May 27, 2021 Executive Meeting

[1) SUSTAINABILITY PRESENTATION]

[00:00:20]

CERTIFICATION PROGRAM, THEY'RE GOING TO UPDATE US ON THE SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS GOING ON IN THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS AS TIN P IN ADVANCE OF A SLATE OF NOMINEES IN JULY FOR THE SUSTAINABILITY BOARD SO WE'LL CALL ON CARLYE AND OLIVIA TO

COME. >> I'M CARLYE SOMMERS AND I MANAGE THE GREEN CERTIFICATION PROGRAM.

I WANT TO GIVE YOU A QUICK OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAM.

AWESOME, SO THE GREEN CERTIFICATION PROGRAM IS A COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY. I'M THE PROGRAM MANAGER BUT WE ALSO HAVE A GREEN CERTIFICATION BOARD MADE UP OF 13.

WE HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL TEACHERS WHICH ARE ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH TEACHERS THAT MAKE UP THE PROGRAM.

THE PROGRAM IS FUNDED THROUGH BUY COUNTY BUT THERE'S NO COST TO OUR ORGANIZATIONS, ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE GREEN CERTIFIES, IT'S FREE TO THEM. ALL COSTS, SUCH AS OUR ONLY BANQUET AND OUR AWORDS THAT WE GIVE OUT ARE PAID FOR BY SPONSORSHIPS. SO THE ONLY COST THAT COMES.

THE 13 [INDISCERNIBLE] AND THEN WE HAVE THREE INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES AND THEY EACH SERVE A 3-YEAR TERM INITIALLY.

THE CERTIFICATION PROGRAM STARTS BY HAVING A SERIES OF WORKSHOPS THAT ARE ABOUT 2 HOURS LONG. WE HELD IN PERSON WORKSHOPS.

WE TEACH ORGANIZATIONS HOW TO PUT TOGETHER AN ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN, HOW TO SET GOALS AND HOW TO BECOME BETTER ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDS. AFTER THEY COMPLETE THE WORKSHOPS AND TRACK AT LEAST ONE GOAL, WE CELEBRATE WITH A GREEN RIBBON CUTTING. THAT PHOTO IS FROM ONE OF OUR LAST RIBBON CUTTINGS WITH ALL STATE.

WE COME IN, HAVE A BIG CELEBRATION AND PUT THAT OUT IN THE MEDIA FOR THEM AS WELL. THEY NEED TO RECERTIFY EVERY 2 YEARS WHICH MEANS THEY NEED TO SET ANOTHER GOAL THEY TRACK FOR 2 YEARS. WE HAVE A LEVEL SYSTEM.

ORIGINALLY, EVERYBODY IS CERTIFIED AT THE BRONZE LEVEL IN WHICH THEY HAPPEN TO BE DOING MORE AND THEY CAN BE CERTIFIED AT A HIGHER LEVEL. THEY RECEIVE POINTS FOR ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING AND IT TELLS THEM AT TEND OF THE SPREADSHEET WHICH LEVEL THEY COME IN AT.

THERE ARE 134 ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY CERTIFIED.

THIS IS A MAP YOU CAN FIND ON THE GREEN CERTIFICATION WEBSITE AND IT SHOWS EVERYONE THAT'S BEEN CERTIFIED.

IT ALSO SHOWS WHAT LEVEL THEY'RE CERTIFIED AT.

WE DO HAVE FOUR ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE MET THE ORANGE LEVEL.

A REAL LIFE EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE PROGRAM DOES IS [INDISCERNIBLE] HENRY. THEY SWITCHED THAT YOU ARE OFFICE LIGHTING TO LEDS. THEY -- THAT WAS LOWEST BILL SINCE 2007 WHEN THEY CHANGED THEIR LIGHTING IN THEIR PARKING LOT. WE HAVE SPEAKERS COME IN, WE GIVE OUT ANNUAL AWARDS AND WE ALSO DO AN UP CYCLE CHALLENGE,

[00:05:02]

WE ASK OUR ORGANIZATIONS TO CREATE AN ITEM THAT'S COMPLETELY FROM RECYCLED AND REUSED MATERIALS AND WE HAVE A DIFFERENT THEME EACH YEAR. THIS YEAR IT'S GARDEN CORE SO THAT SHOULD BE INTERESTING. WE PARTICIPATE IN THE GREAT AMERICAN CLEANUP, IMAGINE A DAY WITHOUT WATER, WE HAVE VOLUNTEER THAT IS GO TO RIVER FEST AND ENCOURAGE RECYCLING AND WE ALSO DO WEBINARS. EARLIER THIS YEAR, WE DID WIN ON SOLAR ENERGY OR SOLAR PANELS AND WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER ONE COMING UP THIS SUMMER. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE AND I WILL

TURN IT OVER TO OLIVIA. >> THANK YOU, I'M OLIVIA HERRON, WE HAVE BEEN MEMBERS OF THE GREEN CERTIFICATION PROGRAM AT AUSTIN P SINCE 2012 SO EARLY ADOPTERS OF THE PROGRAM AND WE'RE PROUD TO HAVE ACHIEVED PLATINUM LEVEL THIS YEAR AND WE WANT TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE EFFORTS WE HAVE PUT INTO SUSTAINABILITY. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON SUSTAINABILITY SINCE 2008 WHEN OUR SUSTAINABLE SYSTEM CREATED.

IN 2016 WE HIRED OUR FIRST PART TIME SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER.

WE WERE INVESTING A LOT OF MONEY BUT THERE WAS NOT A DEDICATED PERSON FOR THOSE PROJECTS. SHE LEFT AND WAS REPLACED IN 2019. I CAME ON THIS PAST YEAR FULL TIME AFTER COMPLETING MY MASTERS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE.

A FULL YEAR OF JUST COVID HAS BEEN CHANGE.

JUST TO SHARE ABOUT HOW WE FUND THESE PROJECTS, I MENTIONED THE SUSTAINABLE FEE. EVERY STUDENT AT AUSTIN P PAYS A $10 FEE EVERY SEMESTER AND THAT'S AL GO INDICATED BASED ON ANY QUESTIONS FROM TEACHERS AND STUDENTS AND WE'RE ABLE TO FUND THESE PROJECTS. WE SELECTED A BUDGET OF $ $160,000 THIS LAST YEAR. WE ENCOURAGE OUR STUDENTS TO GET OUTSIDE AND HAVE THE HELP OF THE CMC COMMUNITY HEALTH FOUNDATION THERE AND THE DUN CENTER LIGHT PROJECT.

WE RECEIVED A GREEN TENNESSEE ENERGY GRANT FOR HALF A MILLION DOLLARS AND MATCHED THAT AND THAT LED CONVERSION HAS SAVED US ABOUT $50,000 A YEAR JUST IN ONE GUILDING SO THAT'S BEEN A HUGE, EXCITING PROJECT FOR US TO SEE LONG TERM.

THEN, LIKE CARLYE SAID, WE DO ON CAMPUS ENGAGEMENT.

WE DO OUTREACH ON A MONTHLY BASIS.

WE DID STANDING DISPLAYS WHICH WE HAD NOT DONE BEFORE IN PLACES LIKE THE LIBRARY, TRYING TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY WITHOUT HAVING TO INTERACT WITH FOLKS.

WE BROUGHT IN SPEAKERS AND AUTHORS AND THERE'S AN EXCITING PICTURE IN THE TOP RIGHT. WE'RE NOW BEE KEEPING ON CAMPUS AND WE'RE SHARING THAT WITH STUDENTS BECAUSE THEY GO AND NEST OTHER FUN PLACES LIKE IN A STUDENT'S TAILLIGHT SO WE DO OUTREACH ABOUT THE SPURNS OF BEES AND WHAT TO DO IFI OF BEESD WHAT TM OF BEES AND WHATP OF BEES AND WHAT OF BEES AND WHATR OF BEES AND WHATT OF BEES AND WAN OF BEES AND WC OF BEES AND WE OF BEES AND WHAT TO DO IF YOU'RE SWARMED.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE BUT WIRE OPEN TO QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU, WE HAVE A LONG AGENDA SO WE MAY HAVE TIME FOR ONE QUESTION OR COMMENT IF ANYONE HAS ONE.

I SEE NONE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU WITH OUR SUSTAINABILITY BOARD.

[2) PLANNING COMMISSION]

>> ALL RIGHT, WE'LL WAIT FOR THE POWER POINT TO BE PULLED UP.

[00:10:01]

THE FIRST TONIGHT IS Z15 2021, APPLICATION OF REDA HOME BUILDERS. THIS IS 2.75 ACRES CURRENTLY SEWNED R-3 REQUESTING TO GO TO R-4, IT'S NOT AN EXTENSION OF THE RBIS-4R-4 ZONING THIS IS IN 4.

IT'S A FORMER HOMESITE THAT'S BEEN OVERGROWN, HAS A MODERATE SLOPE. WE SHOW YOU THE TOPOGRAPHY MAP HERE JUST TO SHOW YOU THAT IT DOES HAVE A SLOPE FROM THE TOP OF THE PROPERTY TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PROPERTY.

YOU WILL SEE HERE IN THE PHOTOS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS PORTION OF NEW PROVIDENCE, LARGELY R-3, POCKETS OF R-4 AND C-2 NEARBY WHICH ALL ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS AND THIS IS REQUESTING TO GO TO R-4 FOR APARTMENTS AS WELL.

THIS IS OAK STREET APPROACHING MAN CIRCLE ON THE LEFT.

THERE'S MAN CIRCLE AND YOU CAN SEE THE TOPOGRAPHY RISES FROM THERE. THE FEW HOMES ON THE LEFT ARE NOT PART OF THIS APPLICATION. EVERYTHING ON THE RIGHT ANT STRAIGHT AHEAD IS. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE T TOPOGRAPHY OUT THERE. GAS AND WATER SYSTEM UPGRADES MAY BE NECESSARY AND YOU CAN SEE THE SCHOOL COMMENTS ABOUT THE CAPACITIES OF THE COMPLEXES. HISTORICAL ESTIMATES WOULD PUT THIS AT 30 UNITS IN THE NEW PROVIDENCE PLANNING AREA.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVING, THE PROPOSAL ZONING REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED PLAN.

THE AREA HAS SEEN RECENT INTEREST WITH DEVELOPMENT AND REFILL OPPORTUNITIES. IT'S NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY WITH RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN AN AREA WHERE GOODS AND SERVICES ARE READILY AVAILABLE. IT'S ENCOURAGED TO MAINTAIN ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE, NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

HAVE BEEN IDENTIFY. >> THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL.

ANY QUESTIONS LARDING ORDINANCE 111.

SEEING ONE? PLEASE PROCEED.

>> THE NEXT APPLICATION, ORDINANCE 112.

PLANNING COMMISSION NUMBER Z-24-2021, APPLICATION OF SATISH PRABHU, MATT ELLIS IS THE AGENT. APPROXIMATELY 395-FEET SOUTH OF MLK HIGHWAY 76 INTERCHANGE. THIS IS IN CITY COUNCIL WARD 10.

IT'S CURRENTLY TWO VACANT LOTS AND THE APPLICANT'S STATEMENT IS TO FACILITATE THE SALE TO THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND THEY WISH TO BUILD APARTMENTS ON IT.

THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT FRONTS ON HIGHWAY 76, RECENT STRIP CENTER. LOOKING DOWN NOW SOUTH DRIVE, THE PROPERTY'S JUST BEYOND THE DUMPSTER ON THE LEFT.

IT'S A FAIRLY LEVEL TWO-AND-A-HALF ACRE TRACK LOOKING BACK TOWARD 76. THE GAS AND WATER SAID NO SEWER AVAILABLE BUT IT'S AVAILABLE NEARBY.

SCHOOL SYSTEM COMMENTS REGARDING THE CAPACITY IS THERE.

HISTORICAL ESTIMATE WOULD PUT THIS AT 27 UNITS IN THE AREA.

THE PROPOSED R-4 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IS AN EXTENSION OF THE R-4 TO THE SOUTH AND IS NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING USES. THE CLASSIFICATION IS APPROPRIATE WHERE THE PROPERTY IS PLANNED SOLELY FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND ADEQUATE INFRASTRAYER CHUCK CAN SERVE THE SITE. PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO

RECOMMENDS APPROVAL >> THANK YOU, MR. TYNDALL.

ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> HI, HOW ARE YOU? I NOTICE THERE'S A LOT OF INFILL HERE. ARE WE SAVING ANY GREEN SPACE AT ALL IN THESE AREAS OR ARE WE JUST GOING TO FILL IN COMPLETELY. IS THERE A PARK?

IS THERE GREEN SPACE THERE? >> THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR OPEN SPACE WHEN DEVELOPING MULTIFAMILY IN R-4 EXCEPT THAT THE TOTAL LOT COVERAGE CAN'T SPEED A CERTAIN AMOUNT.

[00:15:01]

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL PERSON EVANS YOU'RE

RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

MR. TYNDALL, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT NO SEWER BEING AVAILABLE.

JUST FOR MYSELF, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS SO I WOULD LIKE

TO KNOW. >> I WILL DEFER TO MR. RIGGINS HERE. IF HE HAS TO ADD ANYTHING TO THIS, HE CAN. IT MAY NOT BE AVAILABLE IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY BUT AVAILABLE 150 OR 200-FEET AWAY.

IT'S THE APPLICANTS RESPONSIBILITY TO CONNECT IT.

IT MAY BE AVAILABLE IN FRONT OF THE SITE BUT THE CAPACITIES ARE NOT THERE. THE APPLICANT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR UP SIZING THE PIPES TO MEET THEIR NEEDS.

>> OKAY. THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> EXACTLY HOW MR. RIGGINS ROTE IT. OKAY, COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION, WHAT

CAN GO ON C-4 RIGHT NOW? >> C-4 IS OUR HIGHWAY INTERCHANGE DISTRICT. THAT'S USES MOSTLY TAILORED TO OUR INTERSTATE INTERCHANGES AND EXITS 1, 4, 8, 11 ARE THE ONLY PLACES YOU WILL FIND IT RIGHT NOW, TRUCK STOPS, HOTELS, MOTELS, RESTAURANTS, THINGS THERE FOR THE TRAVELER OR PEOPLE GETTING OFF THE INTERSTATE. YOU DON'T SEE HOTELS, MOTELS AND TRUCK STOPS IN ANY OF OUR OTHER ZONES EXCEPT FOR C-5.

THAT'S WHAT C-4 IS BUT IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR SIGNAGE AND LIGHTING

THAT OTHER ZONES DON'T ALLOW. >> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT 112? NOW READY FOR ITEM THREE, 113,

MR. TYNDALL? >> THIS IS Z25-2021 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AGENT IS BERT SINGLETARY CURRENTLY C-5 AND WISHING TO GO TO C-2.

750-FEET WEST OF CENTER POINT DRIVE CENTER COURT.

INTERSECTION AND COUNCIL WARD NUMBER 11, A VACANT LOT AND THE APPLICANT'S STATEMENT IS C-2 ALLOWS FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROVIDING A BUFFER BETWEEN R-4 AND C-5 ZONES.

ON THIS SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY, YOU HAVE THE R-4 IN THE O TO THE WEST AND THE DARK BLUE TO THE EAST IS C-5.

C-2 WOULD ALLOW THIS DEVELOPER TO FLEX THE SPACE FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD WHERE HE COULD HAVE APARTMENTS IN FRONT OF OR NEXT TO AND COMMERCIAL ON THE REST OF THE PROPERTY, MIX IT HOWEVER HIS DESIRE IS. IT REALLY IS THE MIX OF R-4 AND C-5. HERE'S THE PROPERTY AT THE END OF THE FIRST. THERE'S A ROUNDABOUT THERE.

PROPERTY ON THE LEFT, HERE IT IS.

RELATIVELY LEVEL, YOU CAN SEE THE APARTMENTS BEHIND IT.

THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET, A COMMERCIAL BUILDING, AND THEN DOWN AND TO THE LEFT, YOU CAN SEE THE START OF SOME OTHER APARTMENTS. I HEAR THOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING BACK HTHOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING TOETHOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING BAC TORTHOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING BACK TOETHOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING BACK THOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING BACK ARTHOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING BACK ETHOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING BACK THOSE APARTMENTS LOOKING BACK TO THE SITE ON THE RIGHT.

THERE WERE NO COMMENTS OR CONCERNS.

HISTORICAL ESTIMATES WOULD PUT THIS AT NINE ADDITIONAL APARTMENTS AND A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL SPACE.

WE DON'T QUANTIFY THAT. IT'S IN THE TRENTON ROAD PLANNING AREA. THE PROPOSED ZONING REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND ZONING PLAN WITH THE ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL.

THE ADOPTED LAND USE PLAN STATES A MIX OF RESIDENT LEA AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED.

THIS LOT LAYS OUT A POINT OF TRANSITION ON CENTER POINT DRIVE WHERE ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL EXISTS.

NO ADVERSE AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ARE IDENTIFIED AND STAFF

RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING ORDINANCE 113? WE'RE NOW READY FOR ITEM 4,

ORDINANCE 114. >> THIS IS PLANNING COMMISSION CASE Z26-2021, APPLICATION OF SALVADOR CASTRO, REX HAWKINS AGENT. THIS IS LOCATED OFF JACK MILLER BOULEVARD, 810-FEET EAST OF FORT CAMPBELL BOULEVARD AND JACK MILLER BOULEVARD INTERSECTION IN COUNCIL WARD MEMBER ONE.

IT'S A LARGE, DUAL FRONTED LOT WITH VARYING TOPOGRAPHY, FRONTS ON SUNCINDERELLA DRIVE THERE. THE STATEMENT IS TO DOWN ZONE

[00:20:08]

WE'LL REVIEW THAT AT THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PHASE.

GAS AND WATER SAID IT MAY REQUIRE SEWER UPGRADES.

THE STREET DEPARTMENT SAID SIDEWALK WILL BE REQUIRED.

NO OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS.

FORT CAMPBELL WAS OFFERED THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT AND THEY DID NOT COMMENT. HISTORICAL ESTIMATE ROB 99 UNITS IN THE AIRPORT PLANNING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS PROVELL.

THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN.

THE C-2 ZONING PERMITS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR GENERAL GOODS AND SERVICES. THE ADOPTED LAND USE PLAN STATE THAT IS MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED. MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE PROPOSAL IS NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE ESTABLISHED USES AND ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURES SITE, PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO

RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL, COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> I RECEIVED ONE PHONE CALL IN REFERENCE TO THIS.

IT WAS NOT NECESSARILY IN OPPOSITION, IT WAS MORE SO JUST A FEW QUESTIONS. THE PARTICULAR RESIDENTS OWN THE DAY CARE CENTER THAT BUTTS UP AGAINST THE PROPERTY AND HER MAJOR CONCERNS, AND I'M JUST ASKING OUT OF COURTESY TO PUT IT ON THE RECORD AND YOU SPOKE TO HER CONCERN IN WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS ABLE TO TIE INTO CINDERELLA DIRECTLY, THERE ARE TOPOGRAPHY ISSUES. BASED ON THOSE TOPO ISSUES, BASICALLY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, WHAT WOULD BE THE LIKELIHOOD OF THIS DEVELOPMENT TIEING INTO CINDERELLA FOR ADDITIONAL

ACCESS? >> BEST WAY TO PUT THAT IS THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONNECT TO CINDERELLA DRIVE.

DO THEY HAVE TO? NO.

WOULD IT BE REQUIRED? NO AND WE WOULD HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE APPLICANT LAYS OUT AT DEVELOPMENT PHASE.

TYPICALLY RUNNING EXTRA ROAD FOR A MULTIFAMILY UNIT LIKE THIS, LIKELY WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE AT C-2, RUNNING THE EXTRA ROAD WOULDN'T GAIN YOU MUCH BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL SITE PLAN AND THEY WOULD GET A LETTER FOR THAT AS WELL.

>> THANK YOU, AND THAT WAS THE OTHER PART, I EXPLAINED TO HER BUT SOMETIMES IT'S GREAT TO HEAR THAT FROM THE BOARD, THIS IS JUST THE REZONING, THE SITE PLAN HAS TO BE TURNED IN AND EVALUATED BY ALL THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS AND VOTED ON AGAIN BEFORE THEY CAN EVEN BREAK GROUND ON IT,

CORRECT? >> YEAH, AND THEY WOULD GET A

LETTER. >> AND THE LAST ITEM OF HER CONCERN WAS THAT THAT AREA EXPERIENCES SOME DRAINAGE ISSUES OFTEN TIMES WITH THE SEWER SYSTEM FLOODING AND DIFFERENT THING OFFENSE THAT NATURE AND SO YOU EXPLAINED IT AT A PREVIOUS MEETING AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, ONE OF THE CRITERIA DURING THE SITE PLAN PHASE IS THAT THE PROPERTY BEING DEVELOPED CAN NEGATIVELY IMPACT JOINING OWNERS AS IT RELATES TOO -- THEY HAVE TO HAVE A PLACE FOR THEIR WATER, CAN YOU DO A BETTER JOB

EXPLAINING THAT? >> YEAH, UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY LIKE THIS WHERE THE TOPOGRAPHY MAY VARY, THE DRAIN IS GOING IN THREE DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS. ONE DEVELOPED, THE DEVELOPER CANNOT MAKE THAT SITUATION WORSE AND OFTEN TIMES WHEN THEY GRADE THE PROPERTY AND BUILD THE STORM WATER STRUCTURES, IT IMPROVES THE SITUATION ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

>> GOOD DEAL. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> ANY OTHER MEMBER HAVE A QUESTION OTHER COMMENT REGARDING THIS ORDINANCE? WE'RE NOW READY FOR ITEM FIVE,

ORDINANCE 115, MR. TYNDALL. >> THIS IS ORDINANCE 115 PLANNING COMMISSION NUMBER Z-27-2021, APPLICATION FROM SYD HEDRICK, WANTING TO GO FROM R-6 TO C-2.

[00:25:04]

APPLICANT'S STATEMENT IS OWNER SEEKS TO REZONE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL, THE AREA SUPPORTS THIS REQUEST AND C-2 IS ALSO AN APPROPRIATE ZONE, BUFFERING A COMMERCIALLY SUITABLE CORRIDOR.

HE MEANS CROSS LAND AVENUE. THIS IS IN CITY WARD NUMBER 6.

THE PROPERTY'S THERE ON THE LEFT JUST BEFORE THE TRESTLE.

YOU CAN SEE HOW THE TOPOGRAPHY RISES FROM CROSS LAND AVENUE WELL UP TO HIGH STREET BEHIND IT.

YOU COULD HAVE COMMERCIAL ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE AND AS YOU GRADE IT, YOU WOULD HAVE RESIDENTIAL ON THE HIGH SIDE OVER ON HIGH STREET SO IT HAS A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY AS ZONE C-2 FOR A MIXED ZONE DEVELOPMENT. ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPERTY AND TURNING THE CORNER, THERE'S HIGH STREET AND YOU'RE ON THE HIGH END OF THE PROPERTY LOOKING BACK AT CROSS LAND AVENUE AND THERE'S HIGH STREET AND YOU CAN SEW THE TOPOGRAPHY CONTINUES TO CLIMB IN THIS AREA. THE STREET DEPARTMENT MENTION THAT HAD THIS PROPERTY WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW ACCESS ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF DRIVEWAYS ON CROSS LAND AVENUE AND YOU CAN SEE THE COMMENTS PROVIDED.

HISTORICAL ESTIMATES WOULD BE TEN DHOLLING UNITS.

STAFFDHOLLING UNITS. STAFF RWDHOLLING UNITS.

STAFF REDHOLLING UNITS. STAFF RLDHOLLING UNITS.

STAFF RLING UNITS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED.

THIS PROPERTY IS NEAR RIVER SIDE DRIVE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND IS AN AREA OF TRANSITION THAT'S EXISTING IN RECENT DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL GROWTH.

ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES THE SITE AND NO ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO

RECOMMENDS APPROVAL >> ANY MEMBER HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT REGARDING ORDINANCE 115? COUNCIL PERSON SMITH YOU ARE

RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, ANY OPPOSITION

FROM CITIZENS? >> WE DID NOT RECEIVE

OPPOSITION, NO. >> AND THEY WERE NOTIFY?

>> CORRECT, EVERYONE WITHIN 100-FEET OF THIS SITE WERE

NOTIFIED. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS SEEING NONE, FERMENT SIX, ORDINANCE 116.

>> THIS IS CURRENTLY C-5 AND R-1A REQUESTING TO GO TO R-4, C-5 AND R-1A. RECENTLY SOUTH GATEWAY PLAZA BOULEVARD THAT BE EXTENDED BACK TO HIGHWAY 76.

AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY WAS COMPLETED, THIS INITIAL REZONING DONE WELL OVER A YEAR AGO DIDN'T QUITE FOLLOW, DUE TO TOPOGRAPHY AND CHANGES IN THE CONSTRUCTION, THE ORIGINAL ZONE LINES. THIS IS A CLEANUP OF THE ZONES -- THE LASER POINTER SYNTH WORK.

A LITTLE BIT OF R-1A IN THE YELLOW FROM THE TOP IN THAT LI LITTLE HATCHED AREA.

TO THE WEST OR TO THE LEFT OF THAT, YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF C-5 GOING TO R-4 JUST TO ROUND OUT THAT R-4 PARCEL TO THE SOUTH. THIS IS A CLEANUP FROM WHAT'S EXISTING ON THE GROUND VERSUS WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY BEING PLANNED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. THEY ARE ALL EXTENSIONS OF THE ZONE. THE PROPERTY IS 76 NORTH OF KARMAFLUX WAY. NO COMMENTS OR CONCERNS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS, I THINK WE HAVE TWO PICTURES.

IT'S SOMEWHERE OUT THERE IN THAT FIELD.

AND HERE IT IS PRETTY MUCH FROM WHERE THESE PROPERTIES WERE BACK TO KARMAFLUX WAY WHICH EXISTS IN THE COUNTY.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, THE PROPOSED REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN TO ALIGN WITH THE PROPOSED LOT LINE FOR FUTURE

[00:30:01]

RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL.

ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING ORDINANCE 116? SEEING NONE, WE'RE NOW READY FOR ITEM 7, ORDINANCE 117.

>> PLANNING COMMISSION CASE Z29-2021 APPLICANT IS BRIAN WOLFF. IT'S LOCATED ON PROVIDENCE BOULEVARD EAST OF SAFE SPRINGS ROAD IN WARD 4.

THE APPLICANTS STATEMENT IS TO FACILITATE THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONTRACT. YOU CAN SEE WORLD KING TO THE LEFT THERE, THE LARGE WHITE BUILDING, THAT'S WHERE THIS IS.

THE PROPERTY, THE MORE MUSTARD COLOR IS R-3.

ON THE CORNERS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE C2 GOING TO R3 AND IN THE MIDDLE TRIANGLE, R-3 GOING TO C-2, JUST BALANCING OUT THAT PROPERTY FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. WE DO NOT HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AT THE MOMENT. NO SEWER OR WATER IS AVAILABLE.

THERE WERE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS.

THIS IS OFF 41A BACK TOWARDS THE TREE LINE WHERE THIS IS TAKING PLACE. THERE IT IS FROM CAVE SPRINGS ROAD LOOKING BACK, THERE'S A BIG DITCH AND TREES ON THE OTHER SIDE. IT'S UP THERE.

