[0:00] So, it's 5:30, so we'll go ahead and
[0:01] call this workshop to order.
[0:04] And just welcome everybody for coming
[0:06] out and we'll go ahead and get started
[0:07] here starting with item number one for
[0:08] the town recorder position. And Tyler,
[0:10] if you want to go over that.
[0:11] >> Sure. So, if you'll notice we have a new
[0:13] face up here at the table with us
[0:15] tonight. Um
[0:18] I have interviewed some candidates and
[0:20] had some deliberations over the town
[0:23] recorder position. And I ultimately
[0:26] decided to promote from within and so
[0:28] Tiffany has been selected for that
[0:30] position as well as finance director.
[0:33] Um the town recorder position does
[0:35] require an official confirmation by the
[0:38] BMA, more of a procedural thing. Uh so,
[0:41] that'll be coming up
[0:42] two weeks at our next meeting. But, uh
[0:45] glad to have her in this position and
[0:47] the knowledge that she's going to bring
[0:48] to it having worked here uh for over
[0:51] three years.
[0:52] >> Congratulations and thank you on that.
[0:54] Any questions or anything on that one?
[0:57] I'll take us then to the item number
[0:58] two, certified tax rate second reading.
[1:04] » So, we brought an ordinance to you last
[1:07] month about the certified tax rate.
[1:10] This was due to the
[1:13] comptroller's office releasing that
[1:16] after our budget had already been
[1:17] passed. So, that's a point 9758 tax rate
[1:22] and this ordinance is just confirming
[1:24] that rate and updating that for the
[1:27] upcoming or the current fiscal year.
[1:33] » Questions on that?
[1:37] Moving on to item number three, update
[1:39] on flock cameras.
[1:40] >> So, if you remember during our budget
[1:42] conversations,
[1:44] there was an item approved for flock
[1:46] cameras within the police department
[1:47] budget.
[1:49] Um
[1:50] we have been contacted by a couple of
[1:52] media outlets asking where where we're
[1:54] at with that process. We have um in the
[1:58] past several weeks, decided to put that
[2:00] on pause for the time being and invest
[2:02] that money in other areas in the police
[2:04] department, other
[2:06] software that we need in order to
[2:08] improve our report writing and ticket
[2:10] writing. So, we have we've redirected
[2:13] those uh
[2:14] that amount of money for this for the
[2:16] time being. Not to say that it's
[2:19] 100% off the table
[2:21] altogether, but as far as this fiscal
[2:23] year, it is not going to happen. So, we
[2:25] just wanted to make you aware that for
[2:27] now that
[2:29] process has been put on hold.
[2:31] >> Will we have to come back and pass it
[2:33] again?
[2:34] >> It would have to be included in future
[2:35] budgets if you wanted it at that time.
[2:37] >> Okay.
[2:39] Is the pause due to the
[2:43] legislations that's trying to happen
[2:47] at that state and federal levels?
[2:49] >> The primary reason that we decided to to
[2:51] pause was to
[2:53] invest that money in our new
[2:56] ticket
[2:57] and crime reporting software.
[3:02] » So, all that is one thing on that. I
[3:04] think if we do decide to move forward
[3:06] that in the future, I would just I just
[3:07] like to see us make that more of an up
[3:09] down vote on the board making that
[3:11] decision if we proceed with that more so
[3:13] than just putting in the budget cuz I
[3:15] mean I would
[3:16] I I never brought up in the budget time
[3:18] about taking that money out of that for
[3:19] that line. I don't
[3:21] and
[3:22] I don't want to kill the whole budget
[3:23] just because of a single line item with
[3:25] it. So, it's like if we're out I think
[3:26] with something like that if we decide to
[3:28] ever move forward with that, I'd like to
[3:30] just see us
[3:31] have an up down vote on on if we proceed
[3:33] with it or not.
[3:34] >> I think that if we were to pursue it
[3:35] again in the future, that that would be
[3:38] a requirement from the company before we
[3:41] went fully live that we would need some
[3:43] kind of resolution. So, we would
[3:44] probably approach it in that manner if
[3:47] it were to be brought up in the future.
[3:48] >> So, based off that and with no current agreement or contract or
[3:52] anything like that and now we would have
[3:54] to have a resolution to proceed with it.
[3:57] It's essentially dead at the moment.
[3:59] >> And be correct for the time being. Yes.
[4:05] » Any other questions on that?
[4:09] I'll take us then on to item number
[4:11] four, property issue at 912 South
[4:13] Sherbrook.
