[0:18] Welcome to the Murfreesboro City Council meeting is August 13th, 2026. If you will feel bad with me and then we'll stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Uh, Father God, I thank you for this day, for the opportunity that we have to serve the residents of Murfreesboro. Uh, Lord, I thank you for all those opinions. Those that we all agree with or we don't agree with, that we have the right to be able to come to our our city and be able to state our opinion. Um, father God, I thank you for the chance that we all get to represent the residents. I thank you for our employees, uh, for our emergency service providers, that you continue to give us grace, that you continue to give us wisdom. And we ask all these things in your name. Amen. Amen.

[1:00] I pledge allegiance.

[1:02] To the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[1:17] All right. Let's move to our, uh, we got one comment I want to make before we get get started. Um, you know, on the the times that we've all been up here, we've had people who have served the city. They've come and they've gone. And today, with no pomp and circumstance, today was Chris Griffith's last day with the city of Murfreesboro. Chris is not here. Um, but Chris is, um, set the example for many. Many of y'all know that when you got a pothole complaint or a road complaint, a traffic complaint, a bump on a bridge complaint, a drainage complaint. Chris was always there to serve. And Chris really set the example for all of us on how that we're supposed to respond and how we help our residents. And so, um, Chris retired today, and so we want to give thanks to Chris and for his family, for loaning Chris to us for all these years. So, um, Chris, if you're watching, we'll give you a round of applause.

[2:25] All right. Let's move to our consent agenda. You have 11 items on your consent agenda. Is there anything that needs to be, um, taken off or that someone wants to discuss on the consent agenda? Second motion and second, all those. Please call the roll.

[2:41] Hi, Mr. Maxwell.

[2:42] Hi.

[2:44] Hi. Hi. Hi.

[2:47] Hi. All right. You have the the minutes of the July 23rd, 2025.

[2:57] Any additions or deletions to the minutes? S2:

[2:58] Second motion and second. Please call the.

[3:00] Roll. Mr. Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. Hi. Vice mayor Shackley. Aye. Mr. Wade. Mr.. Right. Aye. Mayor McFarland.

[3:07] All right. Let's move to land use matters. We have item 13 amending the zoning ordinance for automotive motor vehicle Repair and Services uses, Mr. Bromley.

[3:15] Thank you. And good evening, Mr. Mayor. And members of City Council. Our first land use matter for tonight is for an amendment to the zoning ordinance. A pretty short zoning ordinance amendment, really meant to address some negative secondary impacts from automotive repair uses and automotive service uses that sometimes, if not managed correctly, those types of uses can have kind of a some negative secondary impacts aesthetically and otherwise. So so what we are proposing are a couple of design standards for these types of uses. The first one would be to put a location restriction so that no automotive or motor vehicle repair use or service use, where such is the principal use of the property, shall be located less than 300ft from any other automotive repair or service use and be all repair work or service work associated with an automotive or motor vehicle repair or service. You shall occur inside of a building enclosed by a permanent roof and on all sides by solid exterior walls. And the reason for that is we had received several inquiries about folks wanting to locate in automotive repair businesses and buildings that were not originally designed for them, and in many instances when, when, or in some instances when that happens, those uses because the buildings are not designed for them, tend to spill out into the parking lot. And so we have the exterior on the exterior of the building. The automotive repair activities occurring in the parking lot or other areas. So so we took this zoning ordinance amendment to the Planning Commission on June the 3rd. And at that meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this ordinance amendment. Happy to answer any questions before or after the public hearing.

[5:23] Any questions for Mr. Manley? All right. We'll need to hold a public hearing on this item. Anyone wishing to speak for or against, if you'll come to the podium, if you'll state your name, address, you'll have three minutes if you're representing as an individual or five minutes representing a group like an HOA. Uh, anyone wishing to speak for or against, please come to the podium.

[5:47] All right. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing, and we'll now consider on First Reading Ordinance 2626.

[5:56] For approval.

[5:58] Motion and second, please call the roll.

[6:00] Mr. Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell, I. Vice mayor Charlotte. Hi, Mr. Wade. Hi, Mr.. Wright. Mayor McFarland. Hi.