ACCESS WOULD LIKELY BE OFF THAT SIDE STREET.

I THINK THAT'S SINCLAIR DRIVE, OR 41A TOWARDS THE PROPERTY.

PLANNING, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

PROPOSING ZONING REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN. IT'S A MINOR EXTENSION OR CHANGE TO MEET A DEVELOPMENT PLAN T. PROPOSED CHANGES ARE NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING USES AND ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL SERVE THE SITE. NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IDENTIFIED, PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

>> THANK YOU, MR. TYNDALL, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING 117? HEARING NONE, WE'RE NOW READY FOR ITEM EIGHT RECT ORDINANCE 118.

>> THIS IS PLANNING COMMISSION CASE Z30-2021 OF DAN JOHNSON WITH TODD MORSE AS THE AGENT. IT'S AN EXTENSION OF THE R-1 TO THE NORTHEAST. PROPERTY FRONTS ON THE SOUTHWEST FRONTAGE OF POWELL ROAD AND ELLIE PIPER INTERSECTION.

IT'S A SEMI WOODED TRACK WITH VARYING TOPOGRAPHY AND THE APPLICANT'S STATEMENT IS TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. THIS FILE DOES HAVE TWO PRIOR CASES IN 1993 AND IN 2020. THERE YOU CAN SEE THE ZONING MAP WITH R-1 TO THE WEST AND NORTHEAST.

HERE'S POWELL ROAD AS YOU HEAD SOUTH ON POWELL ROAD, THE PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY AHEAD AT THE CURVE AND THIS IS LOOKING FROM THE OTHER DIRECTION GOING BACK NORTH, THE CURVE ON YOUR LEFT. THE CURRENT PROPERTY HAS NO STRUCTURES. THIS IS ADJACENT HERE ON THE RIGHT AND FURTHER ON THE RIGHT, ANOTHER HOMESTEAD.

GAS AND WATER SAID NO SEWER IS DEVELOPMENT.

A TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT WAS RECEIVED, ALLOW FOR FUTURE CONNECTION TO DUNBAR CAVE. LEVEL OF SERVICE AT ROSS VIEW ROAD AND POWELL ROAD IS ACCEPTABLE AFTER SIGNAL INSTALLATION AND THEN WE WOULD LIKE THE IDEA OF A FOUR LEGGED STOP RATHER THAN THE CURVE IN THE ROAD ONE WAY IN AND OUT.

THE CURVE, AND THIS IS THE ZONING PHASE SO NOTHING IS IN CONCRETE YET, BUT AS THE APPLICATION COMES, THERE'S ALREADY A REDESIGNED INTERCHANGE THAT ONE LEG GOES TO THE WEST, WHICH COULD BE A FUTURE EXTENSION OVER TO DUNBAR CAVE AND ENTERING THE PROPERTY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES, CREATING A SAFER INTERSECTION THAN A SWEEPING 90-DEGREE CURVE THAT'S OUT THERE. STREET DEPARTMENT AGREES WITH THAT BEING A BETTER SITUATION. YOU CAN SEE THE SCHOOL SYSTEM COMMENTS OF NOTE. HISTORICAL ESTIMATES FOR THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE 45 UNITS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED LAND USE PLAN.

THE PROPOSED R1 SINGLE FAMILY IS THE APPROPRIATE CLASSIFICATION IN THE AREA. CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT ALONG

[00:35:03]

RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL. WE SAW THE NUMEROUS E-MAILS IN COLLUDED IN HERE FROM RESIDENT ACE LONG POWELL ROAD.

DID YOU SEE ANY PHONE CALLS IN REGARD TO IT AS WELL THAT MAYBE

I OVERLOOKED? >> YES.

TYPICALLY WHEN YOU GET OUR STAFF REPORT, WE'LL TYPE -- WE ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO WRITE SO WE'RE NOT TRANSCRIBING A PHONE CALL. WE ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO WRITE OR DROP OFF A LETTER BECAUSE THEN WE'RE NOT TAKING YOUR WORDS AND

TRYING TO WRITE THEM DOWN. >> DID ANYONE SHOW UP TO SPEAK

IN PERSON AS WELL? >> WE HAD SOME OPPOSITION, YES.

>> ALSO, I WANTED TO ASK, HOW MANY HOUSES DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE THROUGH THERE OR ARE THINGS A ZONED DO WE HAVE AVAILABLE

THERE? >> WE RAN REAL QUICK NUMBERS FOR YOU TODAY. CURRENT DEVELOPMENT ON PALPOWEL ROAD IS 541 HOMES. THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE SOME OF THE FRONTAGE LOTS, SOME OF THESE LARGER ONE ACRE PARCELS SO ROUND THAT UP TO MAYBE 550 TOTAL HOMES ON POWELL ROAD.

THEN WITH THIS PROPERTY AS WELL AS ANOTHER 22 ACRE PROPERTY THAT'S ALREADY ZONED R-1, YOU CAN SEE IT JUST OUT OF THE PICTURE HERE TO THE NORTH, THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER 87 UNITS THAT IF THIS WAS ZONED TO R-1 PLUS THAT COULD REDEVELOP TOMORROW.

AND THEN IF YOU TAKE THE REMAINING AG LAND IN GREEN, THAT EXISTS UP AND DOWN POWELL ROAD AND IF THAT WERE TO CONVERT TO R-1, YOU'RE LOOKING AT ANOTHER 532 TOTAL UNITS.

SOME QUESTIONS ON THAT DUE TO THE TOPOGRAPHY AS YOU GET NEAR THE WATER, BUT SO RIGHT NOW, 550 WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF ABOUT ANOTHER 530 UNITS FOR A TOTAL AROUND 1100 TOTAL HOMES.

SO IT'S ABOUT HALF BUILT OUT FROM ITS MAX POTENTIAL.

>> AND WITH THAT 1100, PROBABLY SHOWER CLARIFIED, DOES THAT INCLUDE ALL THE ROADS COMING OFF POWELL?

>> YES. EVERYTHING ACCESSES POWELL ROAD.

WHAT IT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR IS IF THOSE ROADS CONTINUE TO CREEP TO DUNBAR CAVE. AND THAT'S THE HOPE EVENTUALLY, THAT SOME DEVELOPMENT OR SOME PROJECT WILL GET A ROAD FROM

POWELL ROAD TO DUNBAR CAVE. >> BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN THAT COULD POSSIBLY OCCUR BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT OF POWELL. I THOUGH WE HOPE AND PLAN FOR A TRAFFIC SIGNAL BUT IT'S NOT THERE YET.

>> IT WILL HAPPEN THROUGH ONE OF TWO WAYS, EITHER THROUGH DEVELOPMENT AND THROUGH APPROVALS REQUIRING IT SO YOU HAVE THAT PROPERTY TO THE WEST THERE, DR. ROSS' PROPERTY.

IF HE DEVELOPS, WE'LL REQUIRE IT BUT HE MAY NEVER DEVELOPMENT SO IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME. THE ONLY OTHER WAY IS FOR IT TO BECOME A PUBLIC IMPROOICHLT PROJECT.

>> OKAY, AND I KNOWPROVEMENT PROJECT.

>> OKAY, AND I KNOW THERE WERE NO CONCERNS FROM POLICE AND FIRE BY I KNOW THAT ONE ISSUE THAT WAS REFERENCED IN HERE AND JUST HAPPENED A FEW MONTHS AGO, AND I LEARNED ABOUT IT LAST YEAR, MY FIST TIME ON THE COUNCIL WAS THERE WAS A FIRE THAT HAD BLOCKED THAT ACCESS AND PEOPLE COULDN'T GO TO AND FROM THEIR HOMES AND WHAT CONCERNS ME IS AS WE CONTINUE TO BUILD OUT AND BUILD OUT AND BUILD OUT WITH ONLY ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT, THAT HAPPENS AGAIN AND THERETO ANOTHER EMERGENCY UP THE ROAD THAT WE CAN'T GET TO. A CHILD WITH ASTHMA OR ANYTHING ELSE, HOW DO WE SERVICE THOSE THINGS? I KNOW I USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE BECAUSE THAT WAS TOLD TO ME WHEN I WAS THERE LAST YEAR. A GIRL UP THE ROAD HAD ASTHMA SO I'M NOT JUST MAKING THAT EXAMPLE 7 UP. I HOPE WE VOTE THIS ONE DOWN BUT I WILL TALK MORE ABOUT IT NEXT WEEK.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS.

>> YES, WHY WOULD WE NOT CONSIDER AT LEAST EXPANDING FROM ONE ENTRANCE OF THIS ACROSS THE STREET HOUSING AREA THAT'S

[00:40:04]

WHY, KNOWING THAT WE HAVE HAD THAT ISSUE, THAT WE DIDN'T LOOK A LITTLE HARDER TOO TO EXPAND FROM ONE TO THE OTHER IN THE

AREA ACROSS THE STREET. >> I GUESS I DON'T FOLLOW YOU.

>> CAN I SHOW YOU? >> YES.

>> FROM HERE, TRY TO EXPAND IT INTO THE THREE LANES INSTEAD OF JUST A FOUR WAY STOP HERE, A THREE LANE WITH A SIDEWALK IN THE AREA HERE, WHICH WOULD ALLEVIATE AT LEAST AROUND THE CORNER AND AS WE ADD MORE, JUST KEEP ADDING TO THAT EXTENDED PART OF THE ROAD. THAT WOULD AT LEAST IN ONE AREA

GIVE THE RESIDENT ACCESS AROUND. >> THAT IS SOMETHING I BELIEVE THE STREET DEPARTMENT WOULD LOOK AT.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THEM, I KNOW THEY'RE HERE BUT THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE NEXUS OF THE 45 OR SO HOMES IN THIS. I CAN'T SAY IT WOULD OR WOULD

NOT BE REQUIRED AT THIS TIME. >> DOES THE CITY PARTNER, LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, WE ASK THE BUILDER TO DO A CERTAIN AMOUNT AND THEN WE WOULD PARTNER TO DO THE REST KNOWING THAT IT'S A COMING UP -- EVENTUALLY THAT'S PRIME LON THAT WE'LL GET.

IS THAT EVER ALAND THAT WE'LL GET.

IS THAT EVER A CONVERSATION? >> THERE HAVE BEEN PLOPS WHEN THERE'S MUTUAL INTEREST INVOLVED.

>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. THERE ARE EXAMPLES WHERE WE HAVE DONE IT AND WE JUST HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS.

I KNOW THE STREET DEPARTMENT AND I HAVE HAD MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS DOG WITH FLEAS SO WE NEED TO TAKE A

HARD LOOK AT IT AS WELL. >> JUST, AGAIN, FROM MY CURIOSITY, WHEN DO WE SAY, OKAY, YOU CAN BUILD AND WE'RE GOING TO DO A, B, AND C. WHEN DOES THAT CONVERSATION --

>> WHEN THEY APPLY FOR THE CONFER SAYINGS.

>> NOW YOU CAN CONTROL THE REDUCE OF THE PROPERTY.

THAT'S WHEN IT'S TIED TO OTHER ISSUES IN THE AREA.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. A LOT OF POINTS HAVE BEEN HIT ON. I THINK THAT'S AN ADDED PERSPECTIVE OF WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS SPEAKING ON INCIDENCES IN THE AREA DEALING WITH THE CHILD THAT HAD ASTHMA DURING THE FIRE THAT TOOK PLACE, AS IT STANDS NOW, WITH OUR TRAFFIC 2021 OR THAT PARTICULAR PLAN, THIS PARTICULAR AREA IS NOT ON IT, IT'S VERY UNLIKELY FOR CITY GOVERNMENT OR SOME OTHER MUNICIPALITY OR ENTITY TO COME IN AND IMPROVE THAT, HERE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WE HAVE A DEVELOPER THAT'S WILLING TO TAKE CARE OF THAT HAZARD WITH THAT BLIND MAN'S CURVE THAT RESIDENTS ARE HAVING ISSUES, EXPRESSING CONCERNS OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, THIS SEEMS TO ME TO BE SOMEWHAT OF A WIN/WIN IN THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP AND CONTINUE THEIR LIVELIHOOD WHILE MAKING A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT TO THE AREA THAT MORE THAN LIKELY WOULDN'T TAKE PLACE ANY OTHER WAY.

PRETTY ACCURATE SUMMARY? >> YEAH, AS MENTIONED, THERE ARE ONLY TWO WAY THAT IS THIS ROAD WITHOUT GET EXTENDED, EITHER THROUGH DEVELOPMENT OR THROUGH A PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT.

>> OKAY, AND, AGAIN, YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS BODY IS JUST THE REZONING ASPECT. ALL THE OTHER GREAT IDEAS BROUGHT FORTH, THESE JUST TAKE PLACE AT THE SITE PLAN AND WE HAVE TO GET THROUGH THE REZONING OF IT FIRST TO GET INTO ALL THE OTHER WEEDS OF SOME OF THE OTHER IMPROVEMENTS THAT COULD BE POTENTIALLY MADE AND REQUIREMENTS HERE IN THE SITE PLAN PHASE TO MAKE THE AREA A LOT MORE FEASIBLE FOR CURRENT RESIDENTS AS WELL AS NEW RESIDENTS.

>> I CAN'T SAY THIS PROPERTY WON'T DEVELOP THAT AG BUT WITH

[00:45:04]

ACADEMICALLY FEASIBLE. >> HOW MANY LOTS COULD THEY GET AS-IS WITH AG IF THEY COULD DO IT AND NOT MAKE THE IMPROVEMENT?

>> 12 TO 15. >> GOOD DEAL.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> THAT WAS KIND OF MY QUESTION. IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE, THEY'RE

LOOKING AT 15 HOUSES? >> 45, I BELIEVE, WAS THE ESTIMATE AND WE ESTIMATE 1.9 HOMES PER ACRES WHEN IT'S R-1.

>> SO ONE END OF POWELL ROAD IS A DEAD END.

YOU CAN'T GET OUT ANYWHERE TO GO THAT WAY.

>> UH-HUH, THAT'S AS FAR ZOOMED OUT AS WE ARE.

>> AND THE OTHER END COMES OUT WHERE?

>> ROSS VIEW ROAD NEAR THE INTERSTATE.

>> SO YOU HAVE APPROXIMATELY A THOUSAND CARS COMING OUT RIGHT THERE FROM THIS AREA AND THERE'S NO OTHER WAY OUT?

>> MORE THAN A THOUSAND CARS A DAY BEPENDING ON WHEN THEY LEAVE, SEVERAL THOUSAND CARS IN ANDEPENDING ON WHEN THEY LEAVE, SEVERAL THOUSDEPENDING ON WHEN LEAVE, SEVERAL THOUSAND CARS IN AND OUT EVERY DAY. 530 HOMES, MORE THAN TWO TRIPS A DAY BUT, YEAH, THERE'S A TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANNED AT ROSS VIEW ROAD. THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE THAT LEFT TURN BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE A SIGNAL THAT WOULD STOP TRAFFIC.

>> COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN? >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THAT WOULDN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF THE CURVE THERE.

THIS IS A CURVY ROAD, THAT'S NOT THE ONLY CURVE ON THE ROAD, CORRECT? WITHOUT ANY SHOULDERS, ANY TYPE OF SIDEWALKS, SO I'M NOT SURE THAT CATEGORIZING IT AS A WIN/WIN WOULD BE A TRUTHFUL STATEMENT AND I'M SURE THE RESIDENTS WOULD IN KNOW WAY AGREE.

>> THANK YOU. >> I LIVE, AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS MR. TYNDALL, I LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ONE INGRESS AND EGRESS AND MY ROAD HAS BEEN SHUT DOWN TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE ON FACEBOOK MAKING PLANS WITH OUR KIDS AND I HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I HAVE FIELDED SEVERAL CALL THIS IS WEEK ABOUT NOT GETTING CONNECTIVITY TO A SUBDIVISION AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC SUBDIVISION BY WE NEED TO KEEP THESE SITUATIONS IN MIND.

I'M ASKING FOR THE PUBLIC IN CLARKSVILLE TO KEEP THESE SITUATIONS IN MIND WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO CONNECT NEIGHBORHOODS AND YOU DON'T WANT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTED, ETC., ETC., THESE SITUATIONS WHERE WE ONLY HAVE ONE WAY IN OR ONE WAY OUT BECAUSE OF THINGS LIKE THAT. I WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ABOUT THIS, I APOLOGIZE ABOUT TAKING UP THE TIME BUT THIS HAS BEEN A BIG PORTION OF MY WEEK AND I'M GLAD WE'RE DISCUSSING IT NOW, THANK YOU.

>> COUNCIL PERSON SMITH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> THANK YOU. I LISTEN TO WHAT EVERYBODY SAID AND EVERYBODY MADE SOME GOOD POINTS ABOUT THIS ADDITION TO POWELL ROAD. WE KNOW THAT POWELL ROAD IS A NARROW ROAD, WE KNOW THAT, WE KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN MANY COMPLAINTS THAT WE TRY TO PUT APARTMENTS OR HOUSING ON THIS STREET. WE KNOW THAT POWELL ROAD RUNS INTO ROSS VIEW ROAD NEAR THE SCHOOL, TRAFFIC, TRAFFIC, TRAFFIC WE HAVE A PROBLEM. MY THOUGHT IS RIGHT HERE, WHY CAN'T WE MAKE A ROAD? USE SOME OF THIS AGRICULTURE AND ADD ANOTHER ROAD HERE? WE NEED -- [INAUDIBLE] TO MAKE A

[00:50:15]

>> THEY DON'T OWN ALL THAT. THERE ARE TWO SUBDIVISIONS ACROSS FROM THIS, EXITING NORTH AND SOUTH ON POWELL ROAD WITH TWO ENSTRTRANCES. THE POWELL ROAD THAT RUNS THE LENGTH OF THAT ROAD IS 122 SO ONLY 132 OF THE 530 HOUSES EXIST SOUTH OF THIS POINT. THE PROBLEM REALLY IS NORTH OF THIS POINT WHERE MORE OF THE ROADS ARE.

>> I HEAR WHAT SAYING BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM,

THANK YOU. >> ANY COMMENTS? SEEING NON? WE'RE READY FOR NUMBER 9,

ORDINANCE 119. >> ALL RIGHT, Z31-2021, APPLICATION OF WILLIAM BELEW, JR., REQUESTING TO GO TO C5 FROM R-1A. IT'S NOT AN EXTENSION AT THE CORNER OF NEEDMORE AND HAZELWOOD ROAD.

THE STATEMENT IS FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS THE CORNER THERE. RECENTLY CLEARED PLANTED WITH A ROAD CROP THIS YEAR. LOOKING BACK TOWARD THE SCHOOL AND THE CORNER, THIS IS HAZELWOOD LOOKING BACK TOWARDS THE CORNER. GAS AND WATER SAID IT WOULD REQUIRE OFFSET SEWER IMPROVEMENTS.

IMPROVEMENTS MAY BE REQUIRED DURING THE SITE PLAN.

ACCESS RESTRICTIONS ON THE CORNER LOT FOR DRIVEWAY SPACING WILL BE REQUIRED. THEY ALSO WOULD LIKE THE APPLICANT TO RESERVE THE FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY FOR ANY SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS. A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE INTERSECTION IN THE FUTURE.

THE DEVELOPER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND THAT WILL BE DETERMINED AT SITE PLAN STAGE, WHETHER IT'S FULL CONSTRUCTION OR A PORTION OF THAT CONSTRUCTION.

NO OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS WERE RECEIVED.

PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

THE PROPOSED REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN. COMMERCIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS ARE IDEALLY LOCATED AT INTERSECTIONS TO ENHANCE THEIR ECONOMIC POTENTIAL.

FOUR WAY SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS WILL BE REQUIRED AT BOTH LOCATIONS IN THE FUTURE. ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL SERVE THIS SIDE, NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

>> COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> SO YOU SAID THAT EVERYBODY AROUND GOT NOTICE WITHIN HOW

MANY -- >> IT'S ALWAYS 100-FEET FROM THE APPARENT PARCEL. SO WE DRAW A LINE AROUND THE WHOLE PARCEL AND EVERYONE WITHIN THAT 100-FEET GETS A LETTER AND I BELIEVE THERE'S A SIGN PRETTY VISIBLE ON THIS ONE ON THE

CORNER. >> YEAH, IT'S PRETTY VISIBLE, I

LIVE UP THE STREET. >> IT'S ABOUT A 22-ACRE PARCEL.

>> SO WHAT YOU WANT TO TELL YOU IS I LIVE RIGHT THERE ON THAT CORNER FROM PISKA AND WE RECEIVED NO LETTER.

NONE. EVERYBODY IS SUPPOSED TO GET A LETTER AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE IT AND WE LIVE THERE, SO I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. BECAUSE THIS IS AN AREA IN OUR TIERS THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE IMPROVING.

I'M NOT AGAINST A GAS STATION GOING THERE, WE NEED SOMETHING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, HOWEVER, HOW FAST IS THIS AREA RIGHT HERE GOING TO BE IMPROVED BY THE TIME THIS GAS STATION COMES UP? HOW DOES THAT MATCH UP? HOW CAN WE MAKE IT MATCH UP? THAT'S ALREADY A DANGEROUS CORNER.

HOW FAST ARE WE ABLE TO MAKE THAT, TO HAVE THAT LIGHT THERE

[00:55:05]

WE HAVE ACCIDENTS THERE ALL THE TIME.

ALL OUR ROADS ARE SHUT DOWN. >> TWO ANSWERS TO THAT.

ONE, THE CITY STREET DEPARTMENT HAS A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT AND REVIEWED IT. AND TWO, THIS, IF ZONED, COMES IN FOR A SITE PLAN AND IT CAN BE CONDITIONED ON THE FINALIZATION OF THAT SIGNAL, SO THEY CAN BUILD BUT ONLY WHEN THAT SIGNAL GOES UP. THAT'S ANOTHER ONE THAT WE TALK A JOINT PROJECT, THEY WILL WANT TO MOVE FASTER THAN THE CITY.

THE CITY DOES HAVE THIS ON THEIR CURRENT SHORTER TERM ROADWAY PROJECTS AND IT WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A WIN/WIN PARTNERSHIP ON THAT CORNER. ALSO I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SHARE WITH YOU, I WILL E-MAIL YOU A COPY OF THE MAP SHOWING THE

LETTERS. >> I CAN SEE MY HOUSE ON THIS

MAP. >> I WILL GET BACK TO YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> YES, I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE IT'S NEXT TO A SCHOOL AND WILL THERE BE RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT THEY CAN SALE AND WHAT THEY CAN DO BECAUSE OF HOW CLOSE IT IS TO THE SCHOOL?

>> I'M NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE CITY BEER AND LIQUOR LICENSES.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S SOMEONE HERE TO ANSWER THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS ON THAT, BUT I CANNOT.

OKAY, THERE ARE OH NO RESTRICTIONS ONNO RESTRICTIONS

ON WHAT CAN BE SOLD THERE. >> AND WE'RE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT ADDING ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC RIGHT ON THE CORNER BY THE ELEMENTARY

SCHOOL? >> YOU'RE NOT GOING TO INDUCE ANY TRAFFIC DEPENDING ON THE COMMERCIAL.

IT'S GOING TO FEED OFF WHAT'S ALREADY IN THE AREA.

IN FACT, WHETHER IT'S A CONVENIENCE STORE OR 2 ACRES IS A GAS STATION PLUS A LITTLE MORE COULD DIVERT TRAFFIC TRFROM TRENTON ROAD. SO THIS MAY MEET THE NEEDS OF THE RESIDENTS INSTEAD OF DRIVING UP TO TRENTON ROAD.

>> THIS IS THE SAME PROPERTY WE WERE LOOKING AT FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER. I KNOW THERE'S SOMETHING THIS MONTH LOOKING AT THAT. THIS CORNER WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THAT PARCEL THAT WE'RE LOOK FOR FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER?

>> YES. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? SEEING NO, WE'RE NOW READY FOR ITEM 10, RESOLUTION 75. MR. TYNDALL? I JUMPED AHEAD, I PUT THE ABANDONMENT ABOVE THAT.

OKAY, THERE WAS ANOTHER ANNEXATION THIS MONTH PROCESSED FOR THE CITY, AN NECK SIX 2-2021.

TO THE EAST AND NORTH WAS ANNEXED INTO THIS CITY.

IT'S PARTIALLY INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE CITY AND RECEIVES WATER AND SEWER SERVICES NEAR THE SITE.

THERE WERE NO EXCEPTIONS FROM THE CITY DEPARTMENTS.

THE PLAN OF SERVICE AS YOU CAN SEE HERE OF NOTE IS THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING AG WITH THE RBC STAFF.

WE DID THAT FOR THE PARENT TRACK NEXT DOOR.

IT WILL ACCOMMODATE APPROXIMATELY 36 HOUSES WHEN IT DOES DEVELOP AND IT WILL BE A PORTION OF THAT LARGER DEVELOPMENT. YOU CAN READ THAT THERE OR THE PLAN OF SERVICE. I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ANNEXATION. >> COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT YOU'RE

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I SPOKE WITH A COUPLE OF MEMBERS WHO HAD QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT SOME OF THE PROPERTIES BEING LANDLOCKED AND I KNOW ONE REACHED OUT TO YOU AND YOU ARTICULATED IT BUT FOR THE RECORD, FOR SOME OF THE OTHERS TUNING IN, JUST TO GET THE EXPLANATION FROM YOU, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT IMPACT ADDRESSING THOSE CONCERNS THAT YOU TOLD MS.

CARNEY? >> YEAH, THAT WAS LAST MONTH'S

[01:00:03]

ONE. >> GOT YOU.

OKAY. >> ANYTHING ELSE?

>> NO, THAT'S IT. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS ANNEXATION RESOLUTION 75.

ALL RIGHT, RESOLUTION 76. >> I WENT OVER THE ANNEXATION

AND PLAN OF SERVICE. >> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THE PLAN OF SERVICE FOR RESOLUTION 76? SEEING NONE, ITEM 12, RESOLUTION 78.

>> THIS IS A REQUEST OF CODY AND LINDSAY HEGGIE TO ABANDON A PORTION OF AN ABANDONED ALLEYWAY, THERE'S NO PAVEMENT ON IT, IT WAS INTENDED TO BE AN ALLEYWAY.

ONLY THE PORTION HATCHED IN YELLOW IS THE PORTION REQUESTED FOR ABANDONMENT. WHEN WE GET A REQUEST FOR ABANDONMENT, WE NOTIFY ALL THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THEIR INTEREST. SOMETIMES THEY SAY NO, SOMETIMES THEY SAY OKAY. WE RECEIVED NO COMMENT.

HERE IT IS FROM AN OBLIQUE AERIAL FORM.

IT TOUCHES THREE PROPERTIES OFF GOLF CLUB LANE.

STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND THIS WILL BE HANDLED BY THE STREET DEPARTMENT IF APPROVED.

>> AND THE WAY THIS WORKS IS IF WE VOTE TO ABANDON, THE AJOHNING PROPERTY OWNERS, WHICH ADJOINS THE REAR OF ALL THE PROPERTY,

EACH WOULD GET HALF? >> RIGHT, THEY WOULD EACH GET

ABOUT 15-FEET. >> THERE MAY BE MORE OF THIS OLD ALLEYWAY THAT COULD BE ABANDONED, SOME MORE OF IT, BUT THIS MEETS THE APPLICANTS' INTENT.

WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM A CITY PERSPECTIVE IF MORE SHOULD

BE ABANDONED OR NOT. >> AND THERE'S CURRENTLY A COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT ON THE HEGGIE PROPERTY.

>> CORRECT >> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION? OH, WE HAVE SOME COUNCIL PERSON

RICHMOND, THINK. >> SO THIS WOULD BE DIVIDED AMONG THE CURRENT OWNERS IN THAT AREA?

>> YEAH, THE CITY OWNS IT, WE'RE VOTING TO ABANDON IT SO THE PROPERTY OWNERS ADJOINING IT WOULD SPLIT IT.

>> IT WOULD BE DEEDED TO THE OWNERS.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS.

>> YOU REFERENCED A PROPERTY THAT'S GOING COMMERCIAL?

THE HEGGIE -- >> THE HEGGIE FAMILY INITIATED THIS REQUEST TO ABANDON TO ADD A LITTLE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY BUT IT WILL ALSO BENEFIT THOSE SEVEN OR EIGHT PROPERTY OWNERS.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION? OKAY.

REAPPORTIONMENT SECTION ORDINANCE 97.

MR. TYNDALL? >> THIS GOT FIRST READING LAST MONTH BASED ON THE LAST ANNEXATION, A1-2021 AND A2-2021, THAT ANNEXATION OFF BRITTON SPRINGS.

THEY'RE BOTH WELL WITHIN WARD 3'S BOUNDARIES AND THIS WOULD JUST REQUIRE -- IS IT GOING TO REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT FROM THE FLOOR? YES, IT WOOF TO BE AMENDED TO UPDATE THE TWO MAPS AND THE TITLE OF IT.

VERY MINOR WORD CHANGES SO THAT IT CAN BE VOTED ON AT SECOND READING TO INCLUDE BOTH OF THESE PROPERTIES AT WARD THR3.

>> OKAY, ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS? WE HAVE REFLIKS FOR ZONE CHANGE RESOLUTION 81. COUNCIL PERSON KNIGHT, YOU'RE

RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

EACH TIME IT WAS DENIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

THE MAJOR CONCERN WAS TRAFFIC. THERE'S BEEN A STREET LIGHT INSTALLED IN THAT AREA SO I WANT TO ALLOW MR. REDA THE

[01:05:06]

>> WE HAVE COSPONSORS OF THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE.

>> THERE ARE TWO THINGS, I WILL TRY TO BE AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE ABOUT THIS, TWO LAWS THAT APPLY TO THIS OR COULD APPLY TO IT, THERE'S THE SO-CALLED RED RULE AND YOU KNOW WHATAD RULE AND YOU KNOW WHAT THE READ RULE IS.

A BASE THROUGH SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN CONSIDERED AND DENIED OR DISAPPROVED, IT CAN'T BE CONSIDERED FOR ANOTHER YEAR FOR THE SAME THING. THERE'S A DOCTRINE IN THE LAW, THOUGH, THAT DEALS WITH STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION WHEN YOU MAY HAVE MULTIPLE STATUTES OR ORDINANCES THAT COULD APPLY TO SOMETHING AND ONE OF THOSE THERE'S MULTIPLE RULES OF STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION AND ONE OF THOSE IS THAT A MORE SPECIFIC STATUTE THAT HAS APPLICATIONS IN SOME SITUATION IS GOING TO CONTROL OVER A MORE GENERAL STATUTE.

THERE IS A MORE SPECIFIC STATUTE IN THIS SITUATION THAT HAS APPLICATION OVER THE SO-CALLED READ ROULE AND THAT'S FOUND IN THE ZONING CODE SECTION 11.11 AND WHAT THAT SAYS IS UNLESS A PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED ZONING AMENDMENT, NO ACTION SHALL BE INITIATED AFFECTING THE SAME PARCEL OF LAND MORE OFTEN THAN ONCE EVERY 12 MONTHS; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, BY RESOLUTION APPROVED BY 3 QUARTERS MAJORITY OF MEMBERS PRESENT, VOTING, THAT THE ACTION MAY BE INITIATED AT ANY TIME.

SO YOU CAN RECONSIDER A ZONING AMENDMENT THAT HAS FAILED BUT FIRST AND ONLY IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES TO TAKE IT UP AGAIN, BASICALLY, BY A THREE-FOURTHS MAJORITY.

LET'S SAY YOU APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION TO ALLOW RECONSIDERATION IN AN AMENDMENT THAT'S FAILED, WHAT YOU CAN'T DO THEN, IF THAT RESOLUTION PASSES, IS TURN AROUND IMMEDIATELY IN THE SAME MEETING AND VOTE ON THE ZONING REQUEST.

THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE STATE LAW PROVIDES THAT PROPERTY OWNERS SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO REGISTER THEIR OPPOSITION TO IT OR THEIR SUPPORT FOR THAT MATTER, ESPECIALLY IF THEY HAVE OPPOSITION, AND SO THEY HAVE TO HAVE NOTICE OF THAT.

SO IF YOU VOTE TODAY TO APPROVE IT BY THREE-FOURTHS MAJORITY, THEN IT WILL BE ON NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA FOR RECONSIDERATION AND IT WOULD BE LIKE IT'S COMING TO YOU ALL OVER AGAIN.

>> WE'RE NOT VOTING TONIGHT. >> YOU'RE NOT VOTING ON THE ZONING AMENDMENT, YOU'RE JUST VOTING ON WHETHER TO ALLOW IT TO

BE RECONSIDERED. >> THIS IS EXECUTIVE SESSION,

WE'LL BE VOTING NEXT WEEK. >> I'M SORRY.

>> THAT'S OKAY. [LAUGHTER]

>> IT'S CONTAGIOUS. MR. BAKER.

GO AHEAD. >> YOU'RE ENTIRELY CORRECT, I'M SORRY. THAT'S RIGHT.

>> NEXT WEEK AT 6:00, NEW TIME, WE'LL BE VOTING AS TO WHETHER TO RECONSIDER THIS. IT REQUIRES THREE-FOURTHS VOTE

WHICH IS TEN OF US. >> OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT.

>> DEPENDING ON WHETHER WE HAVE A FULL COUNCIL.

>> RIGHT. >> AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS?

>> IF IT PASSES BY THREE-FOURTHS MAJORITY, MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING, BECAUSE SOMEBODY COULD ABSTAIN, THIS ZONING APPLICATION WILL BE ON THE NEXT MONTH EAST AGENDA.

>> SO IT JUST GOES TO COUNCIL, NOT BACK TO THE PLANNING

COMMISSION? >> THE LAW IS NOT CLEAR ON THAT IS THE ANSWER. THAT'S PROBABLY THE WAY IT

SHOULD BE DONE TO GO BACK. >> THAT'S THE WAY WE HAVE DONE IT IN THE PAST ACCORDING TO THE CLERK.

OKAY. THIS IS BRAND NEW TO EVERYBODY.

>> RIGHT. >> AND THEN IT WILL COME BACK TO

[01:10:03]

>> PUBLIC HEARING AND ALL? >> PUBLIC HEARING AND ALL.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. COUNCIL PERSON KNIGHT.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE ON ITEM TWO, WHICH IS

[2) INTRODUCTION OF NOMINEE FOR ETHICS COMMISSION (during regular session)]

RESOLUTION 81. >> AT THE COMMUNITY HOUSING MEETING WE DISCUSSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AD NAUSEAM AND WE'RE FINDING WE DON'T HAVE HOUSING THAT'S UNDER $200,000 IN CLARKSVILLE. THE PROPOSAL THAT'S BEING MADE -- THERE WAS A BIG TRAFFIC ISSUE, HOWEVER, THE PROPOSAL THAT'S BEING MADE, ALSO THERE'S A ROAD THAT MAKES IT THROUGH THAT WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMES OUT ON WILMER RUDOLPH BOULEVARD SO YOU CAN AVOID THAT BIG DOWNHILL AND ALSO THE HOUSES BEING MADE, THE TARGET PRICE FOR THOSE HOMES ARE $160,000 TO $185,000 WHICH IS ALREADY UNHEARD IT ANYMORE IN CLARKSVILLE SO HAVING THAT CONVERSATION, I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THIS BECAUSE WE DO NEED THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE DREAM OF HOME OWNERSHIP BUT DO NOT HAVE THE FINANCIAL MEANS TO GET THERE THE WAY OUR HOUSING MARKET IS GOING AND THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT THAT BACK UP.

>> FORGIVE MY OVERSIGHT? OKAY.

ANYONE ELSE? COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS DO YOU WISH TO BE RESIDENCE NICED ON RESOLUTION 81?

>> YES, I COULD. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MAP BEFORE WE VOTE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT HOW I REMEMBER IT. I CONTINUE TO GET CALLS EVEN NOW IN THAT COMMUNITY REGARDING OLD TRENTON ROAD AND THAT CRAZY STOP. SUNDAY AFTERNOON I MET WITH RESIDENTS ALREADY REGARDING THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ON THE OTHER SIDE, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MAP AGAIN.

I WILL GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT MYSELF UNLESS THIS IS A NEW RENDERANCE. THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY.

NOW, ETHICS COMMISSION, MS. SUZANNE MARSH REDINED BECAUSE SHE WENT TO WORK FOR HER FIRM. SHE FELT IT WAS TOO CLOSE A CONFLICT SO WE'RE NOMINATING DR. GREGORY STALLWORTH WHO WILL BE HERE NEXT WEEK TO APPEAR BEFORE COIN SILL AND TO SEEK YOUR CONFIRMATION. WE'RE NOW READY FOR THE CONSENT

[3) CONSENT AGENDA]

>> 2. ORDINANCE 94-2020-21 (SECOND READING) ACCEPTING DONATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FROM LARRY METCALF FOR THE PURPOSE OF A SEWER PUMP STATION (APPLEGROVE 2) 3. ORDINANCE 95-2020-21 (SECOND READING) ACCEPTING DONATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FROM TODD MORRIS FOR THE PURPOSE OF A SEWER PUMP STATION (ASPEN GROVE) 4. ORDINANCE 96-2020-21 (SECOND READING) AMENDING THE CITY CODE RELATIVE TO WATER AND SEWER RATES, CHARGES, AND/OR FEES 5. ORDINANCE 99-2020-21 (SECOND READING) AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE, APPLICATION OF CHARLES HAND, BRAD MARTIN/LYLE, COOK, MARTIN) - AGENT, FOR ZONE CHANGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF CEDARCROFT DRIVE AND USSERY ROAD FROM E-1 SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE DISTRICT TO PUD-1 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 6. ORDINANCE 100-2020-21 (SECOND READING) AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE, APPLICATION OF HILLDALE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, INC., MARK HOLLEMAN-AGENT, FOR ZONE CHANGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MADISON STREET AND TANGLEWOOD DRIVE FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 7. ORDINANCE 101-2020-21 (SECOND READING) AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE, APPLICATION OF HENRY GALVEZ AND SAUL RAMOS CHAVEZ FOR ZONE CHANGE ON PROPERTY

[01:15:01]

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. NEXT WEEK I WILL BE PULLING ORDINANCE 96-2021 AMENDING THE CITY CODE RELATIVE TO WATER SEWER RATES CHARGES AND/OR FEES. WITH YOUR APPROVAL, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. RIGINS TO COME UP TO DISCUSS THAT.

>> WHY DON'T WE PUT THAT ON YOUR FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT.

>> THAT WILL WORK. >> ALL RIGHT, ANYBODY ELSE?

COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS? >> YES, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATE THE NOMINATION OF DR. STALLWORTH.

AS A SOLDIER WHO SERVED AT FORT CAMPBELL AND I WORK AS A CIVILER IS VENT, I'M GRATEFUL FOR HIS SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY AND FOR

THIS NOMINATION. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT.

ANYBODY ELSE? SEEING NONE, WE ARE NOW READY

[4) FINANCE COMMITTEE]

COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN? >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

ITEM ONE, ORDINANCE 83-2020-21, THIS IS THE FIRST (FIRST READING; PROPOSED AMENDMENTS) AUTHORIZING SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR I-24 EXIT 8 TO SILICON RANCH CORPORATION FOR A SOLAR POWER GENERATION FACILITY FINANCE COMMITTEE AND PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE: -- WITH THE SELLING OF THIS 40% WHICH IS AN AREAWHICH IS AN ARE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN. IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS TO GO IN THURE WE ARE, WE DO HAVE MR. TAYLOR OR MAYOR YOU MIGHT

LIKE TO MENTION THINGS ON IT. >> WE HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS, LET'S GOAT TO THOSE. COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS YOU'RE

ON THE LIST. >> YES, I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL AND I APPRECIATE IT.

MY ONLY QUESTION IS I READ OR I WANT TO SAY SKIMMED IS PROBABLY A BETTER WORD THE CONTRACT INFORMATION AND I DID NOT SEE WHERE WE TRIED TO RESERVE A RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL FOR THE PROPERTY. I'M ONLY CONCERNED BECAUSE WE CAN ALL REMEMBER WITH WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PROPERTY THAT WE SOLD TO THE OTHER SOLAR COMPANY THAT WENT AWAY AND THEN IT WENT TO GOOGLE. WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEAR FUTURE AND I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT WE WOULD AT LEAST HAVE AT FAIR MARKET VALUE AT THE TIME THE FIRST RIGHT TO BUY IT BACK, IF THAT'S EVEN LEGALLY POSSIBLE.

>> WELL, CERTAINLY ANYTHING IS LEGALLY POSSIBLE IF YOU GET THE BUYER AND SELLER TO AGREE BUT WE DIDN'T ASK FOR THAT NECESSARILY BECAUSE THEY HAVE A 30-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH CDE TO BUILD OUT A SOLAR ARRAY, SO THEY'RE CONTRACTUALLY BOUND BY THAT SO THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DISPOSE OF IT WITHOUT PENALTY AND IF I'M WAY OFF BASE HERE -- OKAY. I'M ON THE RIGHT TRACK.

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

>> COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> I KNOW YOU SAID BEFORE THAT WE WERE GOING TO GET A PRESENTATION ABOUT THIS THE LAST TIME IT CAME UP, I WANT TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE HER CHAZ OPTION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT, IF

SOMEONE CAN ELABORATE ON THAT. >> THIS IS STRICTLY A CONTRACT, AN OPTION TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY.

THEY ARE BASICALLY TIEING UP THE PROPERTY, GIVE THEM TIME TO DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE IT'S GOING TO WORK FOR THEIR INTENDED PERPS, TO BUILD A TOE LAIR FARM ORS FARO FARLA FARR FARM OR SOLAR ARRAY.

THEY WOULD WALK AWAY AND SAY NO, WE CAN'T DO IT BUT ARE

[01:20:01]

IF THEY TIE IT UP FOR A YEAR, THEY'REN IT FOR 3 YEARS.

IF THEY TIE IT UP FOR A YEAR, THEY'RE GOING TO PAY IT.

>> SO IT'S $10,000 FOR THE YEAR? >> FOR THE FIRST YEAR.

IN THE SECOND YEAR, THEY WILL PLAY US AN ADDITIONAL $20,000 AND THEN INTO THE THIRD YEAR WOULD BE $30,000 AND THAT'S PART OF THE PAR WHICH YOU SAY PRICE. COUNCIL PERSON SMITH, YOU'RE

RECOGNIZED. >> I JUST HAVE A COMMENT TO MAKE. I ALREADY GOT A CALL TO VOTE AGAINST THIS, BUT I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HAVE ANY STUDIES BEEN DONE ON IF SOLAR POWER IS NEEDED HERE IN CLARKSVILLE. I REMEMBER WHEN WE FIRST STARTED SOLAR POWER HERE IN CLARKSVILLE. AUSTIN P BUILT A BUILDING RIGHT THERE ON COLLIE STREET TO EDUCATE STUDENTS ON SOLAR POWER.

I THINK WE SET UP A COMPANY HERE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, AND THE COMPANY SHUT DOWN. IT JUST WENT DONE, IT JUST CLOSED. NOTHING HAPPENED.

SO I DON'T KNOW. I KNOW IT'S ABOUT MONEY AND THAT'S GOOD AND I'M NOT ABOUT STOOPING PEOPLE FROM OPENING BUSINPING PEOPLE FROM OPENING BUSINESSES, BUT I WANT TO KNOW HAVE ANY STUDIES BEEN DONE AS TO THE PREFERENCE FOR SOLAR POWER?

>> THIS SOLAR FARM, SOLAR ARRAY, SOLAR DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE -- THE PURPOSE OF THIS SOLAR DEVELOPMENT WILL BE TO PRODUCE

ENERGY TO SELL TO CDE. >> OH, OKAY.

>> THAT'S POSSIBLE BECAUSE CDE ENTERED INTO AN GRIM WAGREEMENT TVA WHICH FOR THE FIRST TIME ALLOWED CDE TO PURCHASE THIS TYPE OF ENERGY. SO THIS COMPANY WAS EVALUATED VERY CLOSELY BY CDE AND IT WAS TERMED THEY MET TO CRITERIA.

>> SOUNDS GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER, YOU'RE

RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THIS IS KIND OF SIMPLE AND I KNOW WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE, I APOLOGIZE. HOW MANY ACRES DOES THIS LEAVE

FOR THE -- >> 207.3 ACRES FOR THE ATHLETIC

COMPLEX. >> PERFECT, THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> YOU'RE VERY WELCOME. COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT, YOU ARE

RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I JUST WANT TO INTRODUCE MY THOUGHTS ON IT IN TERMS OF AT PRESENT, IT'S ALREADY BEEN EXPRESSED IN SOME OF THE PRESENTATIONS WE HAVE RECEIVED THAT IT'S LIKE A BILLY GOAT BLUFF. THERE'S NOT MUCH WE CAN DO WITH THIS PARCEL AND NOBODY HAS COME KNOCKING AND INQUIRING ABOUT POTENTIAL USES FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOT, HAVE THEY,

MAYOR? >> NOBODY HAS COME KNOCKING I THINK BAUDSBECAUSE IT'S A MUNI MUNICIPAL PURPOSE TO PRODUCE 10 MEGAWATTS.

IT'S NOT STRICTLY A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BUT IT'S A PRIVATE COMPANY DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY FOR MUNICIPAL PROPERTY.

>> THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY PREMIUM LAND WITH US TIEING IT UP FOR 3 YEARS IN AN OPTION, WE'RE NOT MISSING OUT ON SOME DEVELOPER READY TO WRITE A CHECK TO TRY TO DEVELOP IT BECAUSE THE LAND DOESN'T LEND EIGHTH WELL TO DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THIS THIS PARTICULAR USE ASIT WELL TO DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THIS THIS PARTICULS WELL TO DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THIS THIS PARTICUL WELL TO DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THIS THIS PARTICULWL WELL TO DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THIS THIS PARTICULF WELL TO DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THIS THIS PARTICULLF WELL TO DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THIS THIS PARTICULAR USE AS A SOLAR PLANT SO WE COULDN'T REALLY DO ANYTHING WITH IT OTHER THAN ATTEMPTING TO HAVE WALKING TRAILS AND WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT NOT REALLY BEING NAVIGABLE.

TIEING IT UP FOR 3 YEARS, NOBODY IS KNOCKING ON OUR DOORS TO PURCHASE IT FROM US, WE CAN'T DEADLY DEVELOP IT. IT'S REALLY A WIN/WIN.

WE'RE GETTING SOMETHING FOR LAND WE CAN'T DEVELOP AND MORE THAN

[01:25:03]

EVERYBODY ELSE IS, TOO. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

COUNCIL PERSON HOLLEMAN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> THANK YOU, I'M VERY IN FAVOR OF THIS, THE LAND IS NOT REALLY USABLE. IF YOU WANT TO GO HIKING THERE, THERE ARE BETTER PARKS FOR THAT. THE RIVER STINKS, LOCALS CAMP OUT IN THE WOODS, YOU GET THE SOUND FROM THE INTERSTATE SO THERE ARE LOTS OF BETTER OUT DOOR OPPORTUNITIES.

ON TOP OF THAT, THEY'RE TRYING TO PAY US MONEY FOR THE OPTION OF PAYING US MONEY. THEY WILL CREATE THE ELECTRIC AND THEN SELL IT TO US FOR CHEAPER, LIKE 4.2¢, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT WAS LIKE 40% LESS THAN WHAT WE'RE PAYING RIGHT TROW FROM TVA SO A WIN/WIN ALL AROUND.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, WE WON'T PUT THAT IN THE BROCHURE.

[LAUGHTER] ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I, TOO, AM IN FAVOR OF THIS. WHEN WE RECEIVED OUR PRESENTATION ON IT, THERE WAS A LOT OF GREAT INFORMATION ON IT AND I BELIEVE IT'S AVAILABLE FOR EVERYBODY TO SEE THE POWER POINT ON OUR IPADS. YOU CAN SEE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WAS LISTEN THERE, BUT WITH US BEING ABLE TO HAVE THIS TO WHERE WE COULD BE ABLE TO PURCHASE THIS AT 5% IN ORDER TO BUILD A RENUSHL ENERGY CREDITS, EVERYBODY TALKINGNEWABLE ENERGY CREDITS, EVERYBODY TALKING ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY, THIS WOULD ALLOW THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE TO BE LEADERS IN SUSTAINABILITY.

THIS WOULD BE A WIN/WIN SITUATION FOR US.

WE ARE STILL RECOUPING SOMETHING FOR THAT TIME AND WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT WE COULD DO,

SO. >> OKAY.

PROCEED WITH YOUR REPORT. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

ORDINANCE 104-2020-21, FIRST READING, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL CODE REQUIRING ALL NEW LEGISLATION FIRST BE CONSIDERED BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WILL POSTPONE THIS TO ALLOW A PRESENTATION TO THE FINANCE

COMMITTEE. >> COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER, I THINK YOU WERE THE SPONSOR OF THAT ORDINANCE

>> IT. >> IT'S ME.

THANKS, MAYOR. I CALLED MR. BAKER TO SEE IF THIS WAS STILL OKAY TO PRESENT OR MOVE IT TO ANY BUSINESS AND YOU SAID I COULD PRESENT IT FOR HERE.

I DID STILL WANT TO PUT THIS UP FOR A VOTE BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT COVERS WHAT WE'RE TALK ABOUT, IT'S NOT IN EFFECT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS ORDINANCE WAS POSTPONED IN THE FNA COMMITTEE. I WAS KIND OF IGNORANT IN HOW TO SEND SOMETHING TO COMMITTEE, BUT I ALSO ONLY SENT IT TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE BASICALLY AS A COURTESY AND IT'S INTERESTING THE WAY THAT IT TURNED OUT BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF THE REASON I INITIATED THE ITEM TO BEGIN WITH.

ANYONE PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS BODY, SINCE JANUARY, KNOWS THAT WE HAVE SPENT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME DEBATING WHETHER LEGISLATION NEEDS TO GO THROUGH COMMITTEES BEFORE BEING PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE.

THIS ORDINANCE IS MY ATTEMPT TO ASSUAGE THAT DEBATE SO WE CAN STOP WASTING TIME. THE IDEA FOR THIS ACTION CAME FROM THE COUNTY LEVEL WHERE IN ORDER TO PLEAS AN ITEM ON THE AGECE AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA, IT GOES THROUGH THEIR DIGITI COMMITTEE TO ENSURE THERE'S NFINANO FITHERE'S NO FI OBLIGATIONS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I, MULTIPLE TIMES SAID I GREATLY DISAGREE WITH, HOWEVER, I ALSO WITNESSED ORDINANCES BEING REFERRED BACK TO COMMITTEES FROM THIS BODY AND WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE COMMITTEE, IT WAS NOT EVEN DISCUSSED OR DEBATED, IT WAS JUST RUBBER STAMPS AND SENT RIGHT BACK TO US.

[01:30:05]

I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE VOTE YES ON THIS.

IF YOU CHOOSE TO VOTE AGAINST THIS LEGISLATION, I ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THAT VOTE IN THE FUTURE BEFORE MOTIONING TO IMPEDE A COLLEAGUE'S LEGISLATION BY REFERRING IT BACKWARDS TO A COMMITTEE. SO THAT'S WHERE I WROTE OUT TO SAY TONIGHT AND I'M OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THERE WERE SOME AT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND THAT'S WHY THEY CHOSE TO POSTPONE IT, BUT Y'ALL HAVE MY WORD.

I'M JUST TRYING TO GET US TO A POINT WHERE THE EASIEST THING TO TRIM LIKE WHAT WE DO HERE SO WE CAN GET WORK DONE.

THANK YOU, MAYORMENT >> COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS,

YOU'RE ON THE LIST. >> YES, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I KNOW THAT I HAVE OFTEN STATED THAT OUR ORDINANCE SHOULD ORIGINATE WITHIN A COMMITTEE BUT THAT'S MORE DUE TO THE FRUSTRATION THAT I FELT THE AUTHOR OF THE ORDINANCE FAILED TO RESEARCH AND PERFORM DIE DILIGENCE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THEIR ORDINANCES. I FEEL THIS IS OFTEN NECESSARY BUT I DO NOT SUPPORT ALL ORDINANCES BEING REVIEWED BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. THE COMMITTEE ITSELF, AND I AM A MEMBER, IS NOT ALWAYS OPEN TO INPUT OR COMMENT FROM CITY COUNCIL. THE COMMITTEE COULD DELAY ITEMS RARITY SENTING TO THEP O SENDIN. I O WE COULD HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO STATE THAT ORDINANCES THAT HAVE FUNDS COULD GO THROUGH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE BUT THE DIRECTORS HAVE BUDGETS ALLOCATED SUCH AS PARKS AND REC. THEY DO NOT NEED APPROVAL FROM THE FINANCE COMMITTEE BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY PART OF THEIR BUDGET TO PERHAPS PURCHASE PROPERTY.

THIS IS PART OF THEIR JOB. SO I APPRECIATE THIS, BUT WITHOUT SOME AMENDMENTS I DON'T THINK I COULD SUPPORT THIS.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN, YOU'RE NEXT ON THE LIST.

>> I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS.

I'M ABOUT EXPY DIETING AND STREAMLINING, TOO.

THE FINANCE COMMITTEE CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS BUT NO COMMITTEE CAN AMEND A PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

THEY CAN SEND IT BACK AND COME UP WITH AMENDMENTS LATER BUT THEY CANNOT CHANGE OUR LEGISLATION.

I SPOKE TO MR. BAKER EARLIER TODAY AND HE EXPLAINED TO ME IN ANOTHER PART OF OUR CODE, THERE'S ALREADY SOMETHING IN THERE THAT SAYS THAT ONCE IT'S PRESENTED TO A COMMITTEE, THERE'S A 45-DAY WINDOW BEFORE IT HAS TO COME TO THE COUNCIL.

SO NOBODY CAN POSTPONE IT INDEFINITELY.

THAT CANNOT HAPPEN. THERE'S A 45-DAY WINDOW SO IF YOU HAVE A COMMITTEE LIKE MINE, I'M IN THE COMMUNITY HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT, THAT MEETING IS EARLIER IN THE MONTH.

BY THE NEXT MEETING, IF WE NEED TO POSTPONE SOMETHING, WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT 45-DAY WINDOW SO IT HAS TO GO TO THE COUNCIL THAT NEXT MEETING. FINANCE COMMITTEE MIGHT HAVE A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY TO WHERE THEIR MEETING IS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE WEEK BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE SESSION OR WHENEVER IT IS, LIKE RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE WEEK, SO THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO POSTPONE IT ONCE BUT THEY CAN'T POSTPONE IT AGAIN.