[4:15] >> So,
[4:16] this is a slightly complex issue and I
[4:19] will try to
[4:20] make it as simple as possible for you to
[4:23] understand and um
[4:26] present you with the options the town
[4:27] attorney and his office have been
[4:30] crucial in helping us understand our
[4:32] options in this situation, but um
[4:35] so that this relates to 912 South
[4:37] Sherbrook Circle, which is an uh the
[4:40] property um owners are selling that
[4:43] property.
[4:45] Uh when they when they purchased the
[4:46] lot,
[4:47] there's a shed and a driveway that
[4:50] actually resides on an unopened public
[4:52] street that the the right to that um
[4:55] belongs to the town.
[4:57] So, the current owners didn't build
[4:59] that, but they inherited the property
[5:00] that way and they have been taking care
[5:02] of the property even though it is not
[5:04] physically on their property. They've
[5:06] gone now to sell it and um want to get
[5:09] this resolved before they can go to
[5:10] closing.
[5:11] So, they don't they don't possess any
[5:14] ownership interest in it. Um
[5:17] but they're asking us to do something
[5:18] about it. We have a couple of options.
[5:20] We can either keep the street
[5:22] corridor uh
[5:25] open
[5:26] and allow them to use it temporarily
[5:28] uh under a a revocable agreement, or we
[5:31] can permanently give up the street uh by
[5:33] vacating the street.
[5:35] Um there are a couple of other options,
[5:38] but basically we're free to decide how
[5:41] we want to proceed with this based on
[5:43] long-term goals and interests rather
[5:45] than this, you know, uh immediate need
[5:48] that we've been asked about by the
[5:49] property owners. So, the first option is
[5:52] we can do nothing. The second option
[5:54] would be we can require them to remove
[5:56] those
[5:57] uh
[5:58] improvements, the shed and the driveway.
[6:00] We can require that to be removed.
[6:02] The third option would be allow the
[6:04] improvements to stay with the revocable
[6:07] agreement that the town could revoke at
[6:09] any time in the future that it deemed
[6:10] necessary we would need that road need
[6:12] that street to be open.
[6:14] Um
[6:16] fourth option would be to grant a an easement,
[6:21] which is complicated and it gives pretty
[6:24] much the same result as the temporary
[6:26] revocable agreement. And then the the
[6:29] final fifth option would be just to
[6:30] vacate the street altogether.
[6:32] Um
[6:34] we
[6:35] we've reviewed this, deliberated about
[6:37] it. We feel that the option C, which is
[6:41] a temporary revocable agreement, will
[6:43] probably be best,
[6:45] but at the end of the day it's it's up
[6:46] to your decision.
[6:48] And I will let the town attorney speak
[6:50] to any further comments that he may have
[6:53] might give you more insight on the issue
[6:55] and then we can have any questions.
[6:57] >> There's a couple of different avenues to
[6:59] really achieve
[7:01] a situation to kind of give everybody
[7:03] what they want here, but really
[7:05] our position is to take care of the town
[7:09] and
[7:11] um there's two different things that
[7:12] achieve essentially the same outcome.
[7:15] One of which is to grant an easement.
[7:19] And the easement itself seems simple
[7:22] and there's different ways to explain
[7:25] it, but more or less
[7:27] the easement can be written
[7:28] two different ways. One in which it
[7:30] would go specifically as to the new
[7:33] owner.
[7:34] Another way in which it would go to the
[7:36] land itself.
[7:37] And if the town ever wanted to take that
[7:40] land back, it's my understanding I think
[7:42] there's around 70 acres behind that
[7:44] property.
[7:46] And they wanted to utilize that for any
[7:48] type of development or anything that
[7:49] could benefit the town. That could
[7:52] lead to litigation to just a headache
[7:55] down the road.
[7:56] We could do a revocable license, which
[7:59] essentially achieves the same exact
[8:02] thing. It allows them the use of that
[8:05] land. It allows them to maintain, do as
[8:08] they please.
[8:10] But it's revocable at any time by the
[8:12] town.
[8:13] And that would be recorded along with
[8:16] the deed. So, it's nothing permanent. It
[8:18] would be with the understanding
[8:20] that if the town wanted to use that 70
[8:23] acres behind that and use that
[8:25] particular entrance rather than another
[8:27] egress route uh
[8:29] another entrance route, that uh they would still have access to
[8:33] that. So, it's kind of a layer of
[8:35] protection for the town and down the
[8:37] road
[8:38] even though this little
[8:40] road piece of land in between may never
[8:43] be used. This may never be an issue in
[8:45] the future.
