSTAINING ON THE VOTE AND RESOLUTION 40. >> WE WILL OFFER AN AMENDMENT

ON THURSDAY EVENING TO CHANGE THAT. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU COUNCILMAN NORIS. YES COUNSEL LADY SMITH. >> I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION OF RESOLUTION 20. DID WE RECEIVE ANY FUNDS FROM THE ROXY NOW?

>> NO MAN WE DON'T RECEIVE ANY FUNDING BUT, AS PART OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT WE WILL GET PROCEEDS AFTER A 3 YEAR PERIOD. FROM TICKET SALES AS WELL AS OTHER SPONSORSHIPS AND OTHER

EVENT REVENUE. >> THANK YOU MAYOR. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS

REGARDING RESOLUTION 40? CHAIRMAN BURKART. >> FABRIC CONCLUDES MY REPORT.

[4) GAS & WATER COMMITTEE]

CHAIR LADY GUZMAN. >> I WILL REPORT NEXT THURSDAY. >> THANK YOU CHAIR LADY GUZMAN.

[5) HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE]

NEXT REPORT IS CHAIRMAN ELLEN. CHAIRMAN ALAN YOU RECOGNIZE. >> THINK IT MAYOR.

[6) PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE]

EVERY HAVE A REPORT THURSDAY. >> THANK YOU CHAIRMAN ELLEN. THINK IT MAYOR THE REPORT NEXT

THURSDAY. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU CHAIR LADY GUZMAN'S.

[7) PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE]

[00:50:04]

MY UNDERSTANDING IS UP TO A $50 CITATION THAT COULD BE TAKEN WITH THE CITY COURT.

IF ANYBODY HAS ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS I CAN TRY TO ANSWER. WE HAVE MR. GOLDEN HERE AS

WELL. >> COUNCILMAN GARRETT YOU WILL RECOGNIZE.

>> THINK IT IT MAYOR. IT TIES INTO THIS BUT OUTWARDLY ATED.

PREFER TO POP UP MR. BAKER IF I'M OUT OF LINE ON N ACCIDENT. IT'S IN REFERENCE TO HER LIMITATIONS IN REGARDS O OPPOSING FINES. NOT SO MUCH RELATED TO SECURITY OFFICERS. IN RELATION TO SAY SPEEDING IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

DO WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY AT THE CITY LEVEL TO OPPOSE SOMETHING LIKE IF YOU SPEED IN A CONSTRUCTION ZONE THAT THE TICKET JUMPS UP TO ABOUT $500. ISN'T SOMETHING WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO LIKE FOR SPEEDING IN A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION TO CURB SOME OF THE YOU KNOW, SPEEDSTERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE CAUSING SOME SOCIAL UNREST PAID.

>> THANK YOU, MR. BAKER? >>? SHORT ANSWER IS NUMBER THE REASON IS GIVEN A SHORT AS I CAN. BECAUSE OF WHAT'S KNOWN AS THE $50 FINES CLAUSE. IN THE TENANCY CONSTITUTION. WHICH OF THE TENNESSEE SUPREME COURT HAS INTERPRETED TO MEAN THAT ANYTHING MORE THAN A $50 FINE CANNOT BE IMPOSED BY ANY COURT WHETHER IT'S CRIMINAL OR CIVIL. WITHOUT IT BEING ASSESSED BY A JURY. MUNICIPAL COURT WE DON'T HAVE JURIES.

THERE'S NO PROVISION FOR IT. IT'S NOT AUTHORIZED UNDER LAW. SO, THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT ANY CITY OR TOWN IN TENNESSEE CAN IMPOSE AS A FINE IS $50. THERE ARE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE TYPE OF REGULATORY PROVISIONS. IF YOU ADOPT, THERE'S A SPECIFIC TENNESSEE LAW THAT DEALS WITH BUILDING AND CODES. I MERELY. IF YOU ADOPT THIS REGULATORY SCHEME OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS PASSED YOU CAN HAVE A FINE GREATER THAN $50 BUT, THEY DON'T REALLY CALL IT A FINE. WE'VE LOOKED AT GOING DOWN THAT ROUTE BEFORE WITH REGARD TO BUILDING AND CODES. BUT, IT'S NEVER REALLY COME TO FRUITION.T'S SOMETHING ANY COUNCIL MEMBER OR MAYOR IF THEY WANTED TO PURSUE WE CAN LOOK INTO IT FURTHER.

