General Forum, 2023-2027 Term

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Burkley Allen concerning the National League of Cities Congressional City Conference 2025.

From CM Allen: 

Colleagues attending the NLC Cities Congressional City Conference 2025, this discussion topic is a place where everyone can share what they've learned for future reference and for those who couldn't attend. All topics, links and resources are welcome!

Documents discussed in this topic can be found at this link: https://metronashville.sharepoint.com/:f:/s/MCO/EozOj1ak9XJHg_-erjnKl6YBaIuA0FW6myISWJQArNATRg?e=ksD3nc

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Ginny Welsch regarding questions related to FUSUS, which are linked below in the Sharepoint.

From CM Welsch: 

Though we have been discussing FUSUS for quite a while now, we have been flying blind, without any actual data to back up the numerous claims made by various stakeholders about its safety and actual efficacy. Before we take another vote on FUSUS implementation, I think we need answers to the many questions still hanging out there, so we have all relevant information we need in hand.  

Mike Lacy has put together a list of very thoughtful questions that I believe once answered will help us make a more informed decision about whether FUSUS is the way to go.  I am looking for responses from the administration, Metro Legal, Axon and MNPD.  You will find the questions in the Sharepoint file linked in this post.  Thanks. 

Documents discussed in this topic can be found at this link:  Questions Related to FUSUS 

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Delishia Porterfield to discuss the Special Called Budget and Finance Committee Meeting that will be held on Thursday, February 27 at 5:30pm. 

From CM Porterfield:

Hello everyone,

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Emily Benedict to discuss Ordinance No. BL2025-742, pertaining to the Metropolitan Historical Commission and the Metropolitan Historic Zoning Commission. 

From CM Benedict:

Colleagues,

As promised, starting this thread seeking your feedback on BL2025-742 relative to the historic zoning commission. 

Having concluded two meetings, latest this morning, with Director Tim Walker, I sent a list of questions to Director Lucy Kempf. The responses will be shared here immediately. 

My respect for the community engagement process is genuine, and during our March 4 meeting, I will make a motion for a public hearing on March 18. This is important and your support is requested. I want to hear from people. Genuine feedback is always helpful. If an amendment makes legislation better, then we will explore them.  

This legislation has been in the works for a year. It’s important to share some challenges I’ve had over the years.

First, Historic staff coordinated with Litton High School alumni organization prior to requesting a bill for historic landmark designation for the shuttered school. Litton High School, which was a segregated school, closed in 1971 rather than integrating. This history lesson was a revelation to them during our discussion. 

This history was compelled to be part of any landmark designation requiring my involvement with the matter. And then, only after consideration of other, more appropriate places were searched.

This snafu was further complicated by staff incorrectly asserting to the alumni association it was already approved. We can do better.

Secondly, a home in a conservation overlay where the homeowner sought permits to build an addition on the back of their house. When historic reviewed the permit, they noticed the house had a un-permitted side porch, clearly one there for years, likely pre-dating the overlay. Historic would only approve the requested permit if the homeowner removed the side addition. During the MHZC meeting, this was discussed by the commissioners, who expressed sympathy to the applicant. However, commissioners sided with staff and even offered as possible recourse this applicant might have regarding the side porch is pursuing possible claims against the seller. This is wasteful, unreasonable, and punitive for aesthetics. 

Lastly, when the Inglewood Place Overlay was developed, marketed, and adopted in reliance on, as a way to stop “tall/skinnies.” It was adopted by residents with over 80% approval in 2016. Yet five years later in 2021, with little engagement, 600 impacted property owners were added to the new Consolidated Guidelines in the overlay. 

This changed the overlay dramatically. Instead of preventing “tall/skinnies,” reviews now include windows, roof pitch, and siding type. When I took a case to the MHZC, staff analysis described how the application would revert siding guidelines to the *original* overlay. Revealing staff’s involvement in opaque behavior when those guidelines were added, impacting 600 property owners.