[8:47] But if it is, it allows us to just
[8:49] simply say, "Okay, we're taking that
[8:51] back. We now want control of it." So,
[8:53] it's almost like it's on loan. Whereas
[8:55] the other way is physically going
[8:57] through litigation to try to recover it.
[9:01] » And Jason, what's your input on it? You
[9:04] know, probably you know these roads back
[9:05] in there and everything.
[9:08] » I agree with you. You know, just
[9:11] let them use it as they need to be, but
[9:13] we have a right to take it back if
[9:14] needed.
[9:16] >> Is that the only entrance into that 70
[9:18] acres?
[9:20] >> It appears. Now, that's I don't know for
[9:22] sure, but
[9:23] in up here there's
[9:25] a small street
[9:27] to the west of that property
[9:31] that connects to the 70 acres. There
[9:34] isn't
[9:35] I don't I don't know know, I don't know
[9:36] that to be for sure, but it appears they
[9:39] are. There's another way in here.
[9:40] >> But, just to be clear,
[9:42] for perspective, 70 acres this would be
[9:44] a significant amount of land for houses
[9:46] to be on.
[9:47] So, you wouldn't want them to funnel 70
[9:50] acres through one tiny little one tiny
[9:52] side street. So, even if there were
[9:54] additional entrances to it, I wouldn't
[9:55] think you would ever want to
[9:57] limit what you could develop because I
[10:00] mean, just and just so everyone on the
[10:01] board is clear, it's not the town that
[10:02] owns that that acreage behind it. It's
[10:04] privately owned.
[10:06] Um so, it'd be something that would be
[10:07] privately developed, but we're just
[10:09] looking at it kind of on on Google on
[10:11] the maps here, you I would don't see any
[10:14] advantage to us to
[10:16] cut off access to that that property.
[10:19] Um that the temporary, you know,
[10:23] revocable agreement is the is about four
[10:25] of the best solutions we would have to
[10:27] it, which gives them the ability to
[10:28] proceed and us the ability to if that
[10:30] ever somebody came and wanted to build
[10:32] houses in that area, we can, you know,
[10:35] look at our development options for the
[10:36] street at that point.
[10:38] >> And to kind of add to what the mayor
[10:40] said here,
[10:42] we don't necessarily know
[10:45] uh the areas that he was speaking of to
[10:48] ingress and egress out of that 70 acres.
[10:50] I mean, there could be hiccups or bumps
[10:52] or anything that comes that does not
[10:54] allow that, then all of a sudden you
[10:56] have a landlocked piece of property.
[10:58] And the landlocked piece of property
[11:00] achieves nothing for anyone.
[11:02] >> Correct.
[11:06] So, is our what I guess with staff and attorney recommendation be to
[11:10] proceed with the with the irrevocable
[11:12] agreement?
[11:13] >> And that would be the staff
[11:14] recommendation.
[11:15] Because that would at this point help both parties.
[11:19] It gives us the option to
[11:21] remove the
[11:23] um
[11:25] approval in the future, but right now it
[11:27] allows them to keep the property the way
[11:29] they have it.
[11:31] >> And is that a that's something we'll
[11:32] just need to take a vote or we'll vote
[11:34] on on this month's month's
[11:36] meeting or is that will be will you be
[11:38] able to proceed just based off
[11:41] >> We'll need a vote. It'll be a discussion
[11:43] and consideration on it.
[11:44] >> Okay.
[11:47] Any other questions on that?
[11:49] >> Who who
[11:51] I guess this is back from when she was
[11:52] still alive.
[11:54] Who gave them permission to build or put
[11:57] buildings on the
[12:00] street to begin with? Is there not any
[12:02] permits on file for that?
[12:04] >> I would say not. And it happened prior
[12:07] to this current owner.
[12:09] So
[12:09] >> So it could have been it could have been
[12:11] in the past.
[12:12] >> Well
[12:13] >> long time.
[12:14] >> My understanding
[12:15] >> These owners have had it since 2022 I
[12:17] think.
[12:18] So
[12:20] it was before that.
[12:21] >> You said just a utility building or is
[12:24] it a barn?
[12:26] >> Just an outbuilding.
[12:27] >> An outbuilding.
[12:29] >> And a drive to the driveway?
[12:30] >> Just a turnaround driveway. It's not the
[12:33] actual
[12:34] physical driveway to the house, you
[12:36] know, but it's just a place to turn
[12:37] around.
[12:43] » All right, moving on then.