IT'S ALREADY ENGRAINED IN OUR CODE.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SPONSOR IS SAYING, LET'S NOT USE -- LET'S TAKE AWAY THE POLITICIZING, USING COMMITTEES, AND USE THEM FOR WHAT THEY WERE FOR ORIGINALLY INSTEAD OF SENDING IT BACK AND NOT BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT DUE DILIGENCE ON LEGISLATION, THAT'S AN ASSUMPTION, BUT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT READY TO HEAR IT. SO IF THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING

TO DO, LET'S DO IT. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PERSON

KNIGHT YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

WHILE I APPRECIATE THE INTENT MADE BY THE SPONSOR, THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE DISALLOWS THE COUNCIL THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING ITEMS FORWARD AND PLACED ON OUR AGENDA.

I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT A LEVEL OF REDUNDANCY THAT EXISTS IN THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE SO FOR THAT REASON, I WILL BE VOTING

[01:35:02]

AGAINST IT, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

CHAIRPERSON STREETMAN? >> THANK YOU, A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE MENTIONED THIS BUT THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEES IS NOT FOR POLITICIZING, IT'S SO WE HAVE THE EXPERTS FROM THOSE DEPARTMENTS, THOSE WHO ARE AFFECTED BY THE DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY BING FOR THEM TO HAVE THEIR INPUT SO WE CAN LEARN FROM THEM WHAT THE BEST DECISIONS ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF OUR CITY.

I RECOGNIZE THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL IS TRYING TO EITHER GET THINGS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER BY STREAMLINING IT.

I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR EVERYTHING TO BE ABLE TO GO BEFORE A COMMITTEE BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT EVERY SINGLE THING WOULD HAVE TO BE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.

I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR IT TO BE COMETED TO WHERE IT WOULD BE WHATEVER COMMITTEE IT NEEDED TO GO THROUGH.

IT WOULDN'T HAVE ANY EFFECT ON [INDISCERNIBLE] PUBLIC SAFETY BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE AN EFFECT ON THAT, SO I THINK IF WE WERE REALLY GOING TO LOOK AT THIS AND WANTED TO TRULY DO IT TO WHERE WE WERE SENDING IT THROUGH THE COMMITTEE SO THE PROPER AMOUNT OF WORK CAN BE MADE ON THEM, I THINK IT WOULD NEED TO BE AMENDED TO GO BEFORE THE COMMITTEE IT NEEDS TO AND RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE TIME THAT IS WE NEED TO GET THINGS ON THERE QUICKLY, NOT NECESSARILY US, BUT THERE ARE TIME THAT IS THE MAYOR HAS HAD TO ADD THINGS SO THINGS COULD GET DONE SO I THINK WE NEED TO THINK THIS THROUGH AND I THINK WE NEED TO BRING FORWARD SOME AMENDMENTS TO TRULY STREAMLINE THE PROCESS.

>> A QUESTION FOR THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER IN TERMS OF I GET THE CONCEPT OF WANTING TO SEND IT TO A SPECIFIC COMMITTEE THAT'S RELEVANT BUT WHO WOULD DETERMINE THAT? THERE ARE SOME ITEMS THAT THERE'S NOT NECESSARILY A CURRENT COMMITTEE THAT DEALS DIRECTLY WITH IT SO WHO WOULD BE THE PERSON TO DETERMINE WHAT COMMITTEE IT SHOULD GO TO?

>> COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN, I THINK THAT'S DIRECTED TO YOU.

>> MR. BAKER, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER THAT YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO.

>> THIS IS CITY CODE SUBSECTION D [INAUDIBLE] TO THE CITY CLERK AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING OF ANY STANDING COMMITTEE WHICH WILL REVIEW SUCH ITEMS. THE CITY CLERK SHALL FORWARD ALL SUCH ITEMS TO THE STANDING COMMITTEE OR COMMITTEES WHICH, IN THE OPINION OF THE CITY CLERK AND SPONSOR OR SPONSORS COULD APPROPRIATELY REVIEW SUCH ITEMS AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL.

UPON SUCH REVIEW, ALL ITEMS SHALL BE PLACED ON THE REGULAR SESSION AGENDA REGARDLESS OF WHETHER FAVORABLE OPINION FOR ADOPTION IS MADE BY ANY COMMITTEE.

SO IT'S THE CLERK TOGETHER WITH THE SPONSOR WHO DECIDES WHAT COMMITTEE TO REFER LEGISLATION TO OR PROPOTS ORDISE ORDINANCES

RESOLUTIONS TO. >> DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR

QUESTION COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT? >> YES.

>> COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> THE PROCESS YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, THE CITY CLERK AND THAT COUNCIL PERSON DECIDE ON A COMMITTEE BUT IF YOU BRING IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL, YOU CAN DO THAT, RIGHT?

THE WAY IT SITS RIGHT NOW. >> YEAH.

>> SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOUR LEGISLATION GETS SENT TO A COMMITTEE THAT DOESN'T EXIST, WHICH HAS HAPPENED SINCE WE HAVE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL. LIKE ETHICS LEGISLATION.

IT WAS SENT TO A COMMITTEE THAT DOESN'T COMMITTEE.

>> WHAT COMMITTEE? I DON'T REMEMBER THAT.

>> THEY SENT IT TO COMMITTEE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT COMMITTEE.

[01:40:04]

>> BUT THERE'S AN OUT, REMEMBER, THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

BY THE WAY, IT SAYS IT SHALL BE FORWARDED TO A STANDING COMMITTEE OR MULTIPLE COMMITTEES.

SOMETIMES YOU MIGHT WANT TO SEND SOMETHING TO BOTH PUBLIC SAFETY BECAUSE IT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR BUILDING CODES, AND THEN YOU WOULD ALSO MAYBE WANT TO SEND IT TO FNA BECAUSE THERE'S SOME BUDGETARY IMPACT. I THINK MOST OF THE TIME IT'S BEST TO SEND IT TO ONE COMMITTEE BY THE CODE ALLOWS YOU TO SEND IT TO MULTIPLE BUT THE NEXT PARAGRAPH THAT DEALS WITH THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU GET WITH THE CITY CLERK AND SAY I WANT TO PROPOSE SOME LEGISLATION AND SHE MAKES THE DECISION IN CONSULTATION WITH THE MEMBER AS TO WHICH COMMITTEE IT SHOULD GO TO, BUT THEN THE NEXT PARAGRAPH, ALTERNATIVELY, A MEMBER, OR MAYOR, SUBMITTING AN ITEM MAY DIRECT THE CITY CLERK THAT THE ITEM BE PLACED DIRECTLY ON AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA WITHOUT REFERRAL TO A STANDING COMMITTEE. EACH OF YOU, UNDER THE CURRENT CODE, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO BYPASS COMMITTEES.

PERIOD FE >> WE DID THAT.

THEY SENT IT TOTHEY SENT IT TO AFTER THAT THAT DOES NOT EXIST.

>> THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE. MINE, TOO.

>> THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE DOES EXIST BUT IT'S NOT A STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL.

THERE'S A LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE THAT THE MAYOR APPOINTED EVERY

YEAR. >> THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE WOULDN'T DO THAT, IT WAS NOT SENT TO A LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE.

>> THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, THAT DEALS WITH --

>> STUFF WE SEND UP. >> STUFF TO THE STATE.

>> YEAH, IT WAS NOT THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, IT WAS TO A COMMITTEE THAT WE DIDN'T IDENTIFY A COMMITTEE.

>> OKAY, WELL IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED, I AGREE WITH YOU THERE, I JUST DON'T REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS NEW LEGISLATION DOES, NOTICE ON THE FIRST PAGE, IT REMOVES THE PARAGRAPH I JUST READ AND SO YOU NO LONGER, AS A MEMBER, CAN CUB MITT THINGSSUBT TH SUBMT TIT THINGS DIRECTLY WITHO GOING THROUGH A STANDING COMMITTEE BUT ALSO, IN A FURTHER PARAGRAPH OVER THERE, IT TALKS ABOUT IN THE CURRENT VERSION, AND THIS IS ONE, TWO, THREE FOUR, FIVE, THE SIXTH PARAGRAPH UNDER SUBSECTION DES.

IT SAYS A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL OR THE MAYOR MAY PLACE ITEMS ON THE REGULAR SESSION AGENDA THAT HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE FULL CITY COUNCIL AT THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[INDISCERNIBLE] THEY VOTE IT UP OR DOWN BUT NOW THEY ADDED THIS LITTLE CLAUSE UP HERE AT THE TOP OR IN THE PARAGRAPH I JUST READ THAT SAYS NOTWITHSTANDING SUBSECTION G OF THIS SECTION.

I ADDED THAT AFTER CONSULTATION WITH COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER BECAUSE WE WANTED TOO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH EMERGENCY SITUATIONS SO THAT ANY MEMBER, ESPECIALLY A MAYOR, THINK NATURAL DISASTERS, CAN GET SOMETHING DIRECTLY ON THE REGULAR SESSION, EVEN THOUGH IT DIDN'T GO THROUGH A STANDING COMMITTEE, BUT THIS IS A SIGNI SIGNIFICANT IMPACT OR REDUCTION ON THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S ABILITY TO PUT THINGS DIRECTLY ON

[01:45:05]

>> COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN? >> NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU MR. BAKER. COUNCIL PERSON KNIGHT, YOU'RE

RECOGNIZED. >> THINK, MAYOR.

I'M GOING TO SPEAK MY MIND FOR ONCE IN MY LIFE.

>> ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY, SIT DOWN.

>> WE SPEND ALL THIS TIME ON LEGISLATION THAT HELPS NOT ONE OF OUR CONSTITUENTS. WE'RE DEBATING BACK AND FORTH WHEN WE HAVE ORDINANCES OUTLINED, WHAT THE PROCESS IS THAT WE NEED TO DO. WE HAVE A PROCESS, IT FUNCTIONS, IT ALLOWS US TO BRING LEGISLATION ON THE AGENDA AND THEN HERE AT THE COUNCIL MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHETHER THAT RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE NEEDS TO GO TO A COMMITTEE.

LET'S STOP WASTING TAXPAYERS' TIME, THANK YOU.

>> COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. [INAUDIBLE]

>> I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S NOT STAYING ON.

LET'S TRY IT AGAIN. THERE WE GO.

>> THIS IS DIRECTLY TO THE DIRECTORS OF THESE COMMITTEES BECAUSE I KNOW MOST OF Y'ALL ARE SITTING OUT THERE.

I WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH Y'ALL. I WILL TAKE YOUR ADVICE AT ANY POINT AND JUNCTURE, THIS IS POLITICAL.

I UNDERSTAND THAT NOT EVERYBODY AGREES WITH THAT, THAT'S FINE, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THIS IS NOT ME ADDING OUR DIRECTORS. I THINK THEY'RE GREAT.

I'M SAD THAT HE JUST WALKED OUT. THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER MENTIONED THAT WE'RE WASTING TIME AND I AGREE WITH THAT, HOWEVER, THIS RESOLUTION WAS SPECIFICALLY TO STOP WASTING OUR TIME, OUR CONSTITUENTS' TIME, TAXPAYER TIME, ETC., THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS FOR. EACH TIME A COUNCIL PERSON COMES IN HERE, PUTS SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA THAT'S THEIR RIGHT TO DO AND WE KICK IT BACK, WE'RE ALREADY DOING WHAT I'M ASKING JUST TO LEGITIMIZE WITH THIS ORDINANCE.

WE'RE ALREADY TAKING THAT POWER AWAY.

IF I BRING SOMETHING AND IT'S KICKED BACK, WE'RE ALREADY DOING THAT. AND, AGAIN, IF ANYONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH THE REDUNDANCY IN THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION, I DID WANT TO STICK UP FOR THE LEGAL TEAM BECAUSE I DID GO THROUGH THEM TO WRITE IT. I DON'T FEEL THAT IT IS REDUNDANT AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LEGAL OFFICE KNOWS THAT. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION? BACK TO YOU, CHAIRPERSON STREETMAN.

>> THANK YOU, ORDINANCE 105-2020-21, FIST READING, AUTHORIZING EXERCISE OF RIGHT OF EMINENT DOE NAN TO OBTAIN EASEMENTS GRANTING ACCESS OVER AND ACROSS PROPERTY NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN THE NORTH CLARKSVILLE WATER TREATMENT PLANT. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. WIGGINS

TO EXPLAIN THIS. >> SINCE THIS THES A TOUCHY EXAMPLE RASHED REGARDING THE WELL, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT, MEPLE THAT,PLEASE? OKAY. .

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THINK.

I THATH THIS THOUGHT THIS WOULD EXPLAIN OUR POSITION.

[01:50:06]

SO WHAT THIS LEGISLATION DOES, FIRST, LET ME SAY THIS.

MY DEPARTMENT WILL NEVER, EVEN IF THIS LEGISLATION IS PASSED, MY DEPARTMENT NEVER GOES STRAIGHT TO THE COURT FOR A SITUATION LIKE THIS WITHOUT TRYING TO REACH OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER FIRST. WE MET WITH THE TENANTS, WE REACHED OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO THEN, OF COURSE, TOOK THIS TO THE ATTORNEY. THERE WAS SOME BACK AND FORTH AND WE'RE AT A STALEMATE HERE FOR REASONS THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE CLEAR ABOUT, TO BE HONEST.

THAT BEING THE CASE, WE STILL NEED THE EASEMENT MOVED.

WE KNOW IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE TENANTS, THE OWNERS AND THE CITIZENS OF CLARKSVILLE.

WE HAVE MARK YOUNG APPRAISING THE EXISTING EASEMENT, THE PROPOSED EASEMENT, AND THEN SHOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SO WE CAN ENTER THAT TENDER TO THE COURT.

I BELIEVE IF WE EVER GOT TO THE TABLE WITH THE OWNERS AND THE ATTORNEYS WE COULD WORK THIS OUT WITHOUT THE COURT SYSTEM.

>> THANK YOU MR. RIGGINS. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS TRANSACTION? COUNCIL PERSON EVANS YOU'RE

RECOGNIZED >> JUST FOR CLARITY, WE'RE JUST MOVING THE EASEMENT? .

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> WE'RE MOVING IT BECAUSE THEY PUT A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT TOO CLOSE TO THE EASEMENT WE AGREED TO. THAT'S CORRECT, RIGHT? IT WOULD BE EASIER TO MOVE THE ROAD THAN TO ASK THEM TO MOVE

THE EQUIPMENT? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

WHERE THE GREEN AND YELLOW ARE COMBINED, THAT'S WHERE WE

DISCUSSED WOULD BE BEST. >> NING BUTLCOUNCIL PERSON BUTLE

RECOGNIZED. >> YOU AGREED BUT THEY WON'T AGREE TO IT, THAT'S WHY WE'RE EXERCISING EMINENT DOMAIN?

>> YES, WE MET WITH THE TENANT, THEY DO NOT OWN IT.

THEY HAVE OPTIONS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BUT THEY'RE NOT THE CURRENT OWNERS. WE CANNOT SPEAK WITH THE OWNER.

I'M NOT ALLOWED TO CALL. WE HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THE ATTORNEYS AT THIS POINT. WE HAVE REQUESTED MORE THAN ONCE A MEETING FOR ALL OF US TO SIT DOWN AND WE HAVE YET TO BE

GRANTED THAT MEETING. >> SO YOU AND THE TENANTS AGREE,

THE OWNER NOT SO MUCH. >> APPARENTLY, YES, MA'AM.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN? >> I JUST WANTED TO ASK A POINT OF PRIVILEGE AFTER HE'S DONE SPEAKING CAN WE --

>> YES. >> THANK YOU.

>> I READ YOUR MIND. >> COUNCIL PERSON EVANS.

I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE R?

I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE R>> I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT

THE RISK OF LAWSUIT WOULD BE. >> IT WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO EXPLAIN WHAT EM NINETY DOMAIN IS.

>> I KNOW WHAT>> I KNOW WHAT IT. >> I KNOW BUT --

[01:55:05]

>> YOU'RE AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO EXERCISE THE POUR OF EMINENT DOMAIN THROUGH THE FILINGR OF E DOMAIN THROUGWR OF EMINENT DOMAIN THROUGER OF EMINENT DOMAIN THROUGH THE FILING OF

CONDEMNATION LAWSUIT. >> OKAY.

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH YOU WANT ME TO GO INTO.

>> ABOUT 30 SECONDS WORTH. >> WELL, MR. MARK OLSEN REPRESENTS URBAN FARMS AND I BELIEVE BASED ON THE COMMUNICATIONS WE HAVE HAD, HE BELIEVES THAT THE CITY DID NOT ACQUIRE, IN A LEGAL WAY, THE ORIGINAL EASEMENT.

I THINK THAT HE THINKS THAT THIS IS ANOTHER PROPERTY TAKING SITUATION. I'M HAPPY TO SEND TO THE COUNCIL THE E-MAIL AND LETTERS EXCHANGED BACK AND FORTH IN REGARDS TO THIS AND YOU CAN DRAW YOUR OWN C

CONCLUSIONS. >> THANK YOU.

>> COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> I ASKED YOU THIS THE OTHER DAY.

DO YOU TRULY THINK EVEN JUST BROACHING THIS, US PASSING THIS COULD PROBABLY JUST GO AHEAD AND BE ABLE TO GET THE CONVERSATION AT THE TABLE THAT YOU'RE HOPING TO HAVE SO THAT IT WOULDN'T HAVE

TO GO AS FAR AS THIS? >> THAT'S WHAT I HOPE FOR.

I HOPE THAT THIS COMING TO LIGHT, THE CITY COUNCIL MOVING FORWARD, THIS LEGISLATION, I HOPE THAT PRODUCES A MEETING BETWEEN THE OWNERS, OURSELVES, LEGAL COUNCIL TO ALL SIT AT THE

TUBAL WITHOUT GOING TO COURT. >> THISABLE WITHOUT GOING TO CO.

>> THIS MAKES COMPLETE SENSE. IT'S A QUINN FOR EVERYBODY.

OTHERWISE THEM HAVING TO MOVE WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR GRAIN ELEVATOR AND EVERYTHING THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED WITH THAT, I FEEL LIKE THIS WOULD BE A HAPPY MEDIUM TO SOLVE THE ISSUE FOR

ALL. >> AND LET ME JUST ADD THAT DON'T THINK WE HAVEN'T TRIED TO HAVE A MEETING OR TO DO THINGS IN WRITING. HOWEVER THEY WANT TO DO IT, WE'RE WILLING TO SIT DOWN AND DISCUSS IT.

THERE'S BEEN AN EXCHANGE OF EASEMENT AGREEMENTS, NEW EASEMENT AGREEMENTS AND THIS IS GOING OFF MY MEMORY AND IF I'M WRONG IN THIS, THEN I'M WRONG, BUT, AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT AT LEAST PART OF THE ISSUE IS THAT COUNCIL FOR URBAN FARMS BELIEVES THIS IS A TAKING SITUATION AND THAT THE EASEMENT WAS NOT DONE LEGALLY CORRECTLY. I'M STILL HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN WORK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES AND TRY TO REACH AN AGREEMENT ON AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT, AN EASIMENT IS A CONTRACT,MENT IS A CMENT IS A CONTRACT, THAT WOULD BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE EASEMENT THAT SHIFTS IT.

>> OKAY, MR. BAKER, MR. RIGGINS WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING.

>> WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR HOW LONG? FOR A LONG TIME. ALL THIS DOES IS SAY, OKAY, WHEN MR. RIGGINS AND THE MAYOR, WHEN THINK THINK NEGOTIATIONS ARE DONE, WHICH APPARENTLY WE'RE AT THAT POINT, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND EXERCISE THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN THROUGH A CONDEMNATION

LAWSUIT. >> MR. RIGGINS?

>> I THINK WHAT'S HAPPENED IS BECAUSE THIS IS A REVISION OF AN EASEMENT, IF GAS AND WATER AND URBAN FARMS COMES TO AN AGREEMENT, WE WOULD COME BEFORE YOU TO AGREE.

WE ONLY COME IN FRONT OF COUNCIL IS IF WE'RE GIVING UP PART OF THE RIGHTS WE HAVE. I THINK THAT'S BEEN MISUNDERSTOOD. WHY DIDN'T THE FIRST EASEMENT COME BEFORE COUNCIL? I SPENT THE BETTER PART OF 9 YEARS OBTAINING MOST OF THE EASEMENTS FOR GAS AND WATER AND VERY FEW TIMES DID I COME TO COUNCIL BECAUSE THAT'S AT A DEPARTMENT LEVEL. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO COME TO

COUNCIL. >> ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS ITEM?

>> NO, SIR. >> OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A 10-MINUTE BREAK, GET OUT OF THE WAY OF THE DOORS.

WELCOME BACK. WE'RE ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT, CHAIRPERSON STREETMAN YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR THE REST

[02:00:02]

OF YOUR REPORT, PLEASE. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

ORDINANCE 106-2020-21, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL CODE RELATIVE TO OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH PROGRAM.

THE FINANCE COMMITTEE VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS.

THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO COME OF OUR HEALTHCARE POLICIES.

WE WORK CLOSELY WITH TOSHA'S PUBLIC SECTOR.

KITCHENALLYOCCASIONALLY, TOSHA RECOMMEND THAT THEY [INDISCERNIBLE] THE COUNTY ALSO RECENTLY UPDATED THEIR LANGUAGE

PER TOSHA'S REQUEST AS WELL. >> THANK YOU, ANY QUESTIONS RECORDING 106? SEEING NONE, PROCEED.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. ORDINANCE 107-2020-21, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF SURPLUS TAX SALE PROPERTIES AT A PUBLIC ACTION. THE FINANCIAL COMMITTEE VOTED APPROVAL FOR THIS. THIS IS FOR 17 DIFFERENT PROPERTY THAT IS THE CITY HAS. WE HAVE SPENT THE LAST 2 YEARS RESEARCHING THIS AND LOOKING FOR PROPERTIES THAT WE HAD THAT WERE SURPLUS PROPERTIES. SOME OF THOSE ARE VERY, VERY TINY PARCELS OF PROPERTY BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO TRY TO DISPOSE OF THESE PROPERTIES. WE HAVE VERIFIED WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS TO ENSURE THERE WASN'T ANYTHING THEY NEEDED THESE PARCELS FOR ANY REASON.

NOW THAT THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH THAT LIST AND IT'S BEEN WORKED THROUGH DILIGENTLY, WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT THESE UP.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? >> COUNCIL PERSON SMITH?

>> THANK YOU, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IS THIS THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN PURCHASE THE PROPERTY? IF A CITIZEN WANTED TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY, CAN THEY BUY IT OTHER THAN AN AUCTION?

>> WE'RE PLANNING A PUBLIC AUCTION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COUNTY WHO HAVE SURPLUS TAX SALE PROPERTIES.

WE FELT LIKE THIS WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO ATTRACT ATTENTION.

IT'S NOT THE ONLY WAY TO DO IT BUT WE CHOSE THIS WAY TO DISPOSE OF MULTIPLE PROPERTIES AT ONE TIME.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.

THIS IS ORDINANCE 108-2020-21, FIRST READING, AUTHORIZING DONATION OF PROPERTIES LOCATED ON DUMAS DRIVE AND ELM HILL DRIVE TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

THE FINANCE COMMITTEE ALSO VOTED APPROVAL OF THIS.

I BELIEVE THIS WAS FOR THREE PARCELS FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GIVE TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY FOR THEM TO UTILIZE IT TO BUILD SOME HOME FORS AFFORDABLE HOUSING THROUGH THE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY

PROGRAM. >> WE HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE.

THESE ARE THREE ADJOINING PARCELS.

HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WILL USE SOME OF THEIR FEDERAL HOME MONEY OR CDBG TO SATISFY THE BACK TAXES OWED AND HABITAT WILL HAVE FAMILIES ON A WITTING LIST OR IN A QUEUE TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION ON THESE PAR SELLS. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDINANCECEL. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDINANCESL. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDIL. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDI. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDIL. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDIS. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDINANCE 108? PLEASE PROCEED.

>> THANK YOU, ORDINANCE 110-2020-21, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL CODE RELATIVE TO CITY OFFICIALS, DEPARTMENT HEADS, AND EMPLOYEE DISAPPLY MARE PROCESS. I WILL ALLOW COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT TO SPEAK ON THIS ANS HE SPONSORED.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO EX-PREZ THAT THIS LEGISLATION WAS IN RESPONSE TO MY FELLOW COUNCIL PERSON WHO ATTEMPTED TO INVESTIGATION INTO A DISCIPLINARY ACTION INTO A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND WAS NOT ABLE TO DO SO BECAUSE OF THE WAY THINGS WERE WRITTEN.

I HAVE NOT ALWAYS AGREED WITH SOME DECISIONS BUT I HAVE RESPECTED THEIR DECISIONS BASED ON THEIR EXPERTISE AND THEIR DESIRE TO ACT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF CLARKSVILLE, SO, AGAIN, I WILL BE SPEAKING TO IT MORE AT THE REGULAR SESSION AND I APPRECIATE JUST THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMON SEN FINANCE ECONOMY.

[02:05:18]

>> COUNCIL PERSON STREET MAN YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> THANK YOU, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ENTIRE COUNCIL OF MR. WYATT.

>> WILL WYATT, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR.

>> ALL RIGHT THANK YOU, MAYOR. FIRST, ONE THING -- I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO IN THE HR DEPARTMENT FOR OUR EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE.

WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK, TO START WITH, IS HOW DOES THE DISCIPLINARY -- OUR CURRENT PROCESS, HOW DOES THE DISAPPLY MARE PROCESS WORK TO APPROVE THE APPEAL PROCESS? AND THIS IS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES. I DON'T THINK IT WAS REALLY DISCUSSED EXACTLY WHAT THIS NEW CHANGE WOULD ENTAIL.

>> SURE, I WILL GIVE IT A SHOT. OUR DISCIPLINARY PROCESS OUTLINED IN THE CITY CODE, THERE ARE SEVERAL KEY PIECES TO IT.

ONE IS DUE PROCESS, PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE AND WITH DUE PROCESS, IF THERE ARE ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONNECT, LET'S SAY THEFT, FOR EXAMPLE.

IF SOMEONE IS ACCUSED OF STEALING SOMETHING, CURRENTLY A MANAGER OR THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WILL DRAFT WHAT'S CALLED A DUE PROCESS NOTIFICATION LETTER AND IN THAT LETTER IT OUTLINES THE CHARGES LISTED IN CITY CODE AND THEN IT GOES INTO THE DETAIL ABOUT WHAT SPECIFICALLY HAPPENED.

THAT IS NECESSARY FOR EMPLOYEES TO BE ABLE TO MEET DUE PROCESS.

THERE ARE SEVERAL PIECES. ONE, THE DECISION FOR DISCIPLINE CAN BE ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS AND ALSO THE EMPLOYEE IS AFFORDED THE RIGHT TO LOOK AT THE CHARGES MADE AGAINST THEM AND THEN FINALLY BE ABLE TO SEE THEIR SIDE OF THINGS, ESSENTIALLY.

SO THAT INITIAL LETTER OUTLINES WHAT THOSE CHARGES ARE, DETAILS THE INTENT OF SOME SORT OF DISCIPLINE.

WHEN WE'RE TALKING ARE THESE PURPOSES, WE'RE TALK ABOUT MAJOR DISCIPLINE INCLUDING DEMOTION AND/OR TERMINATION.