Here are a number of press pieces about the ways ordinary Nashvillians are being treated, and demonstrating the need for action. Here are links to some of those articles:

https://www.nashvillescene.com/news/citylimits/historic-overlays-nashville/article_f2fc784a-8316-11ee-81a4-7bc02992b4f0.html

https://www.nashvillescene.com/news/citylimits/metro-historic-planning-department/article_3098c59c-ed7d-11ef-9967-bbe2a8e93b73.html

https://www.axios.com/local/nashville/2025/02/11/historic-zoning-proposal-move-to-planning-department

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/2025/02/13/nashville-bars-historical-preservation-development/78428638007/

https://www.nashvillescene.com/news/citylimits/downtown-nashville-new-design-code-guidelines/article_95383b20-1206-11ef-9bc1-2bf112273f64.html

A Sharepoint folder with links to documents discussed below is available at this link: BL2025-742 - Historic Zoning Commission Historical Commission Legislation  

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Tasha Ellis to discuss her intention to move for a deferral of Ordinance No. BL2025-689, which approves a memorandum of understanding between the Metropolitan Beer Permit Board and the Metropolitan Department of Codes Administration to facilitate cooperation for the enforcement of Title 7 and Chapter 9.20 of the Metropolitan Code of Laws.

From CM Ellis: 

In District 29, a growing accumulation of garbage sits unchecked at a dead-end road behind Starbucks, just to the left of the Dollar Tree. Despite my efforts to address this issue, Metro Nashville’s Department of Transportation (NDOT) cannot remove the waste because the area is classified as private property. However, after speaking with a neighboring property owner, I learned that this has been a recurring problem, and the land in question was previously identified as being owned by Metro.

I initially submitted a hubRequest in December 2024, yet here we are—months later—with the pile not only remaining but growing in size. This ongoing neglect is unacceptable.

This situation is a clear example of why we must postpone the proposed bill that would transfer funding for two full-time positions from Metro Codes to the Mayor’s Office of Nightlife. Our Codes Department is already struggling to address essential issues, and diverting these resources will only exacerbate the problem.

Residents of District 29 pay the same tax rates as those in downtown and the surrounding districts, yet we are being treated as an afterthought. We refuse to let our community become a dumping ground simply because the city prioritizes tourist-heavy areas over our neighborhoods.

Until Metro Codes is fully staffed and able to function at maximum effectiveness, this bill should not move forward. Our communities deserve the same level of service and accountability as any other part of the city.

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Delishia Porterfield to discuss the amendment to Resolution No. RS2025-961, which approves the criteria for Operating Support and Thrive grants for the Metropolitan Nashville Arts Commission.

From CM Porterfield: 

Colleagues, 

First and foremost, I would like to extend a heartfelt congratulations to Ashley Bachelder as she begins her role as the new interim executive director of Metro Arts. In her role as Director of Policy and Research at the Metro Human Relations Commission, Ashley is knowledgeable about the challenges that Metro Arts faces and has been integral to the work of moving Metro Arts forward. I have full confidence in her leadership in this new role. 

I also want to make sure that everyone is aware of the amendment to RS2024-961, which will replace the criteria for Operating Support and Thrive grants, as approved by the Metro Arts Commission on January 16. It is crucial that these criteria are approved as soon as possible in order to get funding to artists. You should have received an email from Ashely explaining the changes and an email from Brian Sexton with the amendment and updated criteria. Please review this material and be ready to discuss on Tuesday. If you have any questions or concerns, please comment below so I can address them. 

It is important that we approve these criteria so we can support the work of Metro Arts staff and the Metro Arts Commission. 

The amendment and attachments can be found at this link: Metro Arts Criteria Amendment - RS2025-961

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Kyonzté Toombs concerning a substitute she is proposing to Resolution No. RS2024-905, which urges  the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department to increase traffic enforcement and the Nashville Department of Transportation and Multimodal Infrastructure to improve the physical environment for everyone using the road.

From CM Toombs: 

Council Members – Please find below my proposed substitute to RS2024-905. Please leave any thoughts, edits, or comments below. 

A link to the proposed substitute is available here: Substitute - RS2024-905 - Toombs Edits.docx 

Documents discussed in this topic can be found at this link: Substitute to RS2024-905 

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member John Rutherford concerning Ordinance No. BL2024-574, which changes from AR2a to SP zoning for properties located at 7102 Burkitt Road and 7216 Old Burkitt Road to permit 288 multi-family residential units.

From CM Rutherford: 

Council Members,

I would like to clear up some confusion and misinformation regarding BL2024-574, the rezoning in District 31 on 3rd Reading tonight.

Contrary to what you are reading in the mostly copy and paste emails we are receiving, there have been multiple meetings regarding this development, including one last week following 2nd Reading/Public Hearing. I was at the National League of Cities Conference, but the developer met with members of the Cane Ridge Community Club and a list of items was developed for an amendment to this legislation. I submitted all the items and all that were eligible to go into an amendment was added. See the amendment packet for tonight. Remember, total engagement on this development dates back three years.