[12:45] On number five, revisit of ordinance
[12:47] 23-518
[12:48] street parking.
[12:51] >> So in 2023 you all passed an ordinance
[12:54] regarding parking on the street.
[12:58] parking allowed on the paved portion of
[13:00] any street except in the event of
[13:02] extreme inclement weather conditions.
[13:05] Temporary parking permits may be issued
[13:07] at the discretion of the chief of
[13:08] police.
[13:10] Um
[13:11] and that's all it said.
[13:12] We've received some
[13:15] requests and maybe to look at this
[13:17] ordinance and maybe
[13:18] uh rework the language, not get rid of
[13:20] it entirely. Um
[13:24] and so I think that it might be a good
[13:26] time to look at that and see if there
[13:28] might be some different language. I
[13:29] think that the premise of the the
[13:31] ordinance is a good idea. You you need
[13:33] it for public safety measures, but
[13:37] um
[13:37] as we've even talked as staff, inclement
[13:40] weather is a time when you really need
[13:42] the streets to be clear.
[13:44] That's kind of an interesting carve out
[13:46] that you would want cars parked on the
[13:47] street during inclement weather.
[13:49] Um some ideas may be
[13:52] you know, parties or events or things
[13:54] that would be a time where it could be
[13:55] allowed versus inclement weather. But
[13:57] it's up to you all to decide exactly how
[13:59] you want it or if you want to leave it
[14:00] the same. Just bring it to you as an
[14:02] item that we've received multiple um
[14:05] comments and complaints about.
[14:07] >> The inclement weather part of it came
[14:09] from the Hammonds Estates subdivision
[14:12] where they have a very steep steep steep
[14:14] driveways that they cannot get down in
[14:16] the wintertime
[14:17] that we would give them permission park
[14:18] on the side of the street.
[14:19] >> Yeah, and the creeks out in the street
[14:22] that neighbors complained about the
[14:24] steep driveways.
[14:25] >> So that's where that language came came
[14:27] about.
[14:29] >> Should we include something for
[14:31] commercial vehicles?
[14:33] Obviously, commercial large commercial
[14:35] vehicles are not going to be able to go
[14:36] up a lot of the driveways. They could
[14:38] just park them on the street.
[14:41] I mean, it's being done now with no
[14:45] consequence.
[14:47] >> Has people come in complaining about
[14:49] people parking on the road or
[14:53] want to
[14:54] get permission to keep parking on the
[14:55] road?
[14:57] >> There's been a little bit of both. Um
[14:59] people having trouble, you know, getting
[15:01] in and out of driveways or other things,
[15:03] but also, you know, um
[15:07] I think people who
[15:11] would like to park on the on the street
[15:13] and feel like they can't because of the
[15:15] way the ordinance is written.
[15:17] >> So one one thing I want to add about
[15:18] this is that it it also is one of those
[15:21] things that
[15:22] I cuz I I don't I don't know I was
[15:23] definitely opposed against this when we
[15:25] passed this in 2023 because of the way
[15:27] it's written. It incentivizes the people
[15:30] that are going to make a fuss and
[15:32] complain. Incentivize might not be the
[15:34] right word to use there, but it's
[15:35] becomes like on my street for example,
[15:37] you could park on my street and probably
[15:39] nobody really know or complain or care
[15:41] because the way it's not something that
[15:42] there's a neighbor that's just
[15:43] constantly complaining about it or
[15:45] there's not a um
[15:46] it's not large traffic uh coming up and
[15:48] down there. But there's you know, the
[15:50] argument was always used about it it
[15:51] being a public safety. And my question
[15:54] is is there an already TCA code that
[15:57] says if you're
[15:58] obstructing the roadway of public safety
[16:02] people from going through that they can
[16:03] cite you of uh
[16:06] I think that's more of a TCA code that
[16:08] could already be covering that aspect of
[16:10] it versus a municipal ordinance.
[16:11] >> Well, also the school bus neighbors
[16:13] complained a lot about they couldn't get
[16:15] their buses through some of these
[16:16] streets because of the cars parking on
[16:18] the side of the road. They couldn't get
[16:20] through. Right.
[16:21] >> East Ridge is is famous for that because
[16:24] of their narrow streets. It's rough
[16:26] getting two vehicles down, much less a
[16:27] bus and a vehicle.
[16:30] » And so it's not something that I think
[16:32] if if the blanket ordinance is written
[16:35] to cover you have with the with just
[16:37] that blanket ordinance saying no parking
[16:39] anywhere and there's except you know,
[16:41] except for the the temporary situations.