IN THAT LET RE, IT WILL OUTLINE THE DISCIPLINES AND WHY AND AT THE END OF THE LETTER A DEMME PLEAT THAT WE USE WHERE IT ALLOWS THEM TO SET UP A PREDECISION MEETING.

IN ORDER TO MEET DUE PROCESS, THE DEPARTMENT HEAD, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST EMPLOYEES AT THIS POINT, THE SAME PROCESS PRETTY MUCH POLICE FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS AS WELL, BUT THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WILL HAVE THAT MEETING.

THEY CANNOT MAKE THE DECISION FOR DISCIPLINE UNTIL THEY HAVE HAD THAT MEETING WITH THE EMPLOYEE AND THE EMPLOYEE IS ALLOWED TO SAY THEIR SIDE OF THINGS AND EXPLAIN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, ETC. THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WILL MAKE THEIR DECISION AND THEN FOR THE DECISION, WE HAVE AN ACTION LETTER. THERE'S AN INTENT LETTER THAT DETAILS EVERYTHING IN IT AND THERE'S AN ACTION LETTER FOLLOWING THAT THAT SAYS WE HEARD WHAT YOU HAD TO SAY AT THE MEETING AND EITHER WE DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING THAT COULD CAUSE US SO CHANGE OUR MIND, OR THE DEPARTMENT HEAD CAN, FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S A TERMINATION, INTENT TO TERMINATE, THE DEPARTMENT HEAD CAN DOWNGRADE THAT.

AT THAT POINT, IN THAT ACTION LETTER IS LANGUAGE REGARDING THE APPEAL. EMPLOYEES HAVE TEN CALENDAR DAYS TO FILE AN APPEAL AFTER THE DECISION IS MADE, IF THEY DISAGREE WITH THE OUTCOME, THEY CAN FOLLOW AN APPEAL THAT GOES TO THE MAYOR. THE MAYOR THEN HAS 20 CALENDAR DAYS TO RENDER A DECISION AND THE MAYOR CAN UPHOLD THE DECISION. THE MAYOR CAN MODIFY IT.

THE MAYOR CAN DISMISS IT ENTIRELY.

SO THAT DECISION LIES ENTIRELY WITH THE MAYOR.

THAT'S OUR CURRENT PROCESS AND THAT APPLIES TO REGULARME AND PO

HAVE PASSED PROBATION. >> HAS THERE BEEN A SITUATION IN THE PAST THAT THE EMPLOYEE APPEALED TO THE MAYOR AND THAT

CHANGED THE OUTCOME? >> YES, THAT'S HAPPENED MULTIPLE

TIMES THROUGH THE YEARS. >> OKAY, IN REGARDS TO THE NEW ONE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT MAKING CHANGES TO, WHAT WOULD THE

APPEAL PROCESS BE THEN? >> ACCORDING TO TO WHAT I READ

[02:10:01]

IF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD DECIDES TO TERMINATE AN EMPLOYEE, THE ONLY RECOURSE WOULD BE TO TAKE US TO COURT IN A LAWSUIT.

DEPARTMENT HEADS, THE SAME THING.

THE MAYOR COULD INITIATE DISCIPLINE BY HIM OR HERSELF AND THAT WOULD BE IT. THERE WOULD BE NO APPEAL THERE OR THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, I THINK, THE COUNCIL CAN BRING CHARGES AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT HEAD AND THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WOULD BE DISCIPLINED WITH NO APPEAL RIGHTS AT THAT POINT,

EITHER. >> OKAY, AND EVEN IN REFERENCE TO THAT, I TRIED TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION ON THIS AND NEVER REALLY UNDERSTOOD EXACTLY HOW ANYBODY WOULD GO ABOUT BRINGING CHARGES. WOULD THEY DO THAT ON THE COUNCIL FLOOR AND BRING THE CHARGES AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT HEAD HERE ON THE COUNCIL FLOOR ON A VERY PUBLIC STAGE?

>> THAT WOULD BE MY ASSUMPTION. THOSE DETAILS ARE NOT HATCHED OUT BUT IT WOULD BE BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE A PUBLIC MEETING FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS AND PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND AT THE VERY

LEAST, THAT WOULD BE TRUE >> AND HOW LONG HAS THIS CURRENT PROCESS THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN PLACE?

>> I WOULD SAY ABOUT 11 YEARS. I HAVE BEEN HERE 12 AND SHORTLY AFTER I CAME ON BOARD, WE STARTED REWRITING THIS PORTION OF THE CITY CODE IN AN EFFORT FOR FAIRNESS AND TO REALLY, AND IT'S NOT JUST THE DISCIPLINARY CODE, THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF HOURS OF TRAINING THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS WITH CONSULTATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND MANAGERS.

WE HAVE A MANDATORY TRAINING PROGRAM, IF SOMEBODY PROMOTES INTO A SIP ADVISORY ROAD, THEY GO INTOUPERVISORY ROAD, THEY GO INTO OUR HR TRAINING PROGRAM WHICH DOES INCLUDE DISCIPLINE.

HOLDING US ALL ACCOUNTABLE, HAVING CLEAR EXPECTATIONS AND BEING FAIR ABOUT IT, WE REALLY HAVE SEEN THAT BE A VERY EFFECTIVE PROCESS OTHER THE PAST DECADE.

>> BEFORE THIS WENT INTO PLACE, HOW OFTEN DID WE SEE AN EEOC

COMPLAINT FILES AGAINST US? >> WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE, WE WERE GETTING 8 OR 9 A YEAR. OF COURSE, THAT'S A FEDERAL AGENCY THAT LOOKS INTO CLAIMS OF ILLEGAL DISCRIMINATION, PRIMARILY TITLE VII, PREGNANCY IS INCLUDED IN THAT, THAT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A LOT WITH 7, 8, 9, BUT IT'S A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE. WE WANT TO AVOID THOSE.

THE EEOC LOOKS INTO THESE MATTERS EVERY TIME THERE'S A COMPLAINT FILED WE'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDEEVERY TIME THERE'S A FILED WE'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A POSITION STATEMENT.

IT'S FOR US TO SAY HERE ARE THE FACTS INVOLVED, HERE'S THE PROCESS WE HAVE GONE THROUGH AND TYPICALLY A LOT OF THOSE EEOC COMPLAINTS INVOLVE DISCIPLINE WHERE SOMEONE WAS TREATED UNFAIRLY. WE TAKE ABOUT THAT IN OUR TRAINING IF YOU TREAT SOMEONE DIFFERENTLY AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHY, THEY WILL COME UP WITH A REASON.

WE GET ONE OF THESE ABOUT EVERY 2 YEARS, KNOCK ON WOOD.

IT'S NOT ULTIMATELY NECESSARY BUT THAT'S THE PROCESS FOR SOMEONE WHO FEELS DISCRIMINATED AGAINST FILES THAT COMPLAINT WITH THE EEOC OF THE TENNESSEE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION AND THAT AGENCY DOES AN INVESTIGATION AND ISSUE WHAT'S CALLED A RIGHT TO SUE LITTER WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO GO THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM IF THEY WISH TOTTER WHICH ALLOWS T GO THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM IF THEY TTER WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO GO THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM IF THEY WISH TO PURSUE A LAWSUIT. THAT'S IF THE EEOC TAKES THE LAWSUIT. THE EECO TAKES ABOUT 2% OF THE INVESTIGATIONS THEY DO, WHICH IS CLEARLY A SMALL NUMBER OF THE ONES THEY GET AND THAT JUST MEANS THERE'S LESS LIKELIHOOD FOR LITIGATION. WE NEVER LOST A LAWSUIT, NOT SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE. LANCE BAKER, OF COURSE, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HELPED TO PUT THIS TOGETHER IN A FASHION THAT'S CLEAR AND WHEN, UNFORTUNATELY, THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF DISCIPLINE IS TO FIX A PROBLEM, TO CORRECT SOMETHING THAT'S WRONG AND WE DON'T LOOK AT IT AS PUNITIVE, IT'S THERE IN

[02:15:05]

SOME OTHER DEPARTMENTS GET ONE A MONTH AND THESE ARE VERY EXPENSIVE COMPLAINTS TO RESPOND TO.

A LOT OF HOURS INVOLVED IN THOSE RESPONSES.

THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WILL BE INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS.

THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL BE INVOLVED IN REVIEWING THAT DOCUMENT. WITHIN HR, THERE'S AN ANALYST THAT CRAFTS THAT RESPONSE BASED ON THE FACTS.

ALL THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN DEVELOPED AND TO BE FAIR, EFFECTIVE, PROVIDE THE EMPLOYEE DUE PROCESS AND TO PROTECT THE

CITY AS WELL. >> I WAS GOING TO ASK IF IT'S COSTLY TO DEAL WITH AN EEOC COMPLAINT

>> IT'S VERY COSTLY. NUMBERS HAVE BEEN ISSUED IN THE PAST. I DON'T WANT TO QUOTE THOSE RIGHT NOW. I THINK THE MOST RECENT WAS FILED IN 2020, I BELIEVE, AND I KNOW THAT AT LEAST ONE DEPARTMENT HEAD, CITY ATTORNEY WERE IN DAYS OF MEETINGS SURROUNDING JUST THE RESPONSE TO CRAFT AND THE ANALYST THAT WORKS ON THESE, IT TAKES WEEKS, SOMETIMES MORE.

THEY WANT TO SEE A RESPONSE IN 30 DAYS AND IF IT'S A COMPLEX MATTER, WE CAN REQUEST AN EXTENSION SO THANK YOUS AND

THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR SURE >> YOU TOUCHED ON THIS AS FAR AS THE TRAINING. WHAT IS INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS BEYOND JUST DISCIPLINE. CAN YOU TALK MORE ABOUT THE TRAINING GIVEN TO DEPARTMENT HEADS AND SUPERVISORS AS A MEANS OF PROTECTION BOTH FOR THE EMPLOYEES THAT WE HAVE AND THE

CITY ITSELF? >> SURE, THERE'S A FORMAL TRAINING THAT EVERYBODY IN A SUPERVISORY OR MANAGEMENT POSITION IS REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH.

THE DEPARTMENT HEADS IN THE ROOM CAN TELL YOU THAT'S A VERY TIME INTENSIVE PROCESS AS WELL. WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME GOING THROUGH THE FACTS INVOLVED IN EACH OF THESE CASES BECAUSE EVERY DEPARTMENT HEAD KNOWS MAYOR PITTS AND THE MAYORS PREVIOUS TO MAYOR PITTS WILL TAKE THESE SERIOUSLY AND REVIEW THEM. WORKING WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS AND GOING THROUGH THESE. SOMETIMES WE GET TO A POINT WHERE IT GETS A LITTLE HEAVY. IF YOU HAVE A LONG TIME EMPLOYEE AND THEY MAKE A MISTAKE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO JUMP STRAIT TO DETERM IN ADDITION. THAT'S THE WHOLE PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINARY PART. THEY MAY MAKE A MISTAKE AND THAT HAPPENS. PEOPLE GET PROMOTED BECAUSE THEY'RE GOOD AT THEIR JOB, NOT BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTAND EMPLOYMENT LAW AND THE HR WORLD, SO PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES SOMETIMES. THAT PROCESS WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY AT THAT POINT AND THAT'S A CONCERN FOR ME FROM AN HR STANDPOINT. THERE'S NO RECOURSE AT THAT POINT. THERE'S NO WAY TO FIX IT BEFORE IT GETS TO THE POINT OF TURNING INTO LITIGATION.

>> ALSO, EVERYBODY'S HEARD ME SAY THIS MULTIPLE TIMES, I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE THE BEST PEOPLE.

THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE, OUR EMPLOYEES, WE HAVE THE BEST PEOPLE. I BELIEVE IN OUR EMPLOYEES AND OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS. WHAT EFFECT DO YOU FEEL THIS WOULD HAVE ON THE MORALE OF ALL EMPLOYEES THIS GENERAL, THE RECRUITMENT AND EVEN RETAINING THE CURRENT EMPLOYEES AND

DEPARTMENT HEADS WE HAVE? >> IT'S CONCERNING BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T WORK FOR A MU ANIES PALTY TO GET RICH.MUNICIPALITY .

THEY KNOW THEY WILL HAVE CONSISTENCY AND RIGHTS AS EMPLOYEES. ANYTHING THAT CAN BE VIEWED AS VIEWING A RIGHT THAT'S PRETTY BASIC.

I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER PUBLIC ENTITY OUR SIZE THAT DOES NOT HAVE APPEAL RIGHTS. THAT WOULD BE AN ANOMALY ANYWAY AND SO I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT DURING COVID, COMPENSATION

[02:20:07]

TURNOVER INCREASED IN A LOT OF PLACES SO WE REALLY PAY ATTENTION TO TURNOVER AND WHY WE'RE LOSING PEOPLE, ALSO, HOW WE'RE ATTRACTING PEOPLE. YOU'RE RIGHT, WE HAVE THE BEST WORK FORCE, IT'S FANTASTIC. THE PEOPLE HERE, WE HAVE AMAZING EMPLOYEES AND PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE I THINK PEOPLE KNOW THAT IT'S A GOOD WORK ENVIRONMENT. OF COURSE THERE ARE ISSUES ANYWHERE YOU GO BUT WE TRY TO DEAL WITH THOSE.

SENDING A MESSAGE, I THINK, TO EMPLOYEES THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING TAKEN AWAY IN TERMS OF THEIR JOBS WOULD BE VIEWED AS A DETERRENT TO, A, COMING TO WORK HERE AND IT'S ALSO GOING TO AFFECT, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT TURNOVER, IF SOMEBODY COMES INTO A JOB EXPECTING THAT, IF THEY'RE AT-WILL, AN THIS ISN'T BEING PROPOSED TO MAKING EMPLOYEES AT-WILL BUT IT'S ONE STEP AWAY FROM THAT. IF THAT'S THE THE CASE, IF WE'RE IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME FOLKS THAT WOULD THINK MIGHT AS WELL MAKE MONEY WHILE WE CAN AND HIT THE PRIVATE SEC SORE AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DRUM UP THERE.

SO OUR BENEFITS ARE A GREAT PULL.

THAT'S OUR GOAL IN HR, TO HAVE THE MOST EFFECTIVE, EFFICIENT WORK FORCE WE CAN. SO PAY IS NOT OUR STRONG SUIT SOMETIMES SO WE HAVE TO RELY ON OTHER THINGS AND THIS WOULD

DIMINISH THAT TO SOME EXTENT. >> GOING BACK A LITTLE BIT SPEAKS TO THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, AND THINKING ABOUT IT FROM, BECAUSE, MAKING SURE WE DON'T LOOK AT IT ON ANY SIDE OF SHORTSIGHTED FROM US IN OUR CURRENT SEATS OR THE MAYOR IN THEIR CURRENT SEAT, WHAT IF SOMEONE WE FEEL IS A REALLY GOOD DEPARTMENT HEAD IS FIRED FOR WHATEVER REASON.

WHERE IS THE PROTECTION FOR THAT DEPARTMENT HEAD IF THE APPEAL PROCESS CURRENTLY F THEY WERE LET GO BY THE MAYOR, IF THEY CHOSE, THEY COULD COME AND APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITYTHEY COULD COME AND APP THE CITY COUNCCHOSE, THEY COULD APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO JOOEFR TURN THAT. WHERE WOULD THAT PROTECTIONOVER.

WHERE WOULD THAT PROTECTION LIE? >> THEY WOULD HAVE TO FIND A GOOD LAWYER AND HOPE FOR THE BEST.

THERE WOULD BE NONE IN TERMS OF OUR AGENTCY'S PROTECTIONS.

THAT'S A CONCERN AS WELL. SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD POLITICIZE YOUR LEADERS IN TERMS OF THEIR ROLES, BUT IF A MAYOR CAME IN IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AND HAD AN AX TO GRIND FOR A POLITICAL REASON, THEY COULD FIRE ANYBODY AT THAT POINT.

THEY COULD GO TO A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND SAY FIRE THIS EMPLOYEE AND IF THEY SAY THERE'S NO GROUNDS FOR TERMINATION, OKAY, I'M GOING TO FIRE YOU AND REPLACE YOU WITH SOMEONE WHO CAN FIRE THEM. CURRENTLY, THE MAYOR IS ELECTED INDEPENDENTLY OF ANY INDIVIDUAL ON THE COUNCIL AND I THINK THAT'S GREAT BECAUSE THERE'S NO CONTROL THERE.

THE MAYOR CAN'T AFFECT WHO IS ELECTED SO YOU HAVE AN INDEPENDENT BODY AND, AGAIN, A CONCERN COULD BE DISCRIMINATION CASES. IF SOMEONE IS TERMINATED AND THEY FEEL IT'S BECAUSE OF A PROTECTED CLASS BY A MAYOR, A MAYOR FIRES SOMEBODY, THEY COULD, AS A DEPARTMENT HEAD, THEY COULD BRING THAT FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, IN A PUBLIC MEETING, AND SAY HERE'S WHO I THINK I HAVE BEEN DISCRIMINATED AGAINST. WE WANT TO BE FAIR AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR EMPLOYEES KNOW WE SUPPORT THEM AND ALSO WE WANT TO AVOID A LAWSUIT AS WELL. IT DOES TAKE AWAY THE COUNCIL'S CURRENT ABILITY TO REVIEW DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE BY THE MAYOR AND THAT, UNDER THIS CURRENT PROPOSAL, WOULD BE COMPLETELY GONE NOR WOULD THE MAYOR HAVE THE ABILITY TO WEIGH IN ON AN EMPLOYEE BEING TERMINATED BY A DEPARTMENT HEAD.

>> ALSO STILL TALKING ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, HOW WOULD THAT WORK? RIGHT NOW THE MAYOR IS ELECTED BY THE MAYOR IN THE ENTIRE CITY TO RUN THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS. THEY'RE TAKING CARE OF EVERYTHING IN THOSE DEPARTMENT HEADS, THEY REPORT TO THE MAYOR.

WITH THIS CHANGE, IF WE'RE NOW THEN WITH THE ABILITY TO DISCIPLINE THEM, WHETHER IT'S TERMINATING THEM, DEMOTING THEM, SUSPENDING THEM, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, IT WOULD BE THAT

[02:25:03]

ANYTHING. >> I THINK YOU POINT OUT A PROBLEMATIC CONFLICT. IS IT INSUBORDINATION IF YOU DIRECT ME TO DO SOMETHING AND ANOTHER COUNCIL MEMBER TELLS ME TO DO SOMETHING ELSE AT THAT POINT? OR THE MAYOR? I DON'T KNOW.

I HAVE NEVER HAD 13 BOSSES, BUT IT SOUNDS PRETTY --

>> THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION, WOULD IT BE INSUBORDINATION IF ONE DEPARTMENT HEAD TOLD THEM ONE THING AND ANOTHER TOLD THEM

TO DO SOMETHING ELSE? >> I DON'T THINK TECHNICALLY IT WOULD BE UNLESS IT WAS DRAFTED TO SAY ANY COUNCIL MEMBER CAN TELL ANY DEPARTMENT HEAD WHAT TO DO BUT THERE'S A CLEAR, IMPLIED EFFECT THERE THAT YOU'RE NOW TALKING TO 13 PEOPLE THAT CAN DO THE SAME THING THAT ONE PERSON COULD DO AT ONE POINT.

OUR MAYOR IS FANTASTIC BUT IT'S ENOUGH TO MANAGE ONE PERSON COMING IN IN TERMS OF THAT RELATIONSHIP AND UNDERSTANDING THEIR AGENDA AND WHAT THEY WANT TO DO AND BALANCING THAT WITH SOMEONE WHO IS, AT THAT POINT, ELECTED BY PEOPLE, THE COMMUNITY, SO I WOULD ASK FOR A SHOW OF HANDS FOR WHO WANTS 13

BOSSES. >> AND 13 BOSSES WHO CHANGE EVERY 2 YEARS OPPOSED TO TA MAYOR WHO CHANGES EVERY 4 TO

12 YEARS. >> I WANT TO>> I WANT TO MAKE S UNDERSTAND EACH OF THE 12 COULD BE SILL MEMBERS AS COUNCIL MEMBERS AS WELL TAKING THAT TO THE NEXT LEVEL OF BEING AFRAID TO SPEAK OUT. DO YOU WANT THEM TO HAVE TO THINK ABOUT OTHER THINGS, THEN, THIS IS IN MY EXPERT OPINION THE BEST ROUTE FOR THE CITY TO GO. PEOPLE WORK FOR THE CITY TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY, RIGHT? WHEN IT BECOMES A CONCERN ABOUT THINGS OTHER THAN BEST PRACTICE, AND I CAN'T THINK OF A DEPARTMENT THIS WOULDN'T APPLY TO.

BEST PRACTICE IS SOMETHING WE ALL CARE ABOUT.

WE ALL CARE ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE OF OUR DEPARTMENTS AND THE JOBS THAT OUR WORK FORCE IS DOING AND IT WILL COMPLICATE THINGS. YOU WOULD START SECOND GUESSING WHO WOULD GET UPSET. THOSE THINGS ARE REAL ANYWAY.

YOU'RE ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS AND EVERYBODY RESPECTS COUNCIL MEMBERS AND YOUR POSITIONS AND AUTHORITY BUT THAT TAKES IT TO A

NEW LEVEL, SO TO SPEAK. >> ONE LAST QUESTION AND I'M NOT SURE IF IT WILL BE FOR YOU OR MR. BAKER, GOING BACK TO WHAT WE SAID EARLIER IN REGARDS TO BEING UNSURE HOW THIS WOULD WORK, WE WOULD BRING THOSE CHARGES AGAINST A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY. IT WOULD STILL TAKE A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THAT, DO WE RISK TARNISHING ONE OF OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS IF ONLY ONE PERSON HAS AN ISSUE WITH THEM AND BRINGS FORWARD ON A THERE ARE PUBLIC STAGE, DOES THAT OPEN UP TO BEING SUED?

>> CURRENTLY THERE'S NOT A PUBLIC MEETING, THERE'S NO SUNSHINE LAW REQUIREMENT FOR THE MAYOR TO SAY YOU NEED TO WORK ON THIS OR FIX THIS OR EVEN TO SAY THIS ISN'T WORKING OUT I HAVE TO GO DOWN THE PATH OF SEPARATING SERVICE.

AT THAT POINT, THE DEPARTMENT HEAD CAN MAKE THE DECISION OF DO I WANT THIS TO BE A PUBLIC EVENT OR NOT? AND A MAJORITY OF THE TIME, I KNEE THAT BEFORE I GOT HERE, SOMEONE APPEALED THE CITY'S DECISION, A DEPARTMENT HEAD, AND THE COUNCIL UPHELD THE DECISION, BUT THAT'S ALSO AN AVENUE THAT I THINK MOST PEOPLE, IF IT'S GOING DOWN TERMINATION, MOST OF YOUR

[02:30:03]

THE COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT TO THE PLOWER AT A PUBLIC EVENT AND THAT OFFICIAL WOULD BEFLOOR AT A PUBLIC EVENT AND THAT OFFICIAL WOULD BE EMBARRASSED -- I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S A LOT TO THAT. FOR THE LIABILITY, I WILL LET

MR. BAKER SPEAK TO. THIS >> OCCASION FALLY I HAVE BEEN THE I NATURE OF BEING THE BUTT OF JOKES OF BEING LONG WINDED SO I WILL NOT DO THAT AND CAN COUNCIL MEMBERS BE SUED WITH THIS? YES.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER AND I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAID. I THINK IT WOULD BE LIKE K CRONYISM, WE WOULD LOSE OUR PROFESSIONALISM AND OUR BASE OF KNOWLEDGE, SO I OPPOSE THIS BUT I'M ALSO VERY CONCERNED, NOT ONLY FOR THE DEPARTMENT HEADS BUT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES. I THINK IT SPEAKS OF GREAT PRIVILEGE WHEN YOU SAY IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, SUE ME.

YOU'RE TALKING SOMETIMES TO 20-YEAR-OLDS, SOMETIMES 16-YEAR-OLDS AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY AND WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THEY KNOW THEY WILL BE TREATED EQUITABLY IN ALL

INSTANCES, SO THANK YOU. >> THINK, COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

MY FIRST QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION? IF AN EMPLOYEE HAS AN ISSUE WITH A DEPARTMENT HEAD, WHAT DOES THAT EMPLOYEE -- WHAT CAN THAT EMPLOYEE DO? WHAT CAN THEY SAY? WHAT IS THE PROCESS TO MAKE A

REPORT ABOUT A DEPARTMENT HEAD? >> THERE'S A GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE. IF THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT AT THE DEPARTMENT LEVEL, AN EMPLOYEE CAN FILE A GRIEVANCE AND THEN THERE ARE MULTIPLE STEPS. THEY START AT THE LOWEST LEVEL POSSIBLE, SO IF THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE SUPERVISOR, THEY ADDRESS THAT WITH THE SUPERVISOR.

IF IT'S NOT MET, THEY CAN GO TO THE DEPARTMENT HEAD LEVEL.

IF THEY CAN'T RESOLVE IT THERE, IT WOULD GO TO THE HR DIRECTOR.

IF IT'S NOT RESOLVED AT THAT LEVEL, THEN IT GOES TO THE

MAYOR. >> OKAY.

MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR THE SPONSOR, ACTUALLY.

THE EMPLOYEES OTHER THAN DEPARTMENT HEADS AND CITY OFFICIALS, YOU XED OUT THAT ENTIRE DOCKS.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU TOOK THAT OUT FOR THE EMPLOYEE LEVELS? IT GOES FROM THE EMPLOYEE TO THE MAYOR, THAT'S BEEN THE PROCESS, RIGHT?

>> COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT, DO YOU WISH TO ANSWER?

>> CERTAINLY. THE REASON BUNNELL IT INITIALLY I DIDN'T HAVE A DESIRE AT ALL TO AFFECT THAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION FOR THE EMPLOYEESBEHIND IT INITI DIDN'T HAVE A DESIRE AT ALL TO AFFECT THAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION FOR THE EMPLOYEES BECAUSE I THINK THAT PART FUNCTIONS FINE. I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH MR. WYATT AND MR. BAKER ON THIS IN A NUMBER OF MONTHS COMING UP WITH AN EQUITABLE WAY BECAUSE HE EXPRESSED CONCERNS IN TERMS OF THIS OPENING US UP TO LITIGATION IF THE PROCESS IS DIFFERENT FOR EMPLOYEES AS IT IS FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS.

WE LOOKED AT A CIVIL SERVICE BOARD THAT IF THE COUNCIL ITSELF INITIATED THE PROCESS FOR AN INVESTIGATION TO BE LAUNCHED AND START A DISCUSSION DISCIPLINARY ACTION, THE COUNCIL, AS IT ROADS, WOULD BE THE ONE TO HANDLE THE APPEAL, SO WHO HANDLES THE APPEAL? SO A COUPLE OF OPTIONS WERE DISCUSSED, ONE WAS CREATING A CIVIL SERVICE BOARD SIMILAR TO THE ETHICS BOARD IN FUNCTION THAT WOULD HEAR THESE ITEMS. LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE HISTORY, THERE WAS SOMETHING SIMILAR TO A CIVIL SERVICE BOARD BUT IT WAS MORE OF A COMMITTEE OF CITIZENS THAT IN THE PAST -- OH, IT WAS A COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS

[02:35:05]

ANOTHER WOULD BE ALLOWING THE CITY JUDGE TO BE THE PERSON TO HEAR THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD.