[6:08] All right, let's move to item 14. Rezoning. Rezoning of property located along Brushwood Drive. Mr. Baldwin.

[6:15] Thank you, mayor McFarland. Our second public hearing tonight is a rezoning request located along the north side of Rush Wood Drive. The bulk of it, 1.3 acres, is currently zoned OG Office General District. And there is a small sliver, which is about 0.07 acres in the red, which is currently zoned Rs eight. Um, the property that is zoned OG was originally intended to be developed as the final phase of the Jefferson Square office condominium development. However, it was determined by the Jefferson Square Owners Association that they it was not desirous to have access from this final phase, go through the existing Jefferson Square development. And so because of that, Mr. Belt has submitted this rezoning request, which includes that finger going out to Rush Wood Drive so that he can develop it with the essentially the same office development that was proposed as the final phase of Jefferson Square, but as a separate office development, self-contained and with access only to Rush Wood Drive so that it does not have vehicular access through the existing Jefferson Square development. The surrounding land uses, as I mentioned to the north is the Jefferson Square office development, and to the north of that is the Belmont Park office development. Directly to the west is an existing office building that I believe Griggs and Maloney has recently purchased, and to the east is an apartment complex. To the south along Brushwood Drive, is zoned Rs eight and is developed with single family residential detached dwellings. Um. So at the Planning Commission public hearing in April, the Planning Commission heard testimony from neighbors along Brushwood Drive, uh, concerned about about traffic. And at that meeting, the Planning Commission deferred action and requested that the applicant submit a traffic study or a traffic analysis, rather to the to the Public Infrastructure division for their review. Um, the Traffic analysis that was generated by Huddleston Steel and reviewed by our Public Infrastructure Division, indicated that the amount of trips generated by this proposed development, which is contained six office buildings less than 13,000ft², would be 209. Average daily trips per day, and which would include approximately 30 trips during the Am and PM peak hours. The conclusion of the traffic analysis was that the that the that both rush would drive and South Church Street could handle the additional traffic with minimal impact. The Public Infrastructure Division concurred with the results of Mr. Huddleston traffic analysis, and agreed that that the this development would have minimal impact on the surrounding roadways. So after that analysis was provided to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission then voted on. At the June 3rd June 3rd meeting, to recommend approval to the City Council of this rezoning request.

[9:55] I'd like to invite Mr. Claude Rowntree. Mr. Bill Huddleston, I'm sorry. Pinch hitting for Mr. Rowntree, I suppose, to give a brief PowerPoint presentation. And I did want to mention, just to get on the record, that there were two emails that I forwarded you earlier today from interested parties who were unable to attend the meeting. And so those have been made part of the record. One was from Mr. Chad Molitor, who is with the Jefferson Square Homeowners or Condo Owners Association to the north. And the other one was from Doctor Billy McIlrath, who is a resident of Brushwood Drive adjacent to the property, so wanted to state for the record that those have been made part of the public hearing record. And so now I'll pull up mr. Huddleston.

[10:46] Okay.

[10:49] Okay.

[10:52] And be happy to answer any questions before or after the public hearing.

[10:58] Good evening, mayor and members of city council. I'm Bill Huddleston with Huddleston Steel Engineering. We've been working on this project for quite some time. I've been to Planning Commission and got favorable reviews, and we're happy to be here at council tonight. I'll remain available to answer any questions that you may have. Uh, as Matthew said, we're looking at six small office buildings that are shown on the screen. Two of those buildings are about 2500ft². Uh, four of the buildings are about 1950ft², which totals up to less than 13,000ft². Uh, I want to point out that the future land use map of the city does show this area as a business park. That's what we're proposing. Uh, most of the property is zoned office general, and we're zoning. We're looking for a planned commercial development. Zoning tonight. Uh, as Matthew alluded to, the traffic study. Our traffic numbers were very low both daily and peak hour. Uh, we also looked at accident data in the area and found that to be very low. There were only five trips. Excuse me? Five accidents over a three year period. Uh, and none of those were fatal. I'll be happy to answer any questions right now. Uh, or after the public hearing. Mr. Wayne Belt, the developer, is here also.

[12:17] Any questions for Mr. Huddleston? All right. Seeing none, we'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak for against this rezoning of approximately 1.37 acres. Please come to the podium.