[16:44] I I still think that
[16:47] it's um
[16:48] it's too restrictive.
[16:50] That there are more situations that can
[16:52] arise where you might need people
[16:54] parking on on on the side of the road
[16:56] responsibly obviously, but also that the
[16:59] way it's written it it
[17:01] gives the complainer a tool to try to
[17:05] use government in their
[17:08] complaint and I'm not a huge fan of
[17:09] that. So, it's a um it needs to be
[17:12] something that we revisit and look at a
[17:14] way to
[17:15] make it where we're still you know, the roads are still able to be traveled,
[17:20] but also not just overbearing for the
[17:23] sake of being overbearing.
[17:27] My thoughts on it.
[17:30] » Are there areas that you want to see
[17:33] carve-outs, exceptions for that I can
[17:35] draft into an ordinance for your
[17:37] consideration?
[17:39] Besides commercial I've heard commercial
[17:40] vehicles.
[17:44] » The The idea of a permit from the police
[17:46] chief to me is a total waste of
[17:48] everybody's time.
[17:50] That Again, I didn't vote in favor of
[17:52] this ordinance when we when we passed it
[17:54] and I don't still agree with that aspect
[17:55] of it. It's a waste of
[17:57] time for everybody.
[17:59] Nobody And it's hard to even get that
[18:00] information out to the general public to
[18:02] know that they would even have to do
[18:04] that.
[18:05] Um so, I would I would 100% strike that
[18:07] language from it.
[18:09] Uh
[18:10] is there anything that's enforceable
[18:12] under two under the current TCA that's
[18:15] obstruction of roadways and
[18:17] >> None of the roads are that big here. I I don't mind the policy as is. It just if we're in an
[18:22] issue permits it should probably come
[18:24] from here
[18:25] instead of from us. And then right now
[18:27] they just call me.
[18:29] I let everybody know, but the roads None
[18:32] of our roads are
[18:34] big.
[18:35] So, I mean it causes a problem anytime
[18:37] there's cars parked on the street.
[18:41] I mean we don't get that many calls for
[18:42] it really, but when we do, we have to go
[18:45] and knock on their door.
[18:48] » Do you ever give Do you ever give them a
[18:49] room in their driveway? Do you ever give
[18:51] tickets out when you see cars parked on
[18:52] the side of the street?
[18:56] » I think since I've been here they
[18:57] cooperated. We've gone out there and
[18:59] knocked on their door and they'll move
[19:00] it into their driveway.
[19:01] Most of the time they're parked on the
[19:03] street when there's not a reason to even
[19:04] park on the street.
[19:12] I mean I just had like if someone has
[19:14] like I just got a call yesterday they're
[19:16] having family in town over the weekend.
[19:18] So, they gave us a heads up that they
[19:20] may have a couple cars on the street.
[19:22] So, I just advise all the officers, you
[19:24] know, if we get calls out there
[19:27] you know, we'll discuss it to whoever
[19:28] the complaint is and advise them that
[19:30] it's temporary.
[19:32] >> And the statute that you were referring
[19:34] to, it does put it at the officer's
[19:36] discretion and that is the portion of
[19:39] ticketing and it's to ask them to move
[19:41] the cars to a required place.
[19:44] >> You're making reference to the TCA
[19:45] statute?
[19:46] >> Yeah, that is uh TCA 39-17-307.
[19:50] >> Okay, I'm looking at 39-17-18-12.
[19:54] Uh
[19:55] I know
[19:56] mostly it's because complaints is in the
[19:58] mornings and afternoons with the bus
[20:00] routes.
[20:00] >> What's the
[20:01] >> Yeah, the buses I've talked to the bus
[20:03] drivers in the past and then one of the
[20:04] other big issues is when they park in
[20:06] the street cuz again that all these
[20:08] streets are small.
[20:09] >> Yeah.
[20:09] >> So, it can get in the way when people on
[20:11] the other side of the road are trying to
[20:12] back out or pull out of their driveway.
[20:29] » Let's um
[20:31] So, as far as how we want to proceed
[20:33] with with this
[20:36] I still would like to see that kind of
[20:37] up the language updated in some sense.
[20:40] If you want to take a look at how we
[20:41] could work on clearing the language up
[20:43] in regards of getting the permit uh
[20:46] even if there would be a way to
[20:48] incorporate that online to the website
[20:50] where somebody could go in and fill fill
[20:52] out a form online that just goes
[20:54] straight to the police department let
[20:56] them know
[20:58] I imagine that
[20:59] uh you know, just something like that of
[21:00] make if we're going to keep that process
[21:02] which I still
[21:04] that's a a lot of hours of manpower for
[21:08] little return in my opinion. But
[21:12] Let's I still let's look at cleaning the
[21:14] language up at least to and then
[21:17] figure out how we can drive awareness to
[21:19] that a little bit more.