IN THE PAST, WHEN THE COUNCIL MEMBER COMMITTEE WAS DOING IT, IT CAME ACROSS AS LIKE AN MINI MOCK TRIAL AND SO WE LOOKED AT THAT AS A VIABLE OPTION. AND SO IN THOSE THREE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS, ONE THING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN MY DISCUSSION, MR. BAKER, IS THAT THERE'S AN APPELLATE PROCESS OUT THAT A PERSON COULD TURN TO JUST LIKE ANY EMPLOYEE CAN DO, WHETHER YOU WORK FOR MCDONALD'S, WALMART, ANYWHERE, EVERYBODY HAS THE ABILITY TO APPEAL DECISIONS MADE BY THEIR EMPLOYEE.

SO UPON HEARING THAT, IT SEEMED TO BE THE EASIEST PROCESS IN TERMS OF BEING EQUITABLE ACROSS THE BOARD, MODELING OUR SYSTEM AFTER HOW THE PRIVATE SEC SORE DOES IT IN JUST ALLOWING THAT EMPLOYEE TO HANDING THE PROCESS WITHOUT PUTTING MORE ON THE CITY JUDGE OR GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING CITIZENS FROM THE COMMUNITY TO HEAR IT OUT ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS.

SO I TOOK IT TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE IN HOPING TO HAVE SOME OF THAT HEALTHY DIALOGUE IN SEEING WHAT OTHER OPTIONS MAY BE AVAILABLE AND I SAID I WAS GOING TO BRING A LOT OF THIS OUT NEXT WEEK, BUT THAT'S THE LOGIC BEHIND THAT.

THERE'S AN APPEALS PROCESS. THOSE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, A LOT OF THEM HAVE THAT SAME THING WHEN WE TALK ABOUT EMPLOYEES AND THEIR PROTECTION. THERE'S A LOT OF EMPLOYEES FOR A LOT OF CHAINS THAT WE FREQUENT THAT DON'T HAVE BODIES OR MAYORS OR THINGS OF THAT NATURE TO APPEAL TO SO IT'S NOT ABOUT SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS. PLENTY OF PEOPLE FALL IN THAT SAME SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS AS OUR CITY EMPLOYEES THAT IF THEY HAVE A CONCERN WITH HOW THEY WERE TERMINATED TO FIGHT THAT, SO THAT'S THE HISTORY BEHIND IT, JUST TO KIND OF PLAY OFF A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT I RECEIVED FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY IN TRYING TO MITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR A DEPARTMENT HEAD WANTING TO SUE SAYING IT'S NOT FAIR, CITY EMPLOYEES CAN APPEAL TO THE MAYOR, WHO CAN WE APPEAL TO? I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO DISCUSSION, OTHER IDEAS AND AMENDMENTS TO THIS AND I WOULD HIGHLY ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO BRING THEIR SUGGESTIONS COME NEXT WEEK TO THIS BECAUSE AS IT WAS PREVIOUSLY BROUGHT UP IN THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, MANY TERMS OF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD APPEALING TO THE CITY COUNCIL HAS NEVER HAPPENED.

SINCE WE ENACTED THIS LEGISLATION, A DEPARTMENT HEAD TERMINATED BY A MAYOR, IT'S NEVER EVEN BEEN APPEALED.

SO HOW MUCH ARE WE REALLY OPENING OURSELVES UP TO? I DON'T KNOW, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY.

I WAS JUST, AGAIN, RELYING ON OUR SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT ON IT WHO EXPRESSED JUST THE POTENTIAL FOR A LAWSUIT AND WAS TRYING TO GUARD AGAINST IT AND, AGAIN, HAVE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR BOTH DEPARTMENT HEADS AS WELL AS CITY EMPLOYEES THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH HOW SOME OTHER ENTITIES TO IT.

>> GO AHEAD. >> SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY ABOUT THIS IS I HAVE TO TELL YOU I WORK FOR THE PUBLIC GOVERNMENT AND WE HAVE SO MUCH PROTECTION IT'S NOT EVEN FUNNY.

EVERYBODY HAS SOMEBODY THEY CAN APPEAL TO, SO I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE APPEAL RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY FROM ANY EMPLOYEE, ANY DEPARTMENT HEAD, ANYONE WHO WORKS FOR THIS CITY, HOWEVER, I THINK WHEN A FORMAL COUNCIL PEE COUNCIL PER COUNCIL PERSON TRIED TO INTRODUCE A PROCESS ON A DEPARTMENT HEAD, I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A FORMAL PROCESS OF WHERE WE CAN SAY WHAT IS IT THAT I NEED TO

[02:40:04]

ALL I COULD DO IS CONTACT THE MAYOR ABOUT IT.

I DON'T HAVE A WAY OF CHECKING BACK ON THAT OR ANYTHING AND I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THESE EMPLOYEES BUT I DON'T HAVE A WAY OF CHECKING BACK ON IT. THERE NEEDS TO BE A FORMAL PROCESS FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SAY LISTEN, TOSHA'S WHAT'S REALLY WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS DEPARTMENT OR THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED TO WHERE THERE ARE SOME CHECKS AND BALANCES.

THE DISCIPLINARY PROCESS CAN STILL BE UP TO THE MAYOR AND APPEALED TO US BUT WE, AS THE COUNCIL, NEED A WAY.

THAT'S WHY I ASKED YOU HOW DOES AN EMPLOYEE FILE A GRIEVANCE? I KNOW I CAN GO TO THE NEXT CHAIN, THE NEXT CHAIN, NOBODY CAN STOP ME, I CAN'T BE RETALIATED AGAINST.

NONE OF THAT. WE ARE TOTALLY PROTETE TECTED IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHEN IT COMES TO THAT BUT THESE EMPLOYEES THAT CAME TOTO THAT BT CAME TO ME ARE NOT FEELING THAT.

FROM OUR LEVEL, HOW DO WE HELP TO INITIATE THAT PROCESS OR GET OUR CONCERNS HEARD IN A FORMAL PROCESS? WE HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN THAT. THAT'S WHY THIS LEGISLATION IS HERE RIGHT NOW, WHICH I THINK IS -- I CAN'T VOTE FOR IT BECAUSE I WILL NEVER SEE ANY EMPLOYEE -- I DON'T CARE IF THEY DID ME WRONG, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO APPEAL.

I CAN'T VOTE FOR THIS BUT MAYBE DEVELOPING A FORMAL PROCESS WHEN WE GET CERTAIN INFORMATION THAT WE CAN DO CHECKS AND BALANCES WITH. THAT'S MY THOUGHTS.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL PERSON RIHOLLEMAN, YOU'

PRICK NOISED >> THANK YOU, I DON'T EVEN KNOW

TO STARTRECOGNIZED >> THANK YOU, I DON'T EVEN KNOW TO START WITH THIS. [INDISCERNIBLE] YOU MIGHT HAVE A TARGET ON YOU, I'M ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTING OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS AND WORKERS. THIS IS GOING TO KILL MORALE.

LIKE WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO BE A DEPARTMENT HEAD WHEN YOU JUST COME UP HERE, OH, NOW WE HAVE 13 BOSSES, WE TALK DOWN TO DEPARTMENT HEADS AND FRANKLY I'M TIRED OF THIS AND I'M HIGHLY

AGAINST THIS, THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER, YOU'RE

RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

MY FIRST QUESTION, MAYBE YOU CAN ANSWER THIS.

IT SAYS CITY OFFICIALS. THAT INCLUDES US, DOES IT NOT? SO WE CAN FIRE EACH OTHER THEORETICALLY?

LIKE WHOA. >> IF ONLY IT WERE SO.

[LAUGHTER] NO, JOKING.

THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME VOTERS OUT THERE WHO WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT. NO, I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK IT BUT I BELIEVE OFFICIALS ARE DEFINED IN THE CHART ARE AND IT WOULD INCLUDE THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND I THINK THE CITYER AND IT WOULD INCLUDE THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND I THINK THE CITY JUDGE, BUT IT MEANS ESSENTIALLY ELECTED OFFICIALS. NO, YOU CAN'T FIRE EACH OTHER.

YOU ARE ELECTED. >> IT SAYS DEPARTMENT HEADS AND CITY OFFICIALS. WOULD WE HAVE TO STRIKE THAT?

NUMBER TWO ON THE ORDINANCE. >> COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER?

>> I HAVE A COUPLE OTHER COMMENTS.

FOLLOW ME FOR A MINUTE, I HAVE TO SEE WHAT PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY

SAID. >> ANYTHING FOR MR. WYATT?

>> NO, I DON'T THINK SO SO. DO YOU WANT ME TO RECLICK?

>> NO, YOU CAN JUST SIT DOWN AND RELAX FOR A MINUTE, MR. WYATT.

GO AHID. >> SO I THINK WE -- I ALSO HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, BUT I APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.

I UNDERSTAND THIS COMES FROM A PLACE OF US FEELING FOR LACK OF BETTER TERMS, CASTRATED FROM DOING SOMETHING, CASTRATED FROM

[02:45:01]

SOME OF THESE PEOPLE, EVERYBODY THAT WORKS FOR THIS -- WELL, MAYBE NOT EVERYBODY, BUT MANY PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR THE CITY HAS A REPRESENTATIVE UP HERE THEY MAY WANT TO GO TO.

I FEEL LIKE WHEN THESE THINGS HAVE COME UP, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN AN ANSWER. I THINK MAYBE THERE'S JUST NOT A PLAN OF ACTION FOR THAT AS OF RIGHT NOW.

I THINK THAT A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, AND THIS MIGHT JUST BE ME ECCENTRIC BUT I THINK THIS COMES TO THE ISSUE OF US BEING A GOVERNMENT THAT'S RUNNING A BUSINESS AND I THINK THAT THERE'S SOME DISCONNECT WITH THAT. WHEN MR. WYATT IS TALKING ABOUT WHY PEOPLE WORK FOR THE CITY AND WE DON'T WANT TO -- THIS IS AN AT-WILL STATE. PLENTY OF PEOPLE GET FIRED FROM THEIR JOBS EVERY DAY WITH NO EXPLANATION.

I JUST THINK THAT WE WANT TO MAKE THIS BLACK AND WHITE AND I OFTEN MAKE THINGS BLACK AND WHITE.

WE HAVE SCHUSSED THAT ALREADY HERE TONIGHT.

I THINK THIS CAN BEDISCUSSED TH HERE TONIGHT.

I THINK THIS CAN BE WORKED ON. WE CAN KEY THIS IN AND MAKE IT BETTER AND SOMETHING THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.

THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THINK, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION FOR MR. WYATT AND THEN I HAVE COMMENTS TO MAKE MYSELF.

>> GO AHEAD. >> TALKING ABOUT AMENDMENTS OR MAKING THIS BETTER. IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT WOULD BE BETTER THAN THIS PROPOSAL THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US?

>> I THINK WHAT WE HAVE HAS BEEN WORKING VERY, VERY WELL.

>> THAT WAS MY THOUGHT. WHAT WE HAVE IN PLACE RIGHT NOW IS MOST CERTAINLY BETTER THAT WHAT WE HAVE HERE, SO.

THAT WAS MY ONLY LAST QUESTION FOR YOU, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> DON'T GO FAR. >> I, TOO, AGREE THAT WE DO NOT NEED THIS IN PLACE. WE DO HAVE GREAT DEPARTMENT HEADS AND I REALIZE THERE MAY BE SOME COUNCIL MEMBER THAT IS TAKE ISSUE WITH SOME OF THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT HEADS, BUT WE NEED THESE DEPARTMENT HEADS THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE TO RUN OUR CITY.

WHAT CONCERN ME ARE THE NUMBER TWOS AND NUMBER THREES, THEY ARE SEEING EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON AND THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR US FOR A LONG TIME, WORKING TO MOVE INTO THAT ROLE AND WE'RE LOOKING AT CHANGING THE WAY THINGS ARE.

THE PEOPLE WE WOULD WANT TO BE THAT ADDITIONAL DEPARTMENT HEAD, WHY WOULD THEY WANT TO MOVE INTO THAT HEADACHE WITH THIS PROPOSAL WE HAVE IN PLACE. ON TOP OF THAT, TALKING ABOUT WHAT THINGS ARE LIKE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

THAT'S GOING BACK TO THINGS ARE VERY MUCH AT-WILL.

THAT'S NOT WHAT WE HAVE HERE. WE ALREADY HAVE TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO COMPETE AGAINST THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

IF WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT FROM THE ASPECT OF HAVING TO BE IN THERE LIKE THE PRIVATE SECTOR, WE'LL HAVE TO HOOK AT PAYING MORE MONEY THAN WE PAY NOW AND IT WILL HAVE TO BE BETTER PAY, BETTER BENEFITS. ALSO LOOKING AT IT FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR. WE'RE ELECTED BY THE RESIDENTS IN THE WARD FOR WHICH WE LIVE. WHEN YOU'RE LOOK AT THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE A BOARD OF DIRECTORS, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ISN'T OUT THERE FIRING OR DISCIPLINING THE DEPARTMENT HEADS.

REALLY, THAT'S LEFT UP TO THE CEO AND ALL THOSE BELOW THEM.

I, TOO, AGREE WITH A PREVIOUS SPEAKER.

WE NEED TO VOTE THIS DOWN. LEAVING THIS OUT THERE IS DETRIMENTAL TO OUR STAFF. THIS IS GOING TO HAVE DEPARTMENT HEADS LEAVING US AN INSTEAD OF STAYING WITH US AND I HATE THE

[02:50:04]

THOUGHT OF LEAVING OVER THIS. >> I JUST WANTED TO LET THE COUNCIL KNOW, BECAUSE COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN ASKED SOME GOOD QUESTIONS EARLIER T. GRIEVANCE POLICY IS CODIFIED IN THE COAT IN TITLE 1.5 CHAPTER 9, GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE.

THE SECTION IS 1.5-901. >> COUNCIL PERSON KNIGHT?

>> ONCE AGAIN WE HAVE AGENDA ITEMS THAT DON'T HEP OUR CONSTITUENTS WHO ELECTED US. WE HAVE A PROCESS, AN INTERNAL PROCESS THAT'S FUNCTIONAL AND LEGALLY SOUND.

THAT PROCESS WORKS. WHAT WAS THE NUMBERS AGAIN, SIR? IN REGARDS TO HOW MANY COMPLAINTS?

>> WE WENT FROM 8 OR 9 A YEAR TO ONE OVER 2 YEARS.

>> THAT'S AN AMAZING DECREASE IN NUMBERS OVER TIME.

I DON'T SEE A POINT IN WASTING TIME ARGUING OVER THIS IN FRONT OF OUR CONSTITUENT WHO IS ARE WATCHING US RIGHT NOW, IT'S

RIDICULOUS. >> THIS IS MORE OF NOBODY WANTS APPEAL RIGHTS TO GO AWAY, WHEN WE'RE GETTING THINGS FROM OUR CONSTITUENTS, TO HELP US KNOW WHERE TO REPORT THEM, HELP US FIGURE OUT A PROCESS AND THAT DOESN'T NEED TO BE DONE IN OUR

CODE. >> COUNCIL PERSON BURICHMOND?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MR. WYATT.

I UNDERSTAND ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE NOT EMPLOYEES AND THE CITY CODE IS WHAT LEGISLATES US. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PROCESS IN PLACE SEEMS TO BE WORKING, BUT MY CONCERN IS IF EMPLOYEES ARE COMING TO COUNCIL MEMBERS, THERE MAY BE SOMETHING WE NEED TO ADDRESS. WHEN IS THE LAST TIME AN EMPLOYEE TEMPERATURE CHECK HAPPENED, A SURVEY TO ENGAGE EMPLOYEES AROUND THE TOPIC OF DO WE NEED TO ADDRESS AND UPDATE CERTAIN POLICIES AND PROCEDURES? WEIGH IN.

HOW SAFE DO YOU FEEL? WHAT IS YOUR MORALE LIKE?

>> I WANT TO SAY THAT WAS TAKEN ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO,

MAYBE A YEAR AGO. >> WELL, LET ME JUST STOP YOU.

CULTURE SURVEYS PLUS MEETINGS WITH DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS WE HAVE HAD OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS REGARDING CULTURE WITHIN AND FEEDBACK FROM EMPLOYEES SPECIFICALLY FROM CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS, WE HAVE HAD THOSE, SO IF YOU DON'T MIND DESCRIBING

THOSE. >> YEAH, TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION, IT'S BEEN ABOUT A YEAR, A YEAR-AND-A-HALF, COVID GOT THINGS A LITTLE SURVEY BUT WE TYPICALLY DO A CLIMATE SURVEY OF OUR EMPLOYEES AND WE TAKE THAT INFORMATION AND WE COME UP WITH A DIRECTION. PEOPLE SAY IT'S NOT WHAT YOU KNOW, IT'S WHO YOU KNOW, SO WE CHANGED OUR RECRUITMENT PROCESS.

WE HAVE ALWAYS NEEDED TO MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS, THAT SEEMED TO BE A PRETTY BIG ISSUE SO THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE FOR HOW WE KEEP OUR FINGER ON THE PULSE THERE AND TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, EACH DEPARTMENT HEAD GETS A 360 EVALUATION EVERY YEAR.

THE TUPURPOSE OF THAT IS FOR DEVELOPMENTAL REASONS TO IDENTIFY WEAKNESSES OR GAPS SO EVERY YEAR, THE MAYOR GETS A REPORT ON EACH OF US THAT OUR PE PEERS FILL OUT AND WE FILL THEM OUT AS WELL, SO THE MAYOR HAS THAT OPPORTUNITY AT THAT POINT TO, IF TEN THINGS POP UP ON AN EVALUATION IN DIFFERENT AREAS, IT'S SOMETHING YOU MIGHT WANT TO PAY ATTENTION SO THE MAYOR IS STÈRE GOOD INV

[02:55:01]

WHEN PLOYS COME INTO HR AND SAY I HAVE A COMPLAINT ABOUT A DEPARTMENT AND I SAY HAVE YOU TALKED TO THE PERSON WHO CAN FIX THIS FOR YOU? AND MANY TIMES THE ANSWER IS NO, SO YOU NEED TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO FIX IT FIRST.

IF THEY DON'T, THERE'S THIS PROCESS TO COME TO HR OR TO FILE A GRIEVANCE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT YOU

WERE GETTING TO. >> YEAH, I WANTED YOU TO FLESH

THAT OUT. >> MANY TIMES, WE'LL CALL IT AN INTERVENTION AND GO IN AND TALK TO THE PEOPLE HAVING THE ISSUE AND SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND THAT'S OUR GOAL, TO FIX THE PROBLEM IN

AN EQUITABLE WAY. >> THE SECOND PART OF THAT QUESTION, THANK YOU FOR THAT, IS WHAT CURRENT HR POLICY OR CODE, MAYBE MR. BAKER CAN WEIGH IN ON THIS, THEN MITIGATES RELATIONSHIPS, EMPLOYEE CONCERNS, AND MORALE OR CHALLENGES AROUND THE COUNCIL AND THE DEPARTMENT HEADS? RIGHT NOW IT SEEMS TO BE A VERY SEPARATED PROCESS, SO INCLUDED IN THAT ASSESSMENT, IS THERE ANY ASSESSMENT AROUND WORKABILITY WITH CURRENT COUNCIL? I KNOW IT CHANGES PROBABLY MORE FREQUENTLY THAN CITY DEPARTMENT HEADS BUT IS THERE ANY TYPE OF EVALUATION THAT THE MAYOR COULD PERCEIVE ON THE DEPARTMENT HEADS CONCERNS AROUND WORKING WITH THE CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBERS? I SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. I THINK THIS LEGISLATION CAME ABOUT BECAUSE THE COUNCIL FELT LIKE HANDS MAY BE TIED AROUND INPUT AROUND CHALLENGES AND SO IS THERE ANY CURRENT -- NOT THAT

I KNOW OF. >> THAT MAY BE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER WHERE EACH PARTY OR EACH PART OF THE WORKING COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN AROUND THESE CONCERNS, EMPLOYEES AND DEPARTMENT HEADS AND COUNCIL BECAUSE WE ALL NEED TO WORK TOGETHER TO COME TO VIABLE

SOLUTIONS. >> THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PROPOSED QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU MR. WYATT. CHAIRPERSON STREETMAN, PLEASE

PROCEED. >> NEXT UP IS 8, RESOLUTION 71-2020-21, AUTHORIZING A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH FORT CAMPBELL, KENTUCKY FOR FIRE FIGHTING ASSISTANCE.

BOTH THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE VOTED IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL. THIS IS REDONE EVERY YEAR.

THIS ISN'T ANYTHING NEW, IT'S JUST DONE FOR US TO MAKE THE CHANGES TO IT. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM

FOR QUITE SOME TIME. >> ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION? SEEING NONE, PLEASE PROCEED.

>> OKAY, NUMBER NINE, RESOLUTION 73-2020-21, THIS IS ADOPTING REVISIONS TO THE PERSONNEL POLICY 08-81 BEREAVEMENT LEAVE.

THE FINANCE COMMITTEE VOTED IN APPROVAL OF THIS.

THIS IS MAKING SOME CHANGES TO OUR BEREAVEMENT LEAVE FOR ONE TO NO LONGER REQUIRE THEM TO ATTEND A FUNERAL.

THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT IS REQUIRED TODAY.

IT'S ALSO TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OUR BLENDED FAMILIES AND LOOKING MORE AT IT FROM NOT JUST LONGING AT IMMEDIATE FAMILY AS A MOTHEROIN IMMEDIATE FAMILKING AT IMMEDIATE FAMILY AS A MOTHER OR A FATHER BUT A STEPFATHER OR A

COUSIN. >> WOULD YOU STILL HAVE TO SHOW

THE SAME DOCUMENTATION? >> THAT'S PROBABLY A QUESTION

FOR MR. WYATT. >> ONE MORE TIME.

>> HE'S GETTING HIS STEPS IN. MR. WYATT.

>> JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS DONE.

THE DOCUMENTATION THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE IS JUST THE OBITUARY FOR THE PERSON THAT'S PASSED AWAY.

>> EVEN IF THEY DON'T GO? >> IT WOULD JUST BE EVIDENCE THAT THAT FAMILY MEMBER PASSED AWAY.

IF SOMEBODY'S RELATIVE ACROSS THE COUNTRY PASSED AWAY THAT'S PART OF THIS, IT WOULD BE COVERED.

THEY WOULD JUST NEED TO SHOW EVIDENCE THAT SOMEONE PASSED AWAY. I HAD A COWORKER IN CALIFORNIA.

I THINK HE HAD ABOUT 18 AUNTS, ONE PASSED AWAY EVERY 3 WEEKS OR

[03:00:03]

PICTURES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. NOTHING PHYSICAL IS REQUIRED.

>> OKAY. >> GOT YOU?

>> YEP. >> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. CHAIRPERSON STREETMAN, PLEASE

PROCEED. >> THANK YOU.

RESOLUTION 74-2020-21, AUTHORIZING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE E911 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS DISTRICT OF MONDAY GUMRY COUNTY. AGAIN, THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND FINANCE COMMITTEES VOTED TO APPROVE THIS.

THIS IS DONE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. >> ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING RESOLUTION 74? SEEING NONE, PLEASE PROCEED.

>> ALL RIGHT. IF POSSIBLE, COULD WE MOVE THE ITEM THAT WE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA REGARDING THE

RATE TO THIS SPOT RIGHT HERE? >> ORDINANCE 96-2020-21?

>> YES, SIR. >> YES, WE'LL DO THAT.

>> THANK YOU. THIS WOULD BE THE SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 96-2020-21, AMENDING THE CITY CODE RELATIVE TO WATER AND SEWER RATES, CHARGES AND/A FEES.

I WILL BE PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THIS NEXT WEEK AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. MARK RIGGINS TO CALM FORWARD AND TALK ABOUT THAT

AMENDMENT. >> MR. RIGGINS.

YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE IT, I

HAVE SOME HANDOUTS >> THE PUCK DROPS AT 8:30, IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY, PROCEED, PLEASE.

>> THE FIRST TWO, THE FIRST IS A CLEAN COPY, JUST A COMPLETE REPLACEMENT OF WHAT WAS PRESENTED LAST MONTH AT FIRST READING. THE SECOND IS THE RED LINE COPY WITH STRIKE THROUGH AND ALSO BACK THERE, WHEN IT GETS TO THE RATES HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAST MONTH AND THIS MONTH. THE KEY THING TO LOOK AT IS THE VERY LAST SHEET THAT I CAN EXPLAIN FROM THERE, THE SPREADSHEET. BASICALLY EVERYTHING IN YELLOW, THE NEGOTIATED THAT YOU SEE IN THE CURRENT PART, THAT'S PER CODE NOW, IT WAS BLANK LAST MONTH SO I WANTED TO SURE TO PUT THAT IN THERE. CURRENTLY, WE DEPTH HAVE ANYONE TO COMPAREON'T HAVE ANYONE TO COMPARE TO BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE 12-INCH METERS CURRENTLY. IF WE RECEIVE AN SPRI THAT DOES REQUIRE ONE -- BUT AS YOU SEE, THAT WILL CHANGE WITH THE UPCOMING LEGISLATION IF APPROVED.

THIS WAS BASED ON THE COUNCIL PERSON'S COMMENTS FROM LAST MONTH. WE WANTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE RATES BECAUSE THE CONCERN OF THE PERCENTAGES NOT ALIGNING.

UPON DOING THAT, THE INITIAL PERCENTAGES WAS BASED OFF MADE UP NUMBERS. WE LOOKED AT THE INDUSTRIAL RATES. WE LOOKED AT EVERY INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMER WE HAD. WE ONLY HAD TWO INSIDE THE CITY ANYWAY AND 8 TO 9 OUTSIDE THE CITY.

WE LOOKED AT THOSE EACH INDIVIDUAL ONE TO SEE WHAT THAT IMPACT WOULD BE AND THE IT WAS NOT EXWHITABLE.

THAT'S WHY THESE PROPOSED CHANGESQUITABLE.

THAT'S WHY THESE PROPOSED CHANGES ARE HERE.

YOU WILL SEE ONE MAYOR CHANGE INJR CHANGE INOR CHANGE INSIDE THE CITY, THOSE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE PAID A BILL LESS THAN THEY DID AND THAT'S NOT FAIR SO IN TRYING TO GET EVERYBODY EQUAL, IT'S NOT FAIR THIS TIME AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ANOTHER AREA WHERE WITH THE NEXT INCREASE THAT COMES, HOPEFULLY MANY YEARS FROM NOW AND SOMEONE ELSE PRESENTING THAT, THEY CAN FIX THAT FARTHER TO MAKE THAT

[03:05:09]

ON THE BOTTOM, WE HAVE THE SAME END NUMBER, WHICH WAS THE GOAL, AND THE FIRST TWO, THE 497 AND THE 646, THOSE ARE NUMBERS.

WHAT YOU HAD ON YOUR SHEET FROM LAST MONTH, THOSE WERE THE NUMBERS WE HAD GIVEN FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR, SO THESE ARE THE ACTUAL NUMBERS IN LOOK AT THOSE AND MAKING THAT AN EVEN SPREAD ACROSS THE BOTTOM TO GET THAT AND, AGAIN, THOSE PERCENTAGES NOW AS THIS PROPOSES GETS THOSE MORE EQUITABLE AS WE WERE ASKED.