[12:35] All right. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing, and we'll now consider on first reading ordinance 2628.

[12:44] Second motion a second, please call the roll.

[12:47] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. I, vice mayor Shapleigh. All right, Mr. Wade. All right, Mr. Wright. All right. Mayor McFarland.

[12:54] All right. All right, let's move to item 15. Rezoning a property located along Elm Road in Jobi Jackson Parkway.

[13:01] Transition to Miss Stephens for this next one.

[13:03] Miss Stephens.

[13:12] After you exit out of here.

[13:17] Good evening, mayor McFarland, city council. I'm Teresa Stephens, the site administrator for the city of Murfreesboro. The item before you is a rezoning request for plans on overlay for buses. The property is approximately 30.7 acres, located at the corner the southeast corner of Elam Road and Joby Jackson Parkway. A plan on overlay is to allow the use of new and innovative signs on large, atypical developments to be eligible for a planned sign overlay. The. Excuse me to be eligible for a plain sign overlay. The development must consist of 20 acres or more and be zoned appropriately, but is currently zoned general Industrial and needs a minimum of 20 acres. Therefore is eligible to apply for the plan on overlay. The applicant is required to present to the city a plan sign book that shows a cohesive plan for the entire project that addresses everything from permanent building signs to temporary signs. The design book is included in your agenda packet. Also, in your packet you will see listing of proposed signs with comparisons with what is currently allowed by the sign ordinance and what Bucky's has proposed.

[14:36] Where did you say that?

[14:39] I'm sorry.

[14:49] Sorry about that.

[15:15] I prepared a PowerPoint for to review is there's a lot of changes for this, for a lot of proposed signs. And I wanted you to be able to see clearly what is planned and what is allowed. The subject property is located at 3355 Elam Road, the corner of Dobie, Jackson and Elam. The property consists of 30.7 acres. The proposed sow will allow three attached building signs, and this has been revised to four, which will show you a little bit later. Attached canopy signs for each gas canopy and interstate ground sign, and painted roof signs, as well as a directional as well as directional enter and exit signs and temporary signs, including a number of grand opening temporary signs. The following signs provide information as it pertains to the current sign ordinance allowed by the sign. Ordinances three attached signs per building. You may install 2ft²/l of foot of building front, with a maximum of 150ft². Signs may be internally illuminated and externally illuminated, um or non illuminated. Bucky's has proposed four attached signs. Each sign measures per the sign ordinance at a 575ft². And I emphasize per the sign ordinance, because we require an entire, um, square around the whole sign to count it as one sign. Uh, I mentioned that they were going to add a for sign. This is different than what we presented to Planning Commission. Uh, the the sign was left off inadvertently. Uh, is on the back of the sign where the green arrows or the back of the building where the green arrow is pointing.

[16:56] They are also proposing a ground sign that's larger than what we typically see by by sign ordinance. They're allowed a 50 foot tall and overall height, or an interstate sign and a maximum of 200ft². The proposed sign is 125ft² in height and 750ft² in overall sign face area with internal illumination.

[17:21] Roof signs are not allowed by the sign ordinance. Bucky's is proposing one painted sign on the flat topped roof at 5674ft². This sign is for aerial view only. Canopy signs. We do allow canopy signs. These are the type of signs you see on a canopy gas station. The sign ordinance allows three canopy signs at 50ft² each, and a maximum of 25ft in height. They're proposing one sign on the northeast and west elevations, for a total of three signs per canopy at 64ft². And there's also two full description signs on the north elevation of canopy, one in this and on the south elevation canopy two. These are 11ft² each, which are just directional in nature. Their height is about 30ft in overall height, which is about five feet higher than we typically see. They also have various equipment, machinery, signs. They'll have some EV chargers. Uh, the ice machines that they have. And these can be found on pages 30, 40, 51 and 53 of your. So these are in keeping with what we typically see for equipment machinery signs. Convenience signs are also allowed by the sound ordinance at three square feet or less than surface area. They're exempt from requiring a permit but shall be in compliance. Illumination is allowed with an electric permit. Bucky's has proposed various of these signs throughout the property, and all of them are five square feet or less, and I've listed the pages that these can be found on.