[21:22] » Wouldn't you
[21:23] If you give somebody permission to park
[21:25] a wouldn't you still have to make sure
[21:27] our bus still be able to get through
[21:28] there?
[21:30] >> That's
[21:30] >> Yeah, we usually
[21:32] invite them to the pole office park.
[21:34] >> I mean he gives them permission and then
[21:36] a bus can buy and they can't get
[21:37] through.
[21:38] >> But that's that's I mean we're you're
[21:40] never going to be able to legislate
[21:41] common sense.
[21:44] I mean just
[21:45] I'm sorry but you're not going to be
[21:46] able to legislate common sense.
[21:47] >> There's not that much
[21:48] >> If you're If you're the the idea of
[21:50] parking on the roadway is not that
[21:52] you're parked dead center in the middle
[21:54] of the right or left hand lane.
[21:56] You know, it's that you're
[21:58] two tires are probably in in the grass,
[21:59] two tires are probably in the road.
[22:01] >> Mhm.
[22:01] >> Right? Um and to me that's where I'm
[22:04] like this is this is becoming Is this
[22:06] the best use of our officer's time?
[22:09] First first and foremost. Yeah, and
[22:10] that's where I'm starting to go from
[22:11] there.
[22:12] >> I guess the biggest thing is how how
[22:13] close do you park to the curb I guess to
[22:15] give a bus going around.
[22:17] >> And and that's where the idea of having
[22:19] an officer out there with a ruler to
[22:20] measure how close somebody is to the
[22:22] side of the road is just like you know,
[22:23] it's just it's pretty you know, it's crazy.
[22:28] And I guess we don't have big roads but
[22:31] there's some of the some of it is just
[22:32] becomes a if it becomes an a individual
[22:35] a particular individual issue or is
[22:37] there not tools in place that you can
[22:39] address the particular issue versus
[22:41] having to have such a blanket policy?
[22:43] >> Unless you do that you can't park 15
[22:45] foot to a curb. That way you know you
[22:46] gave yourself a route for a bus to go through.
[22:51] >> Those streets out there are seven I
[22:53] think they're 17 foot wide aren't they
[22:55] Jason?
[22:56] >> Some of them are 12 Some of them are 12.
[22:59] 14, some 25. You never know.
[23:02] >> I think anybody can park a car out there
[23:04] and you still take a school bus by it or
[23:07] a fire truck if you need to, but you
[23:08] know
[23:09] Yeah, I'm going to people are going to
[23:10] park their cars occasionally whether
[23:12] they
[23:13] want to or not.
[23:14] >> In in your newer subdivisions, yes.
[23:17] >> Go to the one that was
[23:19] >> Your your roads are a lot wider.
[23:21] Now, if you go in the older subdivisions
[23:23] like
[23:24] West side of the park, it's civil
[23:30] Those streets are so small, you can't
[23:31] even get hardly two vehicles, regular
[23:33] vehicles
[23:35] side by side with one another.
[23:36] >> Only older neighborhoods.
[23:38] yes. And
[23:39] that's where the buses is having the
[23:41] most issues is in the older
[23:42] neighborhoods, not so much as the newer
[23:44] neighborhoods.
[23:45] >> So, the the attorney has already read
[23:46] some of the TCA statute, can you
[23:48] elaborate on that?
[23:49] >> Yeah, part of my concern as we talked
[23:51] this through and I listened to you guys
[23:53] uh voice your concerns, uh
[23:55] a portion of this I'm looking at the
[23:57] criminal statute now and uh
[24:01] the town could be exposed to some civil
[24:02] liability if emergency services weren't
[24:04] able to respond to a health fire, to an
[24:07] emergency.
[24:09] So, that exposure is something to
[24:11] consider.
[24:12] >> The town would be responsible for the
[24:13] civil liability or the person blocking
[24:15] the road?
[24:16] >> It looks like it could come back on the
[24:18] town. I would need to do a little bit
[24:19] more research. This is just me
[24:21] >> Just kind of shooting from the hip,
[24:22] yeah.
[24:23] So, what's before we
[24:26] take any action on that because I was
[24:27] under the impression through what I've
[24:29] researched I thought that an individual
[24:31] can be civilly liable if they did
[24:33] something to prevent a emergency vehicle
[24:35] from and it might be both actually at
[24:37] the end of the day, too.