>> OKAY, YOU HEARD THE EXPLANATION OF THE AMENDMENT.

COUNCIL PERSON SMITH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND THANK YOU, RIGGINS, FOR TRYING TO WORK

WITH US FOR TRTHIS CHANGED. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> IN LOOKING AT JULY 2021, THE $7, YOU SEE THAT?

>> YES, MA'AM. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT, IF IT HAD NOT BEEN DONE, TO MAKE SURE YOU WILL COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL TO LET US KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN RAISED. I DON'T WANT TO JUST RAISE, RAISE, RAISE WITHOUT COMING BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITHOUT LETTING

US KNOW HOW MUCH HAS BEEN MADE. >> WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE, AS MR. BAKER STATED LAST MONTH, WE NEED THIS VOTED ONTO MOVE FORWARD WITH BORROWING THE FUNDS.

AT THAT POINT, THERE WOULD BE MANY APP STEPS STEPE STEPS TO A RATES AFTER THAT. I ASK THAT YOU PASS THIS SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO SERVE OUR CUSTOMERS AND IF APPROVED, TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS AENED CONCERNS THAT I'VE HEARD, I WOULD AGREE THAT MYSELF AND MY STAFF, WE WOULD BRING BACK A REPORT TO THIS BODY IN OCTOBER 2022,GIVINGOCTOBER 2022 COMPLETE YEAR OF REVENUE TO SHOW YOU 1 YEAR REVENUE WITH THESE RATES AND THE AMOUNT OF GRANTS OR RELIEF FUNDS RECEIVED WITHIN THAT SAME TIME PERIOD AS WE HEAR ABOUT THESE EVERY DAY, BUT I STAND HERE 3 WEEKS TO A MONTH LATER THAN WE TALKED LAST TIME AND WE STILL HAVE NOT SRECEIVEDA DIME.

THAT WOULD GIVE US A YEAR TO SEE WHAT WE GET, BRING THAT INTO THE MIX. I ALSO PROPOSE WHAT OUR PLAN WOULD BE TO REACH OUT, AGAIN, TO SOMEONE THROUGH AN RFP TO ALSO LOOK AT OUR CONNECTION FEES. THESE ARE OUR RATES AND THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH FOR THIS BOND ISSUANCE BECAUSE IF FOR SOME REASON DEVELOPMENT WERE TO SLOW DOWN OR DRY UP, THE CONNECTION FEES AND THE IMPACT FEES ARE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR ANY OF THIS. RATES PAY FOR IT.

I DO PROPOSE TO DO A STUDY ON CONNECTION FEES AND IMPACT FEES FOR ALL CUSTOMER CLASSES, RESIDENTIAL, AGAIN, COMMERCIAL AGAIN AND ESPECIALLY INDUSTRIAL BASED ON THE CUSTOMER CLASS, METER SIZE AND LEVEL OF DEMAND AND ME AND MY STAFF AND THE OTHERS THAT WE MAY HIRE IN THIS, WE WOULD COMPILE ALL OF THAT AND RESULT IN A RECOMMENDATION FOR HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE. WE WOULD BE GLAD TO DO THAT.

I SPOKE TO MY STAFF AT LENGTH ABOUT THAT.

>> SOUNDS GOOD SO BY THE TIME YOU COME BACK TO US, THE RATE WOULD HAVE INCREASED TO $8 FOR THE METERS, RIGHT?

>> YES, MA'AM. >> SO YOU WILL LET US KNOW THE INCREASED AMOUNT THE METERS CHARGED AS WELL AS THE BONDS?

>> YES, I WILL LET YOU KNOW EVERYTHING FROM JULY 1ST OF 2021 TO JUNE 30TH OF 2022. EVERYTHING THAT I WOULD HAVE COLLECTED THEN AND THAT GIVES ME TIME FROM THEN TO GET THROUGH BUDGET TIME AND BRING IT BACK IN OCTOBER.

I WOULD HAVE ALL THAT REV NEW COLLECTED, CONNECTION FEES,

[03:10:03]

ANYMORE? >> IF IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE, THAT'S THE THING, SO I'M CAREFUL TO SAY WHAT I WOULD DO BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW. THERE HAVE BEEN COMMENTS MADE FROM PREDECESSORS BEFORE ME, AND I'M STILL ANSWERING TO THEM AND THEY HAVE HAUNTED THEM. IF IT SHOWS THAT WE COULD DO ANYTHING, I'M SURE THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD PROPOSE BUT UNTIL WE GET THOSE NUMBERS, I CAN TELL YOU ALONG WITH THESE RELIEF FUNDS, WE'RE FINDING THE BID PRICES ARE GOING UP EQUALLY AS WELL IF NOT MORE. I DON'T MIND TELLING YOU OUR BIT CAME IN AT $212 MILLION, WHICH IS SUBSTANTIALLY MORE THAN WE EXPECTED. WE CAN STILL AFFORD IT, WE REACHED OUT TO OUR FINANCERS AND I WILL SPEAK TO THAT FURTHER IN ANOTHER ORDINANCE ABOUT THE BOND ISSUANCE IF YOU WOULD LIKE, BUT WE CAN AFFORD THAT WITH THESE RATES, THAT'S WHAT WE CHECKED ON, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING WE HAVE ONE BIDDER OUT OF SIX.

>> THANK YOU. THAT'S IT.

>> COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> YES, FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO MR. RIGGINS AND HIS STAFF FOR THEIR PATIENCE.

FULL TRANSPARENCY, AND I'M GRATEFUL FOR THAT.

WITH THAT, I WOULD LAKE TO REMIND EVERYONE HERE THAT WE REPRESENT THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE AND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE WITHIN THE CITY. WITH THAT, I HAVE ASKED MR. RIGGINS TO PREPARE AN AMENDMENT TO HIS AMENDMENT.

THE NUMBERS HE'S PRESENTED US MAKE IT SO THE COUNTY PAYS 175% INSTEAD OF 200%. I REQUESTED THAT HE ADJUST THE NUMBERS FOR AN AMENDMENT WHERE BACK TO THE COUNTY PAYING 200% AND THE CITY PAYING THE REMAINDER.

THERE IS NO CHANGE TO THE TOTAL AND THAT WAS NEVER MY INTENT.

I MADE IT VERY CLEAR TO MR. RIGGINS AND HIS STAFF THAT THIS IS A HUGE PROJECT UNDERTAKING AND I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THEY DO AND I SUPPORT THIS 100%.

I UNDERSTAND THE ABSOLUTE NEED FOR REDUNDANCY IN OUR WATER SYSTEM, BUT WE TALK ABOUT RATE PAYERS, WE TALK ABOUT TAXPAYERS, WE TALK ABOUT COUNTY AND CITY TAXES.

YOU WOULD LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A CITY PERSON, IT'S ALL ONE POCKETBOOK.

WE HAVE HAD A WILL TAX INCREASE. WE FUND THE SCHOOLS.

WE ARE PROPOSING TO INCREASE OUR TAXES FOR THE CITY, WHICH THE COUNTY [INDISCERNIBLE] AND I THINK THAT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO BE EQUITABLE AT THIS TIME AS WE TALK ABOUT A 15¢ OR 20¢ RAISE IN PROPERTY TAXES INSIDE OUR CITY AND I'M JUST REALLY GRATEFUL. DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE

RATE, SIR? >> IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO I

WILL. >> BEFORE YOU DO, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE AMENDMENT.

OKAY. WALK US THROUGH.

>> THE FIRST IS A REMAKE, I IT TO LID THOSE AT THE TOP.

YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCES IN MY AMENDMENT AND COUNCIL PERSON

[03:15:10]

TA WOULD GIVE THEM A GRADUAL INCREASE TO REACH BACK TO THAT 200%. THE SAME ON SEWER, REALLY LOOKING AT THAT WITH THAT TIERED RATE, TIER ONE, TIER TWO, WE LOOKED AT AN INCH IN THE MIDDLE AND THAT'S FOR ALL THREE RATE CLASSESA IN THE MIDDLE AND THAT'S FOR ALL THREE RATE CLASV IN THE MIDDLE AND THAT'S FOR ALL THREE RATE CLASE IN THE MIDDLE AND THAT'S FOR ALL THREE RATE CLASR IN THE MIDDLE AND THAT'S FOR ALL THREE RATE CLASA IN THE MIDDLE AND THAT'S FOR ALL THREE RATE CLASGE IN THE MIDDLE AND THAT'S FOR ALL THREE

RATE CLASSES ON SEWERS. >> COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS DID

YOU CARE TO OFFER COMMENTS? >> YES, WHY DOES THAT NOT LOWER

THE CITY'S BURDEN? >> THAT'S WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE. THE RATES ARE ONLY 15% OF MY

OVERALL INCOME. >> I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING

ABOUT ONLY INDUSTRY. >> NO, MA'AM.

>> I MISUNDERSTOOD THAT CONVERSATION.

I WILL TELL YOU THAT. WHEN YOU SAID THAT I THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT THIS PIECE.

>> ON MY AMENDMENT IT IS JUST THAT PIECE.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SIGHING, ON MINE, INDUSTRIAL RATES ONLY EQUATE TO LESS THAN 10% OF MY OVERALL INCOME.

ANYTHING I DO WITH THEM IS NOT ENOUGH TO REDUCE.

IT'S THE SAME THING ON THE OUTSIDE.

RESIDENTIAL, AGAIN, IS 15% OF MY OVERALL INCOME.

MOVING THESE TO DOUBLE, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH -- I APOLOGIZE FOR

THE MISCOMMUNICATION. >> NO, I PROBABLY DIDN'T ASK FOR CLARIFICATION WHEN I SHOULD HAVE.

OKAY. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PERSON

STREETMAN YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

A LOT OF THAT MIGHT BE ANSWERED BUT I WAS GOING TO ASK WHAT YOUR OPINION IS ON MAKING THAT CHANGE AND I WANT TO PREFACE IT A LITTLE BIT WITH THE FACT THAT I APPRECIATE WHAT THE SPONSOR OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TRYING TODAY. GAS AND WATER IS NOT TAXPAYER FUNDED. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HEAR WHAT WOULD BE -- AND IT MAY NOT BE A DIFFERENCE THERE BUT WHAT'S YOUR

OPINION ON MAKING THIS CHANGE? >> I SAY THIS WITH ALL DO RESPECT TO COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS.

I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU ALLOWED ME TO WORK ON THIS BUT I MUST STATE THAT THIS AMENDMENT TO BRING THOSE RATES BACK TO 200% WILL BE AGAINST THE ADVISEMENT ORIGINALLY OF ME, MY STAFF, THE PROPOSSESSIONALS AS WELL AS THE WATER AND WASTE WATER FINANCE BOARD WHO IS AN ARM OF UTILITY DISTRICTS.

THE INCREASE OF THE RATES TO 200% WILL NOT GENERATE ENOUGH REVENUE TO OFFSET OR LOWER ANY OTHER RATE CLASS WHATSOEVER.

THAT BEING SAID, THERE'S NO REASON TO INCREASE THOSE TO THAT AMOUNT. I WOULD ARGUE A CHALLENGE FOR MY REASON, THERE'S NO CASE OR JUSTIFICATION FOR RAISING THOSE BACK TO 200%. IN FACT, IT COULD BE ARGUED THAT

[03:20:01]

OUR OUTSIDE CUSTOMERS HAVE NO REPRESENTATION FOR THEIR RATES AT ALL. THEY HAVE NO ONE TO VOTE ON THEIR BEHALF IN THIS, IN MY OPINION, UNFAIR PROPOSAL AND LAST I WOULD SAY THAT THE FACT THAT I'M ARGUING AGAINST THIS REVENUE, THIS AVENUE FOR COLLECTING ADDITIONAL REVENUE

SHOULD PROVE OF UNFAIRNESS. >> ONE OF THE REASONS THE STATE TOOK ISSUE WITH JUST THE ARBITRARY ASSIGNMENT OF BEING 200% IS BECAUSE IN SOME INSTANCES, IT'S CHEAP TORE GET WATER TO SOME OF THE RESIDENTS IN THE COUNTY OR OUTSIDE THE

CITY LIMITS. >> YES, AND I MADE THAT ARGUMENT FOR YEARS AT GAS AND WATER. I DON'T KNOW AT WHICH POINT THIS WAS CREATED AND I CAN'T CREATE TO WHAT THE SITUATION IS THERE BUT I'M VERY AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

I HAVE NOT SEEN A REASON FOR IT. THE TIMES THAT I HAVE PEOPLE -- I HAVE NOT HAD MANY CALLS FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT THIS, MORE FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS THAN THE PUBLIC, WHICH IS FINE, WE WELCOME ALL CALLS, BUT THE THINGS ABOUT CONSOLIDATION, THEY DON'T AFFECT UTILITY DISTRICTS OR WATER. CONSOLIDATION CHANGES NOTHING WITH OUR SERVICE WHATSOEVER. IT'S NOT LIKE THE CDE AND CDME, I WOULD NEVER TAKE OVER EAST LAWN OR EAST MONTGOMERY OR CUNNINGHAM OR ANYWHERE ELSE. THOSE LINES DO NOT CHANGE AT ALL UNLESS THERE'S A MUTUAL AGREEMENT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CONSOLIDATION WHATSOEVER. THE ONE THING I WOULD SAY IT WOULD CHANGE IS IF WE CONSOLIDATE, I BELIEVE I WOULD BE FORCED TO BRING THOSE TOGETHER THEN AND INSIDE CITY RATES WOULD GO UP DRASTICALLY TO MEET THAT MIDDLE.

I'M TILLING YOU WHAT I THINK IT WOULD DO WITH GAS AND WATER.

NONE OF THAT AFFECTS ANY OF US. >> THANK YOU AND I AGREE WITH YOU AND APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT WHO WAS TRYING TO LOOK OUT FOR THE CITY RESIDENTS WHO WERE ELECTED TO

REPRESENT, SO THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN, YOU'RE

RECOGNIZED. >> SO WITH YOURS, I REMEMBER YOU TALKING ABOUT THIS AND YOU SAID 2021 TO 2024, SHOW BY BUT SURELY, AS TIME GOES OW BY BUT , AS TIMELOW BY BUT SURELY, AS LY BUT SURELY, AS TIME GOES ON, MAYBE THE NEXT TIME WE'LL BE GETTING TO THE SAME RATES.

>> YES, MY PROPOSAL ON MOST OF THEM, AGAIN, EXCEPT FOR INSIDE CITY, THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING AMEND THOSE.

IT WAS A LITTLE INEX-WITTY THERE BUT BY JULY 1, Q THERE BUT BY JULY 1,U THERE BUT BY JULY 1,I THERE BUT BY JULY 1, THERE BUT BY JULY AB THERE BUT BY JULY LE THERE BUT BY JULY 1, 2024, IT'S 175%. I IMAGINE THE NEXT PERSON IT WOULD BE DOWN TO 150% AND THEN YOU GO FARTHER AND FARTHER UNTIL

THEY'RE EQUAL. >> AND THIS WOULD SEPARATE THAT MORE AND PUTS US RIGHT BACK WHERE WE WERE AT BEFORE THAT?

>> YES. >> NOT THE RATES PER SE BUT THE

SPREAD? >> YES.

BASICALLY ALL CLASSES INSIDE STAY THE SAME AS WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED AND THEY WOULD BE BACK AT 200% FOR

OUTSIDE CITY RATES. >> I SEE DOWN HERE AT THE BOTTOM THERE'S ALSO THE WASTE WATER CHARGES THAT KIND OF CHANGE.

WHERE ARE WE WORKING ON GETTING THOSE CLOSER, TOO?

>> ON MY AMENDMENT? >> OUTSIDE RESIDENTIAL, IT'S A

LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN YOURS. >> WHICH SHEET?

>> THE SAME SHEET BUT AT THE BOTTOM, THE WASTE WATER IS WHAT

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT, THOUGH. >> WHAT THAT DOES, AGAIN, YOU LOOK AT THE TIERED RATE. I TAD TO WORK IN FOR WHAT COULD

[03:25:07]

>> I HUH. >> ANDUHUH.

>> UH. >> -HUH.

>> AND I TOOK THAT DIFFERENCE AND DIVIDED TO WHERE IT WOULD EQUAL OUT TO 200% AT THE END GRADUALLY OVER THE 4 YEARS.

>> BUT WE'RE TRYING TO BRING THOSE NUMBERS FOR WASTE WATER

DOWN TOGETHER CLOSER, TOO? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> AND THIS KEEPS IT AT 200%? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE FURTHER?

>> I DO, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE FURTHER COMMENTS, IF I MAY.

THIS IS BASED ON SOME INFORMATION I WAS ASKED.

I WILL STAY AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE.

EITHER AMENDMENT YOU CHOOSE TO GO WITH, I NEED TO GIVE YOU FINAL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. I WAS ASKED WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES WOULD BE IF THIS RATE INCREASE LEGISLATION FAILED. I CAME UP WITH THESE RESULTS WITH MY STAFF AND I WANT TO STATE THAT I WOULD NEVER HAVE WANTED TO LEAD WITH THIS FOLLOWING INFORMATION AS I WOULD NEVER WANT YOU TO THINK THAT I WAS COMING FROM A STANDPOINT OF THREATENING THIS BODY AND I THINK YOU KNOW ME WELL ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT I WOULD NEVER, EVER DO THAT BUT I OWE IT TO YOU TO KNOW THE GRAVITY OF THE MOMENT WE'RE IN AND ESPECIALLY THE DIRE CONSEQUENCES OF THE WATER AND SEWER RATES NOT BEING PROPOSED.

IF THIS FAILS, IT WOULD RESULT IN THE FOLLOWING.

I WILL ASK YOU TO FAIL THE BOND RESOLUTION BECAUSE, AGAIN, IF WE DON'T RAISE THE RATES, I CAN'T PAY BACK THE DEBT.

WE WILL NOT BUILD THE NORTH CLARKSVILLE TREATMENT PLANT BECAUSE I COULDN'T AFFORD IT AND WE HAVE ALREADY SPENT $7 MILLION ON ENGINEERING. WE WILL CONTINUE WITH THOSE TAX PROJECTS, THE CACS, THE SEWAGE PROJECTS AT THE BOTTOM, ON THE OUTSIDE OF IT, AS WE HAVE MANDATES AND AGREEMENTS WITH THE STATE TO DO THOSE AND WE DO HAVE THE REVENUE TO DO THOSE.

WE ENSURE THAT HAD WITH THE LAST RATE INCREASE THAT WE DID.

WE WILL HONOR ALL UTILITY PLANS APPROVED AS OF TODAY, BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS TODAY BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, WE WOULD BE FORCED TO SET A SELF-IMPOSED MORATORIUM OUTSIDE CITY CLALIMITS INCLUDIN ANY DEVELOPMENTS AS WELL AS ANY EXPANSIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS. CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW TODAY, AND THIS HAS HAPPENED FOR THE LAST YEAR OH YEAR OR 2 YEARS, IF THEY NEED SUBSTANTIAL WATER UNTIL 2024, WE CAN'T. WE WILL SHALE MOST IF NOT MOST OF THE WATER AND SHOWER PROJECT THE WATER AND E MOST IF NOT MOS THE WATER AND L MOST IF NOT MOS THE WATER AND L MOST IF NOT MOSF THE WATER AND SHOWER PROJECTS PROPOSED IMPOSING A MORATORIUM IN PARTS OF THE CITY LIMBS INCLUDING SENGO, COUNTY TOWN ROAD AND ROSS VIEW ROAD AREAS. THOSE NAMES WERE CONNECTED TO A LOT OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT WE WERE DOING.

ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENTS PROPOSED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS WOULD BE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, DETERMINED BY OUR FUTURE ABILITY TO SERVE SET DEVELOPMENT. LY ALSO ASK THAT YOU POSTPONE THE AGREEMENT WITH BI-COUNTY INDEFINITELY AS WE WILL NOT BUILD THE THERMAL DRYERS AT THE WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT.

THAT'S ANOTHER $14.5 MILLION. I COULD NOT AFFORD THEM AND THAT WOULD PUT ME IN A VERY PRECARIOUS POSITION WITH BI-COUNTY GOUMENT BECAUSE WE'RE SO CLOSE ON AN AGREEMENT AND GETTING OUT OF THAT LANDFILL AND PRODUCING SOME OF THE BEST FERTILIZER YOU CAN FIND. IF YOU REMEMBER, THIS RESULTS IN AN ADVANTAGE TO OUR CUSTOMERS AS THEY'RE ABLE TO MONITOR THEIR WATER AND/OR GAS [INDISCERNIBLE] A LOT OF THOSE, WE HAVE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ALLOCATED TO THAT. LASTLY, I ASK THAT YOU REMEMBER MY STATEMENT IN THE BEGINNING THAT IF AFFORDED THE MONEY, EVEN

[03:30:07]

WE WIMP $128 MILLION GALLONS WITHPUMP $128 MILLION GALLONS WITH ONE PUMP DOWN. I ASK THAT YOU APPROVE THIS.

>> WE HAVE ONE FINAL COMMENT OR MAYBE TWO.

COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS? >> I GUESS I LEARNED MY LESSON 3 MONTHS IN. I WISH I HAD SEEN THAT INCREASE IN THE RATES SO THIS WAS A PRIZE.

I GUESS MY QUESTION IS I CAN JUST NOT DO ANYTHING NEXT WEEK

AND LEAVE IT AS IS, CORRECT? >> CORRECT, NEEM.

>> COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER EVANS? >> THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE IN SUCH DIRE NEED. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THAT AND THANK YOU FOR. BEING SO TRANSPARENT.

>> OKAY, COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN, PROCEED WITH YOUR

REPORT. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

OKAY. NUMBER 11, RESOLUTION 77-2020-21, AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, SALE, AND PAYMENT OF UP TO $240 MILLION IN WATER, SEWER, AND GAS REVENUE BONDS AND UP TO $65 MILLION IN WATER, SEWER, AND GAS REV NIGH --ENUEG

BONDS. >> THIS IS EASY ENOUGH.

THIS ALLOWS US TO BORROW UP TO $240 MILLION, AGAIN, FOR ALL THOSE PROJECTS THAT YOU HEARD ME SPEAK ABOUT BEFORE THAT I WON'T GO OVER AGAIN UNLESS YOU WANT ME TO.

AND ANOTHER $65 MILLION OF REFINANCE AND BASICALLY EXISTING BONDS THAT EXIST IN $225 MILLION WORTH OF DEBT, REFUNDING $65 MILLION OF THAT WHICH WILL RESULT IN AN OVERALL SAVINGS OF

$4 MILLION. >> THANK YOU, ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER, YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR A COMMENT?

>> YES, THANK YOU. I KIND OF ALREADY ASKED THIS IN A PREVIOUS MEETING BUT I JUST GOT TO ASK AGAIN.

IF WE ISSUE BONDS TO GAS AND WATER AND THEY DEFAULT, WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM? I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT IT DOESN'T COME FROM TAXPAYER MONEY, SO WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM?

>> THAT WATER AND WASTE WATER FINANCE BOARD THAT I WAS TELLING YOU ABOUT. THE GREAT THING ABOUT THAT FOR OUR CUSTOMERS IS IT WILL NOT ALLOW ME AS THE DEPARTMENT HEAD OR YOU AS THE BODY WHO VOTES ON RATES TO RUN THIS DEPARTMENT IN THE GROUND. AT SOME POINT, THEY WOULD COME IN AND TAKE OVER AND RAISE THE RATES THEMSELVES TO A POINT THAT

IT'S SOMEONESED. >> SO THE BILL'S GOING TO GET

PAID >> THE BILL WILL GET PAID

>> AND THAT BOARD IS STATE LEVEL?

>> STATE K06R7 TROLLER'S LEVEL. >> SO THE BILL'SCOMPTROLLER'S L.

>> SO THE BILL'S GONNA GET PAID. >> YES.

>> I HAD CONSTITUENTS ASK ABOUT THIS SO THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MR. RIGGINS. CHAIRPERSON STREETMAN?

>> ITEM 12, RESOLUTION 80-2020-21, ACCEPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 22-26 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM APPROVED BY THE REGIONAL

PLANNING COMMISSION. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

SEEING NONE, PLEASE PROCEED. >> THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON THE

FINANCE AGENDA. >> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. WE'RE NOW ON GAS AND WATER

[5) GAS & WATER COMMITTEE]

[03:35:01]

CAN YOU COMMENT? >> WE'RE WAITING TO HEAR BACK AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE SOMETHING IN FRONT OF YOU, IF NOT I WILL ASK FOR YOU TO PROPOSE AGAIN.

[6) HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE]

>> OKAY, WELL SAID. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, CHAIRPERSON SMITH YOU ARE

RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, WE ONLY HAVE ONE THING ON THIS AGENDA TONIGHT AND I'M GOING TO READ, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN ASK MR. NEW, BEEN WAITING PATIENTLY,

WANTING TO TALK. >> HE'S ASLEEP.

>> THIS IS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO FILE THE FY2021-22 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND THE FY2021-22 APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRAND FUNDS AND HOME INVESTMENTS PARTNERSHIP

PROGRAM IF I UNFUNDS. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> IN ORDER TO BUY A HOME, MAYBE A SIX TO 8-WEEK PROGRAM THAT YOU COULD EVEN WORK WITH LOCAL PEOPLE HERE IN DEVELOPING AND FALKING WITH THEM ABOUT BUILDING OR REBUILDING THEIR CREDIT, HOW TO ADDRESS DEBT TO INCOME RATIO PROBLEMS, HOW TO SAVE UP FOR A DOWN APPOINTMENT.

EVERYBODY WANTS TO OWN A SOMETIMES ANH AND SOMETO AND SOMETM AND SOMETE AND SOMETIMES IT COULD YOU COME UP WITH A WAY WE COULD PROPOSE THAT.

>> IF I GIVE YOU A 1 WORD ANSWER, WILL THAT BE ENOUGH?

>> DEPENDS ON THE WORD. >> SO --

>> IS THAT THE 1 WORD? >> THAT'S NOT YAY OR NAY.

>> THERE'S A POPULATION THAT WANTS TO BUY A HOME AND CAN'T PURCHASE. EITHER THEY DON'T HAVE THE DOWN PAYMENT OR THERE HAVE BEEN CREDIT PROBLEMS. FOR MANY FOLKS, THEY ARE NOT AWARE OF WHAT'S REQUIRED BEFORE YOU GET INTO THE MARKET TO BUY A HOME AND MANY CAN BE FRUSTRATED.

IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT PROCESS AND IT CAN BEING CHALLENGING SO PROVIDING SOMEONE WHO CAN BE [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S A VERY GOOD, POSITIVE THING. IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD DO AND WE CAN REPORT BACK TO YOU AT ANOTHER TIME.

>> THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT. COUNCIL PERSON HOLLEMAN DID YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO WHAT WAS PROPOSED BY MR. NEWBURN.

>> THERE ARE A LOT OF COMPANIES THAT DO CREDIT REPAIR AND DIFFERENT SCENARIOS FOR DOWN PAYMENT AND THE LOAN COMPANIES, THEY USUALLY DO IT FOR FREE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU MIGHT WANT TO REACH OUT TO SOMEONE.

>> ABSOLUTELY BUT I WILL RECOMMEND A COMBINATION OF BOTH.

I WOULD MAKE IT A POINT IF SOMEONE IS ACTUALLY READY, THE EASIER WAY TO GO TO A THIRD PARTY LENDER.