[19:02] Specifically, S3:

[19:34] They also have part of the package of their temporary grand opening signs. We don't typically allow or we don't have a specific ordinance for grand opening. What's allowed by the temporary sign ordinance is what is allowed. Um, they have proposed streamers, which are allowed by our sign ordinance. They've proposed inflatables which are allowed by permit. Those are larger than what we typically allow. Uh, they are proposing 125 foot tall mascot at approximately 700ft² and 112 foot tall mascot at approximately 175ft². These will be displayed for 30 days beginning at the grand opening. After this time, they will not be allowed um at Bucky's at any in the future.

[20:22] The Planning Commission after a public hearing recommended approval for the ISO on June 3rd, 2026. If you have any questions for me.

[20:32] Any questions for Mr.

[20:36] Stevens on this? S8:

[20:39] Over the interstate sign where? So there's the round Bucky sign, and then underneath it'll say Murphysboro after it opens, but they just want to put a a opening soon sign on that.

[20:52] I was thinking like a banner.

[20:54] I'm sorry. Yeah. No, it's not.

[20:56] On that over there.

[20:57] It's on their permanent sign. Yeah. After it's installed.

[21:01] Is that 125 foot sign?

[21:06] Are there other 125 foot signs in that area in Murphysboro?

[21:11] Yeah. Yes. We do have some signs that are I don't know their exact height, but, um, I think we have at two that are 119ft in height. I know of two others that are over 80ft in height. They're all nonconforming signs currently because our current sign ordinance does not allow that. Those were here prior to the sign ordinance having that restriction. But there are a couple of signs in in town.

[21:37] If we do this 125 foot sign, is that basically anybody going forward could do this.

[21:43] If you're eligible for a so that they can present it to the city and we get to make a decision. Okay.

[21:53] With that that acreage is 2020 plus acres.

[21:57] Yeah.

[22:03] Any questions before we hold the public hearing on this?

[22:07] Also, I'd like to let you know that there's a Bucky's representative here if you have any questions for them as well. Okay.

[22:13] Good. Would allow us I just say it's going to be such a heavily trafficked area. Um, the ability to put even, you know, we put up these signs on panhandling and I'm just wondering, would we have the opportunity to put that up to discourage, you know, panhandling? Because I could see where people could park it out there all day long. Panhandling and the traffic flow.

[22:36] So the signs that are currently that you see around Murphysboro right now were, um, they're in the right of way. Which city the city can put those signs there if they're city signs. I don't know that Bucky's has any plans to do that. If they wanted to do something like that, they would be covered under their, uh, convenience.

[22:52] Appreciate it, because, I mean, if they're here, they should consider that because it's going to be a magnet. I mean, if if, if somebody would rather not be on Church Street and be there and get more and more traffic. I'm just saying that may discourage it is what I'm getting at.

[23:08] Yeah. I believe their temporary sign. The convenience section would cover those provided they didn't exceed that five square feet.

[23:17] Councilman, also, if they're on that private property would be trespassing. They would. They would have to be in the public right of way.

[23:26] To.

[23:28] Avoid being trespassed. Okay.

[23:33] All right. Any other questions? All right. We need to hold a public hearing for the rezoning of this 30.17 acres. Anyone wishing to speak for or against, if you please, come to the podium.

[23:48] Seeing none will close. The public hearing will now consider on first reading ordinance 2629.

[23:53] So move second.

[23:55] Motion and second. Please call the roll.

[23:57] Mr. Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell.

[23:59] Hi.

[24:00] Vice mayor Shackley. Hi, Mr. Wade. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[24:04] Hi. Mr. Stevens, thank you for your hard work on this. I appreciate you. All right, let's move to item 16. The plan of services, annexation and zoning for property along Franklin Road, Gresham Lane. In all, Moore not drive Mr. Bromley.

[24:18] Y'all are stuck with me again. Our next public hearing. If I can get through the gigantic buggies.