[24:38] >> It is criminal
[24:40] a criminal charge.
[24:41] >> Criminal charge, okay.
[24:43] Yeah. Let's let's kick that to the attorney
[24:46] and to Tyler to work on what the wording
[24:48] needs to look like to to
[24:51] make it as um
[24:54] to cover the what the the liability
[24:55] first and foremost, but also um
[24:58] you I said we're not going to be able to
[25:00] legislate common sense, but I think a
[25:01] lot of this just breaks down to having
[25:03] common sense of getting your car as far
[25:05] off the road as you can.
[25:06] >> Yep.
[25:07] >> Just plain simple. Um but yeah, we'll I I'll
[25:10] So, let's let's proceed with going that
[25:12] route and letting them review that and
[25:14] action it once that's ready.
[25:16] >> We'll probably bring that back to you at
[25:17] the September workshop.
[25:19] >> Okay.
[25:21] >> Not put anything on this
[25:22] >> No, not on the I don't I don't I
[25:23] wouldn't think it would be approved
[25:24] ready for this about this month, so.
[25:28] Any more questions on that?
[25:30] Want to take item number six then,
[25:31] interlocal agreements with fire
[25:33] departments.
[25:35] Mitch, do you want to tell them what
[25:37] you're working with?
[25:37] >> Um Mitch brought me a couple couple of
[25:40] interlocal agreements that he would like
[25:41] to see us entertain.
[25:44] And I'll let him talk about those if he
[25:46] wants to.
[25:47] >> There's two uh interlocal agreements.
[25:49] The first
[25:50] is with the
[25:52] Tennessee where our department of public
[25:54] safety sits in Tennessee Homeland
[25:55] Security District one.
[25:58] Um
[25:59] So, this would be the the actual
[26:01] interlocal agreement would be with
[26:02] Sullivan County and Sullivan County EMA
[26:05] that emergency management, that's who
[26:06] heads this up.
[26:08] Um but this would If we enter in this
[26:11] agreement, we'll allow our guys to go a
[26:12] lot more training, um
[26:15] especially specifically technical
[26:16] rescue, swift water,
[26:18] uh urban search and rescue, just
[26:20] participate with the district.
[26:22] Uh
[26:23] team trainings that go on on a regular
[26:25] basis now.
[26:26] Uh I was a part of that when I worked uh
[26:28] in Johnson City and it's it would be a
[26:30] huge asset for us to be able to send
[26:32] people to that, participate in that.
[26:34] Um
[26:35] we just have to have that interlocal
[26:36] signed with them. Um
[26:39] the guys have to be when they're
[26:40] participating as part of the Tennessee District one
[26:43] Homeland Security District, they have to
[26:45] uh they have to be covered under their
[26:47] home department's workers comp. They
[26:49] can't just bring their own plans and go
[26:50] up there, by school.
[26:52] Um the second is with the city church
[26:55] hill.
[26:56] Uh they've got it on their BMA agenda as
[26:59] well.
[27:00] Um this would be to formalize pretty
[27:02] much what we do now. Uh it would be for
[27:05] automatic aid
[27:06] to
[27:07] or Mount Pleasant respond Churchill
[27:09] automatic aid and vice versa
[27:11] automatically on structure fires.
[27:14] Um we do that now more or less. It's
[27:16] just it's a little bit of a delay. We
[27:18] have to request them, they have to
[27:19] request us. This just takes that two to
[27:22] three minute delay out of the mix.
[27:26] Um
[27:27] I've spoke with fire chief and the
[27:28] public safety director there. They've
[27:30] talked uh to Mayor Deal.
[27:32] Uh it's it's on their BMA agenda as
[27:34] well. Uh but they don't foresee any
[27:36] issues with it being passed there.
[27:42] » Questions on that?
[27:50] We're ready to move that forward and
[27:52] then
[27:52] on to the meeting.
[27:56] I think it's item number seven for an
[27:57] update of rules of order.
[28:00] And Tyler, you want to go with that?
[28:02] >> Sure.
[28:03] So,
[28:04] we had
[28:06] some
[28:07] pretty um
[28:09] back and forth discussion back in April
[28:10] and May about moving the meeting and
[28:12] rescheduling a meeting and when that
[28:15] motion was brought up and and everything
[28:17] and I think we talked about, you know,
[28:19] making sure that we follow our rules
[28:21] that we set forth and and all those
[28:22] things so that we have orderly meetings
[28:25] and motions not made out of order.