THE SAFER WAY, THE WAY THAT'S MUCH MORE EQUITABLE [INAUDIBLE]

[03:40:01]

>> OKAY. >> YOU'RE REALLY TESTING ME

TONIGHT. >> OKAY COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO PIGGY BACK OFF ANOTHER SPEAKER. THERE'S ALSO TSTA WITH PLENTY OF NONPROFIT PROVIDERS AND OTHER ENTITIES THAT ARE CERTIFIED TO PROVIDE THE DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE.

THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A FIRST TIME HOME BUYER'S PROGRAM WHICH EDUCATES THEM ON CLOSING COSTS, DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE, ALL THE THINGS THAT FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS NEED TO KNOW PRIOR TO PURCHASING A HOUSE, SO THE COMBINATION OF IT, I THINK FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE IN TIMES PAST, THE CITY, FOR THOSE WHO APPLY FOR OUR DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, WE HOST A WORKSHOP REFER THEM TO ANOTHER PROVIDER FOR IT, I THINK AS A BETTER USE OF THE DEPARTMENT'S TIME, JUST WORKING WITH OUR CURRENT ENTITIES AS PROVIDED, SERVING AS A LIAISON VERSUS HAVING THEM FOCUS ON THE EDUCATION PEACE, JUST WORK WITH THE AGENCIES THAT'S ONE OF THEIR MAIN FUNCTIONS TODAY, NOT JUST A BETTER USE BUT A GREAT EYES OF THE DEPARTMENT'S ATTENTION AND THIS IS SOMETHING WEUSE OF THE DEPARTMENT'S ATTENTION AND THIS IS SOMETHING WE DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT DURING THE BUDGET MEETING, DOING SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE, LOOKING AT CLOSING COST ASSISTANCE BECAUSE THAT'S THE LOW HANGING FRAUIT THAT'S LEAVIG OUR COMMUNITY WITHOUT AND FOCUSING ON THOSE WITH RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS AS OUR INVENTORY CONTINUES TO DEPLETE, THE PROPERTY VALUES ARE GOING TO RISE, MORE LANDLORDS ARE GOING TO SELL THEIR PROPERTIES VERSUS CONTINUING TO RENT WHICH WILL PUT MORE AND MORE TENANTS IN A MARKET TRYING TO PAY HIGH MARKET VALUE RENTS.

I THINK WE NEED TO DIVERT OUR ATTENTION AND FOCUS ON THAT LOW HANGING FRUIT FOR CLOSING COST ASSISTANCE AND I WOULD LOVE TO SET UP A TIME WITH YOU THIS UPCOMING WEEK TO DISCUSS SOME OPTIONS IN WORKING WITH THE CLARKSVILLE ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS. THEY HAVE A FOUNDATION CALLED SOS THAT THEY CREATED AS A VIABLE OPTION TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY IN THOSE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME INDIVIDUALS IN TRYING TO OBTAIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING

>> YEAH, . >> YEAH, LET ME JUST STOP THAT DISCUSSION THERE. WE NEED TO GET BACK ON RESOLUTION 79.

GO AHEAD, COUNCIL PERSON SMITH. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

THIS CONCLUDES MY REPORT. >> ANY OTHER REPORTS?

COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN? >> NO THANK YOU

[7) PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE]

>> OKAY, THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.

[8)PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE]

CHAIRPERSON RICHMOND? >> I'LL HAVE A FEW REPORT NEXT

WEEK. >> OKAY, THE PUBLIC SAFETY

COMMITTEE. >>LY HAVE A REPORT NEXT THURSDAY

FOR YOU. >> THANK YOU.

[9) TRANSPORTATION-STREETS-GARAGE COMMITTEE]

RECOGNIZED. >> DITTO.

>> DITTO? WE'RE EARNED NEW BUSINESS.

[10)NEW BUSINESS]

>> ALL RIGHT, MR. BAKER, WHAT ARE WE DOING? THIS IS NEW 2 MONTHS WE HAVE POSTPONED.

>> IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE POSTPONED AGAIN UNLESS THERE ARE IMMEDIATE CHANGES. AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE ALREADY SENT

[03:45:04]

MR. OLSEN CLAIMS THERE'S PROBLEMS WITH IT BUT HE'S REFUSED TO IDENTIFY WHAT THE PROBLEMS ARE, SO WE HAD TO FILE A MOTION WITH THE COURT ASKING THE COURT TO ORDER HIM TO IDENTIFY WHAT THE PROBLEMS ARE ACCORDING TO THEM AND THE COURT ISSUED AN ORDER ALMOST IMMEDIATELY ORDERING THEM TO DO THAT BY NEXT TUESDAY AT 5:00. IF THE PARTIES CANNOT IRON OUT THE DIFFERENCES, SHE'S ORREDED, THE JUDGE ORDERED THAT THE PARTIES MEET WITH THEIR LAWYERS LITERALLY SIT DOWN IN A ROOM TO DISCUSS THE DIFFERENCES AND IF WE'RE UNABLE TO DO THAT, THEN SHE'S GOING TO REQUIRE US TO COME TO HER COURT AND SHE WILL CONDUCT THE MEETING. I WILL TELL YOU THAT I'M REALLY SURPRISED AT THIS DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SAME ONES THAT WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING FOR AN A LONG TIME WITH THEM AND WE TOOK OUT THE THINGS THEY ASKED TO BE TAKEN OUT, THE INDEMNITY CLAUSES AND THE PART ABOUT GETTING CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY OWN TORS APPROVE.

I THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE NOTHING ELSE TO FIGHT ABOUT BECAUSE WE ALREADY AGREED ON A PROPOSAL AMOUNT.

>> COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER? >> I WILL MOVE TO POSTPONE THIS AND I WILL ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT THAT AND THANK YOU, THAT CONCLUDES MY MONTHLY UPDATE ABOUT THE LAWSUIT.

[LAUGHTER] >> COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN?

>> WE HAVE TALKED IN THE PAST ABOUT STRATEGIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, I WOULD JUST ASK THAT YOU PUT IT ON A WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW FOR TODAY BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE PUT OUT A LITTLE BIT OF STRATEGY AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE IS KIND OF LIKE, OKAY, ALL WE NEED TO KNOW IS ARE WE POSTPONING IT

AGAIN? >> I'M SORRY I'M NOT FOLLOWING.

YOU WANT MORE INFORMATION? >> NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO SO FAR INTO WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE CASE OR ANYTHING.

JUST SAY LOOK, WE NEED TO POSTPONE IT AGAIN.

YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? SO WE CAN BE FOR THOSE TYPE OF THINGS, ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE.

>> WE'RE LIVE STREAMING, LET'S NOT GO ANY FURTHER WITH THIS IF

THAT'S OKAY. >> YEAH.

>> THANK YOU, WE'RE NOW READY FOR ITEM TWO UNDER NEW BUSINESS, ORDINANCE 98, FIRST REEDING POSTPONED MAY 6THED AMENDMEING E OFFICIAL CODE RELATIVE TO FAILURE TO RETAIN CONTINUOUS COUNCIL WARD RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS.

>> I'M GOING TO MAKE MY COMMENTS TO THE PUBLIC BUT EACH OF YOU HAVE A COPY OF WHAT I'M SAYING. THERE ARE EXTRAS AT THE END FOR MR. BAKER AND SYLVIA. SO WE DISCUSSED THIS ORDINANCE ON MAY 6TH. I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY A FEW ISSUES FROM THE MAY 6TH MEETING. I REALIZE IT WAS TIME TO ENFORCE A CHARTER BECAUSE I'M PERSONALLY KEEPING TRACK OF THE CLOSE VOTE THAT IS I PLAN TO REVIEW AT THE CLOSE OF THE ETHIC AND LEGAL CHARGES AGAINST SITTING COUNCIL MEMBERS.

TO CLARIFY A QUESTION FROM ONE OF OUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, ALL ITEMS IN THE WHEREAS STATEMENTS, SUCH AS FORFEITING 50% OF A MONTHLY PAY FOR MISSING REGULAR SESSION, ETC., ARE CURRENT ITEMS IN OUR CHARTER AND STATE LAW. THESE ARE NOT NEW PROPOSALS AND THESE ARE INCLUDED AS SUPPORTING INFORMATION TO SHOW THAT THERE'S NO NEW INFORMATION OR RULES ON THIS AMENDMENT, ON THIS ORDINANCE. PER MR. BAKER.

WHEN A CITY COUNCIL PERSON RESIDES OUTSIDE THE WARD THEY ARE ELECTED TO SERVE, THEY ARE SERVING ILLEGALLY AND THEIR VOTES COULD BE CHALLENGED. THAT COULD EXTEND INTO BOARD AND COMMITTEE VOTES AS WELL. WE HAVE CONTENTIOUS ZONING ISSUE THAT IS COULD EXTEND TO CONTENTIOUS LAWSUITS.

WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE AS WELL AS GAS AND WATER INCREASE. I CAN'T PREDICT HOW CLOSE THE VOTES WILL BE BUT YOU CAN IMAGINE THE ISSUES IN THE FUTURE. IT IS TIME THAT WE, AS A CITY COUNCIL, ENFORCE THE CHARTER. THIS ORDINANCE IS TO CLARIFY THE INTENT OF THE CHARTER. ALTHOUGH, FOR MANY OF US, IT'S

[03:50:02]

THE INTENT IS TO PREVENT LAWSUITS AGAINST OUR CITY AND COUNTY. ON MAY 6, 2021, I PROVIDED GENERAL EXAMPLES OF HOW THE LANGUAGE IN THIS ORDINANCE IS PRESENTED IN OTHER AREAS OF TENNESSEE STATE LAW, NOT SPECIFICALLY STATING THAT THESE ARE REFERENCES TO USE IN A COURT OF LAY. TENNESSEE CODE ANNEX 3916401A4 DEFINES PUBLIC MISCONDUCT OFFENSES, A PERSON IS PERFORMING [INDISCERNIBLE] OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT.

A PUBLICER IS VENT COMMITS AN OFFENSE WHO, WITH INTENT TO OBTAIN A BENEFIT OR TO HARM ANOTHER VIOLATES A LAW RELATING TO THE PUBLIC SERVANT'S OFFICE. I ADD PRIVATE ACT CHARTER WORDING TO SUPPORT THE ORDINANCE, ENFORCEMENTS OF ORDINANCES BY FINE, FORFEITURES, CIVIL PENALTIES, COSTS, LIMITATION ON FUNDS. TO ENFORCE AN ORDINANCE, RULE, OR REGULATION OR BY ABATEMENT OR BY ORDER OF INJUNCTION OR TO STOP WORK OR BY ACTION OR PROCEEDINGS OF ANY TINED IN ANY COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION OR BY ANY ONE OR MORE SUCH MEANS AND TO IMPOSE COSTS AS A PARTNER OF BUT NO FINE FORFEITURE OR CIVIL PENALTIES SHALL EXCEED THE AMOUNT PERMITTED BY GENERAL LAW.

ON 6 MAY, MR. BAKER INDICATED THAT I COULD ADDRESS THIS AS A RESOLUTION. A RESOLUTION WOULD TARGET AN INDIVIDUAL AND, AGAIN, MY GOAL IS TO PREVENT VIOLATIONS OF THE CHARTER IN THE FUTURE. PER ARTICLE THREE SECTION TWO OUR PRIVATE CHARTER STATES ANY ACTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL HAVING A REGULATORY OR PENAL EFFECT OR REQUIRED TO BE DONE BY ORDINANCE UNDER THE CHARTER OR BY GENERAL LAW SHALL BE DONE BY ORDINANCE. THE INTENT OF THIS ORDINANCE IS TO PREVENT NUMEROUS LAWSUITS THAT COULD OCCUR WHEN A MEMBER OF CITY COUNCIL PERFORMING A GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTION UNDER CLAIM OF RIGHT ALTHOUGH NOT LEGALLY QUALIFIED TO DO SO VOTES. I ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED THIS ORDINANCE TO MR. BAKER ON APRIL 19TH.

WE HAVE NOT CORRESPONDED SINCE MAY 6TH.

I ANTICIPATE HIS INPUT AND SUGGESTIONS TO THIS ORDINANCE.

>> THANK YOU, ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDINANCE 98?

COUNCIL PERSON KNIGHT? >> BASED OFF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED TO US BY ATTORNEY BAKER TO THE LAST MEETING TO DISCUSS THIS, JUST LOOKING AT IT LOGICALLY, I WOULDN'T WANT TO TRY TO AVOID POTENTIAL LITIGATION BY TRYING TO CAUSE

POTENTIAL LITIGATION. >> THANK YOU.

COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN? >> I LOOKED OVER IT AND READ AND READ AND READ. WE WERE ALL ELECTED.

WE CANNOT BE REMOVED FROM OUR SEATS UNLESS WE DO SOMETHING EGREGIOUS. THAT'S WHY IT'S MADE THIS WAY.

SO RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE A COUNCIL PERSON GOING THROUGH SOMETHING AND THE LEGAL SIDE HAS TAKEN CARE OF IT.

I THINK IT'S OUR PLACE AT THIS POINT TO STAY OUT OF IT.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING EGREGIOUS THAT YOU COULD BE KICKED OUT FOR. IT'S SOMETHING THAT HE NEEDS TO HANDLE THROUGH THE LAW AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS. MAKING LEGISLATION AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE WANT TO HAVE CONTROL OVER ANOTHER COUNCIL PERSON? THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

THAT'S SNOT WNOT WHAT THIS DEMO PROCESS IS.

I THINK WE NEED TO LEAVE THIS ALONE AND I'M GOING TO VOTE THIS

DOWN. >> COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS?

>> YEAH, OUR CHARTER CLEARLY STATES THAT TO REPRESENT THE CITY, YOU HAVE TO LIVE INSIDE YOUR CITY.

I'M NOT SURE WHY YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NOT EGREGIOUS.

IT'S PERFECTLY OUTLINED IN OUR CITY COUNCIL, IN OUR CHARTER.

LET ME SEE. BASIC QUALIFICATIONS -- TO RUN

[03:55:01]

STATED. >> COUNCIL PERSON STREETMAN?

>> I DO RECOGNIZE WHY THE SPONSOR OF THIS ORDINANCE IS CREATING THIS. BASICALLY IT'S EXACTLY WHAT WAS JUST SAID AND READ. WE ARE FULLY AWARE WHEN WE CHOOSE TO ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY TO RUN FOR OUR OFFICE, THAT WE ARE TO RESIDE WITHIN THE WARD WITH WHICH WE REPRESENT FOR THE DURATION OF OUR TERM.

IT'S A COMMITMENT WE MAKE TO THE RESIDENTS IN OUR WARD TO DO SO AND ALSO UNDERSTAND THE REASONING BEHIND DOING THIS BECAUSE I KNOW I HAVE GOTTEN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS BOTH FROM RESIDENTS WITHIN MY WARD AND RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN OTHER WARDS OF THE AREA THAT HAVE CONCERNED WITH VOTES OCCURRING ON THINGS THAT AFFECT THEM FROM SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT LIVE WITHIN THE CITY THEMSELVES. SO I APPRECIATE WHAT YOUR INTENT

IS BEHIND THIS, THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. QUESTION FOR THE SPONSOR.

THE STATEMENT THAT YOU JUST READ, YOU HAVE NOT IS THE DOWN

WITH MR. BAKER YET TO AMEND -- >> I WAS WAITING.

I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING SO I WAS WAITING FOR AN E-MAIL OR INPUT. I HAVE SUBMITTED IT AND HE'S INDICATED THAT HE HAS ISSUES WITH IT BY HE'S NOT PROVIDED ANYTHING IN WRITING ON HOW HE'S ANYTHING IN U HE'S NOT PROVIDED ANYTHING IN T HE'S NOT PROVIDED ANYTHING IN WRITING ON HOW TO

CORRECT IT >> MY CONCERN IS IF THERE ARE LEGAL ISSUES WITHIN THE ORDINANCE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED BEFORE WE CAN VOTE ON IT, JUST IN MY OPINION.

AND ECHOING THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER, I ALSO HAVE ISSUES FOR TAKING ACTION ON THIS UNTIL AFTER THE SITUATION THAT'S ALREADY IN ETHICS IS FINISHED OR WHATNOT.

I ALSO HAVE -- I KIND OF TAKE ISSUE WITH THIS IN THE CODE THAT IT DOES GO THROUGH -- IT'S LIKE A BIG, LONG LIST OF WHAT RESIDENCY MEANS. BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CODE THAT COVERS REMOVAL AND I FEEL ALMOST LIKE THAT'S WHAT THIS SHOULD BE SAYING, HOW DO WE DO THE REMOVAL? SO THOSE ARE JUST MY ISSUES WITH THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE.

NOT SO MUCH THAT I DON'T -- THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. BAKER DO YOU WISH TO RESPOND BEFORE WE MOVE ON THE LIST?

>> YES, WITH ALL DO RESPECT TO COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS, YOU'RE WELCOME TO CALL ME AND COME SEE ME AND I'M HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU ON TRYING TO CRAFT SOMETHING THAT MEETS YOUR INTENT BUT I TAKE ISSUES WITH PORTION OS OF WHAT YOU SAID.

I HAVE TO GIVE MY BEST OBJECTIVE LEGAL ADVICE AND YOUR COMMENTS ON I WANT TO FIX THIS AND I DON'T WANT TO TELEGRAPH SOMEONE ELSE ON HOW TO SUE US BUT IT COULD BE THAT IT CAN'T BE FIXED.

THERE'S AN ASSUMPTION ON SOME OF THE COUNCIL PERSON'S PART THAT WE CAN JUST WORD SMITH THISSMIT FIX IT.

THERE MAY BE REAL PROBLEMS IN TRYING TO DO WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO HERE AS COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN POINTED OUT.

THERE ARE SOME OPTIONS, BUT IT'S NOT THE LEGISLATION THAT YOU PROPOSE. WE TALKED ABOUT THOSE IN THE

[04:00:04]

IT PUTS ME IN AN ETHICAL DILEMMA UNLESS THAT PERSON OR PERSONS WERE TO VOLUNTARILY AGREE TO ABSENT THEMSELVES FROM AN ATTORNEY CLIENT/PRIVILEGE MEETING WHERE I COULD DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITIES AND OPTIONS AND WALK YOU THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THE LAW THAT PERTAINS TO THIS SITUATION.

LAST THING, WITH REGARD TO THE REMOVAL.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. THERE IS NO REMOVAL PROVISION IN THE CHARTER. THERE USED TO BE IN THE OLD CHARTER. IT PROVIDED THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER COULD BE REMOVED AFTER BASICALLY A TRIAL BY THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AND THERE WAS A WHOLE DUE PROCESS MECHANISM THAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THE CHAPTER ABOUT HOW YOU GO ABOUT DOING THAT AND IT WAS PRETTY DETAILED.

THERE WERE PROBABLY SOME GAPS IN IT BUT IT WAS DETAILED.

THE CHARTER REVISION COMMISSIONS, WE HAD LIKE TWO DIFFERENT ONES, AND THE PREVIOUS COUNCILS VOTED TO TAKE THAT OUT.

THEY FELT LIKE A GERALD COULD USE IT, WEB NOISE THAT AS A POLITICAL RECALUATION TOOL TO GET RID OF SOMEONE AND BYTALIAT GET RID OF SOMEONE AND BY DOING THAT.

>> OKAY, ANYTHING ELSE COUNCIL PERSON BUTLER?

>> COUNCIL PERSON ALLEN? >> I THINK MR. BAKER BRINGS UP INTERESTING POINTS. THERE'S A FORMAL INVESTIGATION AND AS A COUNCIL, IT WOULD BEHOOVE US TO LEAVE THIS ALONE AND LET THE PROCESS WORK. IF WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH WAYS TO REMOVE WHEN SOMETHING IS BROKEN, I GET THAT, BUT MESSING WITH SOMETHING WHILE IT'S IN A FORMAL SITUATION, I CAN'T SEE US DOING THAT. IF SOMEBODY WAS FACING A CRIMINAL CHARGE, IF SOMEONE ON THIS COUNCIL HAS A DUI OR SOMETHING, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SAY OR DO ANYTHING UNTIL THEY'RE CONVICTED AND WE NEED TO DO THE SAME THING WITH THIS AND THAT'S

JUST REAL. >> COUNCIL PERSON REYNOLDS? YES, SIR. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR YOUR

FINAL COMMENT. >> THIS IS NOT AT A SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL, THIS IS ABOUT PRESENTING IT IN THE FUTURE.

THERE'S A HOLE OR A MISSING ASPECT OF OUR CHARTER, THIS IS JUST TO PREVENT IT FROM HAPPENING IN THE FUTURE.

WE TALK ABOUT LAWSUITS, WE'RE AT RISK, SINCE OCTOBER, OF EVERY VOTE TAKEN TO BE CHALLENGED. SO WHILE I KNOW THAT I CLEARLY MEAN THIS TO BE PREVENTION IN THE FUTURE, SO IF WE DON'T DO THIS NOW, WE WILL HAVE TO PUSH IT OFF AND DO IT AT SOME POINT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WHAT'S IN OUR CHARTER ISN'T WORKING, THANK

YOU. >> OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON.

NEXT ITEM RESOLUTION 67, EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE CITY COUNCIL HONORING WOMEN VETERANS, COUNCIL PERSON KNIGHT.

>> THIS IS POSTPONED FROM APRIL AND IT'S HONORING WOMEN

VETERANS, THANK YOU. >> OKAY, ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION? SEEING NONE, NEXT ITEM -- OH,

[04:05:06]

YES, I'M SORRY. >> THERE NEEDS TO BE AN AMENDMENT ON THERE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SAY JUNE 12TH.

WE WILL HAVE TO AMEND THAT COME NEXT WEEK.

YOU GET IT? >> OKAY, THANK YOU FOR WORKING THAT OUT. NOW, WE'RE READY FOR DISCUSSION DIRECTING THE PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR TO SUBMIT THE OFFER TO PURCHASE THE 20 ACRES OF LAND AT THE INTERSECTION OF NEEDMORE AND HAZELWOOD, YOU WERB TO DISCUSS TWISH TO DISCUSS THIS COUNCIL PERSON GARRETT?

>> YES, THANK YOU. WE HAD A PRETTY GOOD DISCUSSION IN THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. THIS CAME ABOUT AFTER I ACQUIRED ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE LAND FOR THE NORTH CLARKSVILLE REC CENTER. [INAUDIBLE] THE SITE THAT WAS PROPERLY VETTED THROUGH AN RFP SUBMITTED OVER A YEAR AGO.

I INITIALLY REQUESTED TO HAVE AN ACTION ITEM PLACED ON THE AGENDA TO COMPEL THE DEPARTMENT HEAD TO EXPEND THE FUNDS THAT THE COUNCIL APPROPRIATED FOR THE FUNDS ON IT BUT IT WAS LISTED AS JUST A DISCUSSION DURING THAT MEETING SO I DIDN'T HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY BUT DURING THAT MEETING WE WERE ADVISED THAT THE DEPARTMENT HEAD DID HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SUBMIT THE OFFER FOR THE LAND THAT WE APPROPRIATED THE FUNDS FOR BUT CHOSE NOT TO AND DIDN'T NECESSARILY REQUIRE LEGISLATION AUTHORIZING HER TO DO SO. THE MAYOR GAVE US SOME ADDED PERSPECTIVE TO IT, ADVISING US OF A NEW SITE BEING CONSIDERED THAT MAY BE MORE ADVANTAGEOUS. AT THE TIME, HE WAS NOT AT LIBERTY TO COMMENT AT THE JUNCTURE.

THE CONCERNS THAT I HAD AND A FEW OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS EXPRESSED WAS JUST LIKE THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION DURING THE PARKS AND REC COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH MEMBERS SO THAT WE CAN PROPERLY MANAGE THE PUBLIC'S EXPECTATION OF THE CITY, CITIZENS ADVOCATING FOR THE CENTER AND WHILE THERE ARE VALID REASONS AFTER FUNDS ARE APPROPRIATED FOR A PROJECT TO NOT BE EXPENDED, THAT, AGAIN, MAYOR I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING US THE BACKGROUND OF IT BECAUSE IT MAKES SENSE AND I GET IT BUT THERE'S ALSO, IT DOES LEAVE ROOM FOR FUTURE MAYORS TO COME IN AND GO AGAINST THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL AND CITIZENS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY FIT THEIR AGENDA.

AT THIS TIME, I'M NOT SEEKING TO CHANGE THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO THE CITY COUNCIL HAVING THE AUTHORITY TO FORCE A MAYOR OR A DEPARTMENT HEAD TO EXPEND THE FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR A SPECIFIC PERSON BUT I THOUGHT IT PRUDENT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROCESS TO GAIN A BETTER UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE COUNCIL'S LEGISLATURES. SO I APPRECIATE SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WHO AT THE TIME THIS WAS BROUGHT UP DIDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE A RESPONSE.

IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY HAD TO RESEARCH AND THINK ON AND I'M NOT EXPECTING TO PUT ANYBODY ON THE SPOT TONIGHT TO COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THIS WAS JUST A DISCUSSION, SOMETHING TO GET THE WHEELS TURNING.

IS THE PROCESS FINE AS IT IS? IT MAY BE BUT THERE'S THAT LINGERING THOUGHT THAT IF THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE AND THE EXPRESS SENSE IS TO MOVE FORWARD THAT IF A SITTING MAYOR DOESN'T LIKE A PROJECT, THERE'S NOTHING ANY OF US CAN DO ABOUT IT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING AND MR. BAKER CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG AS FAR AS COMPELLING A MAYOR TO EXPEND FUNDS ON ANY TYPE OF PROJECT. IT WAS JUST TO GET THIS ON THE TABLE, SOMETHING TO GET OUR THOUGHTS GOING.

I HAVE A SET OF SOLUTIONS ON THIS ONE, JUST WANTED TO PIT

IT OUT THERE. >> I WILL JUST TELL YOU THAT THE FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE LIES SOLELY ON ME AND I WILL TAKE THAT, BY THIS IS A ONE OFF SO I WILL TAKE THAT CRITICISM FAIRLY.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THIS ITEM? OKAY. THANK YOU.

[11) MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS]

[04:10:02]

COUNCIL PERSON EVANS? >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I TOLD THE LEADER OF THE COUNCIL OF BLACK LIVES MATTER GROUP THAT I WOULD ANNOUNCE THAT THE ANNIVERSARY PROTEST IS GOING TO BE HELD TOMORROW AT 6:30 IN FRONT OF JOANN'S.

IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THAT IN MEMORIUM TO THE PEOPLE WHO WE HAVE LOST TO BRUTALITY, WE'LL BE THERE.

>> I WANTED TO THANK THE MAYOR AND ANYONE WHO HELPED ADMINISTRATE AND PUT THAT EVENT TOGETHER, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PERSON RICHMOND? I WOULD LIKE TO CALL ATTENTION TO A RECENT VIDEO THAT WAS CIRCULATING ON SOCIAL MEDIA THAT WAS FILMED IN THIS COUNCIL SHAMEERS BY A COUPLE OF MEMBERS. THERE WAS SOME PROFANE LANGUAGE USED THERE SO I WOULD ASK MEMBERS TO BE CIRCUMSPECT AND COMPORT TO THE RESPECT AND DIGNITY OF THE OFFICE AND THIS CHAMBER. WE'RE NOW READY FOR PUBLIC

[12) PUBLIC COMMENTS]