[24:28] All right, there we go. Um, so our next public hearing is for the annexation of the Franklin Road Baptist Church campus, which is located on the north side of Franklin Road. Um, you can see three of the parcels owned by Franklin Road Baptist Church are already in the city limits. Um, the one here, here and here. So they are requesting annexation for the balance of their property. And it's the area colored in blue. Also included in the annexation study area is the right of way of Alma Norte Drive. Uh, the county road board granted its consent for the city to annex that segment of Alma Norte Drive. And this segment of Franklin Road right of way, which is, of course, State Route 96, T dot highway and t dot granted its consent to um for the city to annex that segment of right of way as well. And that that including those rights of way, um, closes two gaps in the in the city limits on those two two streets, which makes the provision of services more predictable. And so anytime that we have a gap that we can close in, that we can fill in with a, with an adjacent annexation, uh, a gap in the right of way that we try to do that at the same time as we, as we study that, uh, the, the private property. Um, so the church has requested annexation for the balance of its, of its campus. Um, they are already served as an outside the city sewer customer. Um, but they do have plans for expansion in the future of both the the school and the church, I believe. And so they will be needing additional sewer for additional buildings. And they also would like to take advantage of considering their the the location of the church. Um, basically surrounded by the existing city limits, they'd like to take advantage of the other complement of city services offered. Um, if the property were to be annexed into the city, um, the plan of services has been provided in your agenda materials, which shows that, as you would expect, considering its proximity to the existing city limits, that the city can provide services to the subject property, uh, relatively easily. Um, and so we would ask you to conduct a public hearing on this annexation request. Um, and at which time I'll be available for questions before or after, if you have any. Uh, Mister Sam Huddleston, representing, uh, Franklin Road Baptist Church is here today. And I believe you would like to say a couple of words. Um, before the the council conducted a public hearing. This annexation was voted on at the June 3rd Planning Commission meeting, at which time the Planning Commission voted to recommend its approval.

[27:20] Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Sam Huddleston, Franklin Road Baptist church. Good evening, mayor McFarland. Members of council. First of all, thanks for your service to our community. Secondly, congratulations to our good friend Chris Griffith on his retirement. And then I would just like to give you a little insight into our thoughts on annexation. Franklin Road has long desired to be annexed into the city, and about 20 years ago we thought that that was going to happen. And as some of you may recall, that annexation was, uh, tied up in a legal issue for some time and then eventually settled out of court. Um, and so we saw that as a benefit to our campus and to our needs there. But, uh, and we're we're certainly, um, consensual to the annexation at that time. Uh, since that time, we we haven't had a significant project. Uh, really to to drive the question on annexation. But in the last several months, as we looked at our campus and our master plan, uh, we do have some, some growth needs in the school and in the church. And, uh, this would give us an opportunity to, uh, to be under one jurisdiction. As Mister Bromley pointed out, we do have, uh, split campus, uh, portion of our campus is served. And within the city limits, a portion is outside the city limits, but covered under an outside the city sewer agreement. And so when we take on a project, uh, especially if it includes something on the educational side, uh, we deal with Rutherford County. Uh, we deal with the city of Murfreesboro, and we also deal with the state fire marshal. And and so it would help us somewhat to consolidate all of that under one umbrella of review and oversight for for development. Um, and then the, the, the other thing I'd like to mention is, just as Mr. Bromley alluded to, the availability of other services. Uh, we're certainly excited about the opportunity for emergency services provided by the police and fire department and making those services available to our campus, and then working with our school community and also our church community to provide those services. We have also requested commercial fringe zoning for this property. That would be consistent, we think, with the community, the neighborhood, and also it would be a permissible zoning that would allow us to to do our expansions for church and school, uh, without additional, um, special use permits through the BCA. Um, again, appreciate your consideration of the annexation and the follow up zoning. I'm available either before or after the public hearing to answer any questions. Thank you.

[30:14] Any questions for Mr. Huddleston? All right. We need to hold a public hearing for the plan of services and the annexation for 35.3 acres. This, again, is the plan of services and the annexation. Anyone wishing to speak for or against, please come to the podium.

[30:31] All right. Seeing none, we'll close. The public hearing will now consider on first reading resolution 26, our PSA 30. So move motion a second. Please call the roll.

[30:41] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. Hi, vice mayor Charlotte. Hi, Mr. Wade. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[30:48] Hi. All right. We now need to consider the zoning of the 27 acres.