[28:28] So, I think one way to do that is to
[28:30] adopt our agendas at the beginning of
[28:31] each meeting. That's pretty standard
[28:33] procedure. We just don't do it
[28:35] currently. Um I've done some research on
[28:37] Robert's Rules and think that it's
[28:39] important for us to add that in. So,
[28:41] we'll look at updating our whole order
[28:43] of business to include adoption of the
[28:45] agenda.
[28:46] So that at that point in time it takes a
[28:49] simple majority to adopt the agenda. If
[28:51] anybody wants to add anything, which
[28:54] that runs into open meetings, um
[28:57] it requires a 2/3 majority to to add add
[29:01] something to a meeting.
[29:02] Um
[29:04] that that also opens you up to further
[29:07] potential
[29:08] uh litigation if you were to try to walk
[29:11] something onto a meeting that was not
[29:13] publicly noticed.
[29:15] But really it gives you an opportunity
[29:17] to to confirm the business that that's
[29:19] set before you for the meeting, and I
[29:21] think it'll just be a routine thing we
[29:22] need to add. So we're going to look at
[29:24] updating that. Also give a space for us
[29:26] to do employee recognition or or any
[29:29] type of visitor recognition right at the
[29:30] beginning of the meeting.
[29:32] Uh so that we we follow what we said
[29:34] we're going to do.
[29:38] More of a housekeeping item.
[29:41] >> Questions on that. So basically this is
[29:43] if you're trying to add a topic at a
[29:45] meeting.
[29:46] >> Right.
[29:46] >> Not something that was previously
[29:48] requested to be said. Okay.
[29:50] >> And it's the And just to be human, to
[29:52] also the business meeting, the workshop
[29:54] would be available from if you wanted to
[29:57] add something at the beginning of the
[29:58] meeting, you'd be able to add it at the
[29:59] beginning of the meeting. It's not We're
[30:00] not actually taking action on that.
[30:02] Uh this this would just be your business
[30:04] meeting where you could have a true
[30:05] actionable item gets added night of
[30:07] meeting.
[30:08] >> Okay, thank you.
[30:09] >> That is very That in itself is very
[30:11] limited in what you're allowed to do.
[30:13] What I'm trying to get to it would be
[30:15] something minor.
[30:17] >> Right.
[30:17] >> Not a substantial issue.
[30:19] >> Right.
[30:19] >> If you do that, you could be open to
[30:21] litigation.
[30:22] >> Okay. Okay.
[30:24] Thank you for the clarification.
[30:25] >> Any questions on Any other questions on
[30:27] that housekeeping item?
[30:29] Before we close out, I just want to
[30:32] thank the
[30:33] departments that are here. Uh I think
[30:35] it's majority of everybody for
[30:37] coming out Saturday and putting on uh
[30:39] Touch-a-Truck and Back to School event.
[30:41] Have received nothing but positive
[30:43] feedback about it from uh uh
[30:45] to the guys and you make sure you pass
[30:47] that along down to the guys that were
[30:50] here because the uh
[30:52] the getting to kind of just even be out
[30:53] there and observe it, too. I mean, I
[30:55] think everybody did a great job of of
[30:56] representing the town, representing your
[30:58] departments, and everybody should be
[31:00] commended for that. I think we will have
[31:03] learned some things that we'll do a
[31:04] little differently next time. Hopefully,
[31:05] there won't be a monsoon happening a few
[31:07] hours beforehand.
[31:09] Um but considering all things considered
[31:11] with it, we got a great turnout, great
[31:13] participation, and and wonderful
[31:15] feedback. So, thank you all for your
[31:17] great work on that.
[31:18] >> Let me
[31:18] add to that. I represented Colonel
[31:21] Lawson's retirement
[31:23] function for uh Sheriff Lawson.
[31:26] And uh
[31:28] amazingly, he he almost burst into tears
[31:31] at one point. He's been in law
[31:33] enforcement 49 years, 16 as a sheriff.
[31:36] >> Wow.
[31:36] >> And uh
[31:38] August 28th, I think, is his last day.
[31:41] It was really kind of funny. The uh
[31:43] sheriff's office bought him a rifle, all
[31:46] tricked out, $4,000 rifle. And as he
[31:49] opened it, pulled it out, he said,
[31:51] "Look, my first gun."
[31:54] Anyway, it was a good function and uh
[31:57] >> Thank you for going down there on behalf
[31:59] of the county. We appreciate that.
[32:02] Anybody else?
[32:04] We'll see you next week.