YOU'D HAVE TO PASS A PRETTY COMPREHENSIVE LAW TO DO IT. YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE TO SEPARATED FROM CITY COURT JUDGE TO HEAR CASES UNDER THAT SPECIAL STATE LAW PROVISION. OTHER THAN THAT, THE CITY IS LIMITED TO $50 FINES.

IT'S THE MOST THE CITY COURT CAN EVER IMPOSE. DUE TO THE TENNESSEE

CONSTITUTION. >> THAT'S ONLY APPLICABLE TO BUILDINGS AND CODES.

IT WILL BE ANY OTHER, THAT RAPID SCENARIO. >> THAT'S WHAT MY RECOLLECTION IS. I THINK IT'S ONLY REALLY DEALING WITH BUILDING CODE TYPE THINGS. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE AND THAT SORT OF STUFF.

I'M CERTAIN IT DOESN'T APPLY TO ORDINARY VIOLATIONS THAT ARE POLICE OFFICERS WOULD PASS OUT FOR TRAFFIC OFFENSES, SPEEDING. I KNOW IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THAT.

>> OKAY. I APPRECIATE MR. BAKER. >> THANK YOU COUNCILMAN GARRETT. COUNSEL MEANT BURKART YOUR RECOGNIZE.

>> I WAS CAN ASK IF THE COMMITTEE APPROVED? >> YES I'M SORRY, THEY DID

APPROVE.> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> COUNSEL LADY SMITH, YOUR RECOGNIZE.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR. IT WAS THE AUTHORITY OF THIS AMENDMENT FOR MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES. WHO IS THIS PERTAINING TO? WHAT ORGANIZATION?

WHO'S PUSHING IT? >>. >> A GOOD QUESTION.

AS A PART OF CITY GOVERNMENT WE HAVE LOST PREVENTION OFFICERS WHICH ARE PART OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OFFICE OVER CITY GOVERNMENT. THERE ARE THOSE FRIENDLY FACES YOU SEE IN CITY HALL. THAT WORK IN THE SECURITY DESK.

[00:55:04]

VERSUS THE BLUE, LIKE THE PLACED APARTMENT. >> MAYOR YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT

THE SECURITY GUARDS? >> YES MAN WE CALL THEM LOSS PREVENTION OFFICERS.

BUT YES. THEY FUNCTION AS SECURITY GUARDS AS WELL.

>> WHERE WOULD THEY BE GIVING OUT FINES AND CITATIONS? WHERE WOULD THIS BE?

>> ONLY ON CITY PROPERTY SUCH AS IN A CITY PARK OR THE CITY HALL PARKING LOT OR THE GREENWAY FOR EXAMPLE. IF SOMEONE IS MISBEHAVING IN A VERY NARROW SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO ISSUE A CITATION TO CITY COURT.

>> I BELIEVE THIS IS THE ONE THAT MR. GOLDEN CALLED ME ABOUT AND I MADE KNOWN TO HIM THAT HE SAID HE WANTED LOST PREVENTION TO BE ABLE TO CARRY GUNS ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION.

AND HE SAID THAT THEY WOULD BE HELPING THE POLICE OUT. I EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT WE DON'T NEED SECURITY GUARDS AT THE PARKS WITH GUNS. GIVING OUT CITATIONS.

I FEEL LIKE THIS WOULD BE, THEY SAID THEY WOULD GET THE BENEFITS AND PAYMENTS OF OTHER PERSONNEL. I THINK CARRYING GUNS ON, AT THE PARKS IS OFFENSIVE TO OUR CHILDREN. I THINK IT ALSO DEALS WITH TAKING OUR FREEDOM AND CAUSING DRAFTS TO BE FEARFUL. I DON'T THINK WE NEED SECURITY OFFICERS OF THE PARK.

I DON'T THINK THAT THERE SUFFICIENT TO DO THAT. IF ANYTHING WE NEED PARK RANGERS THERE. WITH RADIOS WHO CAN CALL THE POLICE AND I KNOW CHIEF HAS ALREADY HIRED MORE OFFICERS TO BE ABLE TO KEEP A SECURE AND PROTECTED AS CITIZENS.

WE ALREADY PUT THAT IN THE BUDGET. I THINK WE ARE PUTTING STRESS AND STRAIN ON OUR GENERAL BUDGET OF THE CITY WHEN WE HIRE SECURITY GUARDS TO BE CARRYING GUNS AT THE PARKS. I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA.

NOW, I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS. I THINK IT'S THE STRESS AND STRAIN ON GENERAL FUNDS. I THINK IT ALSO BRINGS FEAR AND DISRESPECT TO THE CITIZENS.

WE ARE READY HAVE ENOUGH CITIZENS CARRYING GUNS. AT THE PARK.