[30:53] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[30:54] This is the companion zoning request, which is kind of a two two part zoning request. So see, the area in green is an area that the church did a land swap with the um Hillwood development to the west. It's currently zoned PUD, which is the zoning classification of the Hillwood planned development, but it is owned by the church. And so they're requesting to rezone that to commercial fringe. And then the area in the kind of beige orange color, uh, they are requesting to have zoned CF commercial fringe simultaneous with annexation. And just as a as a matter of information, the area in blue would come into the city limits with an interim SES 15 zoning classification. Um, the church has indicated that they intend to have some future plans for that area to the north of Almanac Drive, but they're not ready to move forward with those. So that area would come in with the interim SES 15 zoning classification. As Mr. Huddleston mentioned, the church has is anticipating some some future church expansions and future school expansions. Now, most school expansions, if you'll recall with the ordinance amendment that was adopted about a year ago, are allowed to move forward by right. But church uses in residential zoning districts still require a special use permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals. However, zoning the property to commercial fringe allows the church to move forward directly to the site, plan, review process, and bypass the special use permit process with the fact that it is on a major arterial road, Franklin Road. Staff used the commercial fringe zone as an appropriate zoning classification. The future Land use map of the Murfreesboro 2035 Comprehensive Plan recommends that the property develop as public institutional and that public institutional classification was largely shaped by the existing church and school use on the property, which is an institutional use. Institutional uses are are allowed in commercial fringe zoning by right, so staff views the request as generally consistent with the recommendations of the future land Use map. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter on June the 3rd, at which time it voted to recommend approval to the City Council. I'll be happy to answer any questions before or after the public hearing. And Mr. Huddleston is here if you have any questions for him representing the church.

[33:37] Any questions? All right. Seeing none, we need to start. Have a public hearing for the zoning of this 27 acres. Anyone wishing to speak for or against, please come to the podium.

[33:49] All right. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing, and we'll now consider on first reading ordinance 26000.

[33:55] So moved.

[33:56] Second motion and second. Please call the roll.

[33:58] Mr. Harris. Aye. Mr. Maxwell, vice mayor. Aye. Mr. Wade, Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[34:05] Aye. All right. Thank you all. All right, let's move to item 17. This is the plan of services, annexation and zoning for property along Shelbyville Pike.

[34:14] Thank you, mayor McFarland. This is for the annexation of 16.78 acres located along the east side of Shelbyville Pike, directly to the south of the Tiger till Tiger Hill Townhomes development, as well as some commercial out parcels there, which there's a Pep Boys and a racetrack gas station I believe, developed just to the north. You see on the map before you that Christy Knob way, which is a public street, stubs directly into the subject property. Um, also to the west, across Shelbyville Pike, is the location of the Murfreesboro Medical clinic Shelbyville Pike satellite office. The applicants have, or the owner of the property has requested annexation of the front half of his property. It's Mr. Curtis's property for the proposed Lowe's development, which will be the subject of the subsequent public hearing after the annexation. The subject property is contiguous with the existing city limits, however, and it's within the urban growth boundary. However, it is not within the service infill boundary that was adopted with the Murfreesboro Murfreesboro 2035 Comprehensive Plan Update back in 2023. However, the 2035 Comprehensive Plan did identify that or did recommend that these areas that were identified as future study area could be added to the to the to the service infill area with a small area study to determine what additional property needed to be brought in. This was a similar situation to what happened to what you voted on a month or two ago on Hall's Hill Pike property that was outside of the service infill boundary, and so we are currently working on bringing forth a studying this and then subsequently bringing forth an amendment to the to the future land use map. But that would not preclude you from voting on this annexation tonight. Um, the plan of services has been included in your agenda packet and services can be provided to the subject property upon annexation. Sewer is not immediately available to the to the property in question, but can be extended from the north to serve the property. And the applicants have been working with the Water Resources Department on the preferred method of doing so. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter on June the 3rd, after which it voted to recommend approval to the City Council. I'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have before or after the public hearing.

[37:02] Who would pay for the sewer to be extended?

[37:05] Uh, the the developer, the applicant.

[37:07] Lows would. Okay.

[37:12] Any questions? All right. We need to hold a public hearing on the plan of services and annexation for 16.78 acres. Anyone wishing to speak for or against, please come to the podium.