For those not familiar with the area, it is worth noting that the Community Club is not located in District 31, though some District 31 residents are among it’s members, and much of the emails we have received regarding this development are from outside the district.

As for the call to include a transit shelter (like Green Hills) to this development, I’m sure Metro will consider the need for bus turnaround and shelter in due time when the 52 route is extended. This development will not be completed for at least three years. Much will happen between now and then regarding implementation of the transit plan. 

This is density along a major thoroughfare, walkable to transit (when the route is extended), with walkability added to the area by connecting to adjacent recently approved owner occupied townhome community and nearby businesses. This is what we have been talking about all along.

And 7 more developments coming??? This is complete misinformation. I have one other that is in the planning stages for a community meeting and one other where an initial conversation has been had, but the developer has not decided yet on moving forward. So, I have no idea where 7 comes from. Maybe that is across multiple area districts, but there's certainly not 7 in district 31 where I’ve had direct engagement with developers. 

Thank you, 

John Rutherford 

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Delishia Porterfield concerning issues regarding the 2024 National League of Cities City Summit Conference.

From CM Porterfield: 

Colleagues attending the City Summit Conference at NLC, thank you for participating and representing Nashville! Could you please share what you learned here for future reference and for those of us who couldn't attend? All topics, links and resources are welcome!

Documents discussed in this topic can be found at this link: National League of Cities 2024 

This discussion topic was requested by Council Member Ginny Welsch concerning issues regarding the Office of Homeless Services.

From CM Welsch: 

I am calling for a change in leadership at the Office of Homeless Services.  

Yesterday at the Public Health & Safety committee meeting, we learned that OHS is not fully functioning, despite having $50M in ARP funds at their disposal, and an (over)staffed office funded with $6 million per year by Metro, and leadership is non-existent. (see the link to the meeting, at mark :43)

OHS admitted yesterday that they are deliberately keeping beds open that could be filled right now with the unhoused, and get people indoors. Instead they are holding those beds for people displaced by encampment closures. Specifically only 30 out of about 110 rooms are currently occupied at one of their transitional housing places. Why are residents in specific encampments prioritized over others who are unhoused?  I believe for propaganda. It makes for good media to close an encampment, and get the unhoused out of sight, out of mind, but it doesn’t make for good policy.   Holding beds intentionally open is unconscionable, and it’s not in alignment with best practices or a Housing First approach that OHS has been claiming to promote.

We also learned yesterday that the Salvation Army, the recipient of almost one third of Metro dollars designated for support services for the homeless, is pulling out of their contract to provide those services. But are they really?  When you look at the contract, it does not say what leadership at Metro says it says. It is poorly written, and the scope of work is unclear.  But even worse is that OHS could not immediately start the process of contracting with other community providers to step in and fill the gap. That process takes time, but if there was a real coordinated system in place at OHS, that process would already be moving forward.  (see contracts linked below)

The structures at Old Tent City were demolished yesterday (October 15,) and OHS says they gave residents there ample time to prepare. But the notice they gave to residents had the wrong date for demolition listed. According to the notice, demolition is actually set for October 25.  OHS has 34 staff, and no one bothered to proofread the notice? (see notice linked below)

These are just the tip of the iceberg. OHS is attempting to consolidate power over the community, and is building bureaucracy within its office to that end. OHS, and it appears Metro, is trying to build a top-down system, with OHS alone calling the shots on how homelessness is addressed in Nashville. Not only will that not work, it will cause even more chaos within the community.  Trust in Metro leadership is virtually non-existent within the community right now, as OHS leadership keeps pointing the finger and blame at nonprofits they are supposed to collaborate with, rather than listening and working with them.  And the people whose lives are on the line are the ones suffering for it.

Part of this falls back on Metro council. Where has true oversight been? These are Metro dollars we are talking about. We are the entity at Metro that needs to provide oversight. We have for too long taken the word of OHS and its ever-rosy assessment of the work they are doing. It has to stop, or we will have burned through $50M and accomplished nothing of lastly import. That is unacceptable.

I call again for the leadership at OHS to be removed, either by resignation, reassignment, or termination.

Link to Public Health & Safety Committee Meeting: https://www.youtube.com/live/bioPccjHICQ?si=Pzb5jMFjbQjRNoD7&t=2505

Grant Contract Exhibit 1.pdf 

Grant Contract Exhibit 2.pdf  

OHS OTC Notice