I DON'T THINK THE PARK NEEDS TO BECOME A PLACE WHERE WE HAD TO BE FEARFUL.

IN PRACTICING OUR DEMOCRATIC FREEDOM. I THINK WERE JUST ADDING MORE FUEL TO THE FIRE. PUTTING SECURITY GUARDS AS POLICE OFFICERS.

WE HAVE ENOUGH POLICE OFFICERS TO TAKE CARE OF WHATEVER'S GOING ON OF THE PARKS.

I ASKED HIM WHERE SEEM TO BE A PROBLEM I'M ALWAYS WALKING AND RIDING MY BIKE SUBTLETY FIGHTS.

HE SAID IT DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING MAJOR. THAT THEY GET DRUNK DOWN THE PARK. IF THEY'RE GETTING TROUBLE THE BOATS WE ARE POLICE ON THE WATER. THEY WALK, THEY READ BOOKS IN THE WATER.

TO COVER PEOPLE GETTING DRUNK AND BOATS. SIN LANGUAGE FOLDER LANGUAGE IS BEING USED. I MEAN, I'D RATHER SEE SOMEONE USE FOGLER LANGUAGE THAT A GUN TO SHOOT AND KILL SOMEBODY EVEN THOUGH I DON'T LIKE FOLDER LANGUAGE.

WORKING TO CAUSE MORE PROBLEMS PUTTING GUNS IN THE PARKS WITH SECURITY GUARDS WERE NOT TRAINED TO BE POLICE OFFICERS. I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS. I THINK IT'S CAUSING MORE HAVOC

THAN PEACE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU COUNCILOR SMITH.

CHAIRMAN HENLEY.> LIKE TO CLARIFY. THIS ORDINANCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GUNS. IT'S JUST ALLOWING THE SCAREDY OFFICERS TO GIVE CITATIONS.

I LIKE TO SAY CHIEF COCKRELL IS IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS AND HE THANKS IT WILL HELP THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THEIR JOB.LL I HAVE AND I WILL HAVE A FULL REPORT ON THE REST OF THAT

ACTIVITY. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING MAYOR.

>> WE RECOGNIZE COUNSEL LADY SMITH. >> THANK YOU MAYOR.

I WAS TOLD BY MR. GOLDEN THAT THEY WILL BE CARRYING GUNS. THEY WILL BE AUTHORIZED TO

[01:00:01]

I DON'T THINK WE NEED SECURITY GUARDS WRITING CITATIONS IN THE PARK.

THEY WORK IN THE GAS AND WATER DEPARTMENT. AND THEY PAY THEM IN THE BUDGET. WE HAVE OF THE CDE AND THERE IN THE CDE BUDGET.

IF THERE DOWN HERE IN THIS CITY WE HAVE SECURITY GUARDS AND THEIR PAID OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUNDS. I JUST DON'T THINK WE NEED TO KEEP ADDING THE STRESS ARE GENERAL FUNDS WHEN THAT MANY COULD BE USED FOR SOMETHING ELSE.E DO HAVE POLICE IN POSITION TO TAKE CARE OF WHAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. I DON'T THINK THEY NEED TO BE WRITING CITATIONS. THEY DON'T NEED TO BE AT THE PARK.

PUT A PARK RANGER IN THE PARK. SOMEONE WHO IS EQUIPPED AND TRAINED TO BE PARK RANGERS.

SECURITY GUARDS ARE NOT PARK RANGERS. >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY

MAYOR. >> THANK YOU COUNSEL LADY SMITH.

>> ALL RIGHT NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE STREETS AND GARAGE COMMITTEE.

[8) STREETS & GARAGE COMMITTEE]

HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT? COUNCILMAN ERB? >> WE HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT.

I GUESS EITHER MYSELF OR TIM CHANDLER WILL HAVE A REPORT NEXT THURSDAY.

[9) TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE]

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SIR. NEXT ITEM IS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE.

CHARLIE SMITH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> OKAY MAYOR.

I HAVE A REPORT FOR YOU ON NEXT THURSDAY. THANK YOU.

[10) MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS]

>> THANK YOU COUNSEL LADY SMITH. NEXT ITEM IS MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS.NY MEMBER OF COUNSEL HAVOC, THEY WISH TO MAKE IT THIS TIME?

>> LET YOU KNOW WILL BE HONORING THE CENTER FROM OF OUR OUTGOING MEMBERS ON THURSDAY.

SO WE WANT TO INVITE YOU TO STAY TUNED FOR THAT AND WANT TO THANK THEM IN ADVANCE FOR THEIR

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.