[37:29] Good evening, Mayor and council. My name is Todd Simmons. I'm with Freeland and Kaufman with the civil engineering firm for Loews. I know this is just the annexation, so I assume any presentation probably needs to hold for the other part. So I will just say we're here to answer any questions you might have.

[37:44] Thank you.

[37:47] All right. Any other comments? All right. If there are none, we'll close the public hearing. And we'll now consider on first reading resolution 26 or PSA 30. And this is for the plan of services in the annexation.

[37:59] So moved.

[38:00] Excuse me. This is resolution 2631.

[38:05] Um, that is for the plan of services and the annexation.

[38:09] So moved.

[38:10] Second motion and second. Please call the roll, Miss Harris.

[38:13] Hi, Mr. Maxwell, I vice mayor Shapleigh. Hi, Mr. Wade. Mr. Wright. Hi, mayor McFarland.

[38:19] All right. All right. We'll now move to the rezoning of 16.78 acres simultaneous with annexation, Mr. Bromley.

[38:26] Thank you, mayor McFarland.

[38:27] Our final public hearing tonight is the companion zoning request for the same 16.78 acres located along the east side of Shelbyville Pike. Um, went over the the surrounding land uses during my last presentation. The surrounding zoning, of course, to the south and to the east is still unincorporated, um land in the. In Rutherford County to the south is, I believe, a contractor's office with some outdoor storage. You can see that on the aerial photo. There are large lots, single family residences across Shelbyville Pike to the west. However, to the northwest is the Murfreesboro Medical Clinic, zone CF and some undeveloped property. Zone H to the immediately to the north is zoned C.H., as I mentioned, the Pep Boys and the racetrack, and then PRD, which is the Tiger Hill Townhomes development, which is currently under development. The request is to zone this property to PCD planned commercial district, simultaneous with its annexation for the development of a Lowe's Home Center. It would include both the home center and a garden center, and in a moment, the applicant will go over the plan in greater detail. I will mention that the area is identified on the future land use map as future study area. As I alluded to earlier, which essentially means that it's outside of the service infill boundary. Um.

[40:04] Another thing that I did want to mention, a change, um, that they are requesting the city council consider, uh, between when it went to planning Commission and when it's before the city council tonight. They identified in their pattern book when they went to planning commission that they would like for their temporary seasonal outdoor display area. Um, a total of five months from March to July. Um, for their, I guess, the spring outdoor inventory that they that they wanted to keep outside at the planning commission meeting. Um, they raised the, um They raised the issue that they wanted to also add November and December for, um, seasonal outdoor Christmas tree sales. And so, um, the Planning Commission heard that um, but did not include that in their, in their motion to approve. Um, so that being said, they kind of made a more formal ask and amended their pattern book to include those extra two months in their in their temporary outdoor display. Um, so that would be March through July and November and December. So they're requesting for seven months. And so that would be up to the city council as to whether or not to, uh, to grant that request. But I did want to point that out. That's a that's a difference between what went to planning commission and what's before you tonight.

[41:32] So can you can you say that difference one more time? March 4th of July. And now it's.

[41:37] Now they're asking to add November and December for seasonal Christmas tree sales outside. So um.

[41:46] That was talked about in Planning Commission.

[41:48] It was talked about. But we went we went back and watched the video. It was not included as a part of the motion. And um, and so because it wasn't specifically voted on, I think what went what was the result of that? Was that the five months, which was officially what was a part of their ask at the time, was what was forwarded to city council.

[42:12] It's in the book that we have, though, of course, tonight.

[42:15] Yes, they have amended their book in in the hopes that that you will grant their additional two months, but that is totally at your discretion. Um, Planning Commission did vote to recommend approval to, uh, to you at its June 3rd meeting after a public hearing. And now Mr. Todd Simmons with Friedland Kaufmann. I'd invite him to the lectern to make a presentation on the specifics of the development.

[42:53] Good evening again, Todd Simmons, Freeland and Kauffman, civil engineer for Lowe's. I've got with me this evening. I've got David Yost, who's with Lowe's Engineering Construction, and Trent Farrell, who's with Blue Ridge Architecture. If there's some questions that kind of gear more towards the the operation or the architectural, um, side of things that I can't answer. So appreciate the time this evening just, um, kind of want to I want to express Lowe's, um, really excitement about the potential to come here, have another store in the city. I believe that will provide a well needed, uh, service to the south end of town. So I appreciate you all here and our request this evening. So, um, we'll try to make this fairly quick. Um, I think we've got to assume you all have seen copies of the pattern book. So really going to just kind of focus on the site plan, unless you all want me to kind of double back on any of the other areas. I think, uh, uh, roughly 107,000 square foot kind of enclosed building, roughly a 30,000 square foot garden center. So, um, basically it's fairly common that's generally the size of all new Lowe's home centers that are built now. Uh, that is the standard size, um, really fairly, um, really enjoyed working with staff as to, to get to this point as it relates to our request, I think from a from a build architect architecture standpoint, I think we've we've landed on, uh, a good layout, a good, uh, a good mix of what we got. I think you'll note in the exceptions we did request for the use of quick brick, which I guess is more of a modular, uh, unit rather than than an actual brick for the north, the west, and the south sides of the building. An integrally coloured CMU kind of on the on the east side. Um, I think worked extensively with staff as it relates to outdoor sales, storage and display. Um, obviously a very important part of, of our business and kind of, kind of noted that on the plan, we've obviously got kind of the front sidewalk areas, identified grills, lawnmowers, things of that nature. Um, we've got kind of an area right up here, which would be for the sheds and utility trailers. Um, and then and all of these are kind of the permanent areas. And then we've got a permanent area here on the side of the garden centre, which is really more of what we would call our quick load areas for our, um, skew items that are sold. So those are mostly your, your mulch items during springtime sales, etcetera. So, uh, one thing we did kind of working with staff and kind of understanding, Kind of what what the city is looking for is we did integrate a screen wall here coming off the garden center in this location and this location to try to help screen that material from from view from the parking lot. Um, and then so as was indicated, the seasonal area is a five month request, which is, uh, from a site layout standpoint, we think it worked out pretty well for kind of an isolated area here that would be used for those months. I think we showed starting in March through the end of July, kind of enclosed in a black fencing material here to kind of help screen that, but really have have that area for, for that kind of spring rush that we have. And then this is also the area that, uh, that we were proposing to add the November and December for Christmas tree sales again, in this area, kind of separated from the the general overflow or the general parking lot items here. So, um.

[46:36] Additional exceptions. I think the other one just trying to hit on those foundation plantings, obviously with this type of big box store, um, you know, worked with staff to basically relocate foundation plantings, not not eliminate. So I think there was some that normally would have been required here that have been have been modified and uh, really kind of added areas here on the South and then kind of work through the areas on the front to be able to do that. So, um.

[47:06] Traffic wise, I will kind of note access points, um, because we've worked pretty extensively with D.O.T. and city staff as it relates to that. Obviously we've done a traffic study, got that approval. We have done preliminary, basically pretty detailed offsite roadway plans that have been submitted to T, Dot and city and waiting on comments for those now. But basically what that amounts to is kind of what we call a ride in, ride out, left in motion movement here that we do anticipate would be signalized. Uh, so it would allow um, motorists going southbound on Shelbyville to be able to turn in, but, uh, you would not be able to turn left out of the Lowe's to go southbound on Shelbyville. So, um, what that does also is volunteer, and I think you all probably know. So volunteer. And then the signalized intersection up here between Pep Boys and, uh, the racetrack, I think pretty, pretty close here. So working with them, we came up with a, a, um, similar type thing that we're doing here. We're, we're going to eliminate the left, turn out a volunteer, which we think will probably help the overall, uh, workings of that intersection. Um, but then volunteer, they can go southbound, but would eliminate that left down movement, left out movement there. And then finally we've got a access connection to Christie Norway, which is here. That would give us access to the signal that comes out here between Pep Boys and the racetrack. Um, with that, um, a couple other things to point out. I think as we, as we worked, um, here to kind of try to dress up the look along Shelbyville Pike, we are proposing a fence that's in kind with what the Walmart development has down the road, which is kind of the pilaster with, uh, split, split rail fencing, uh, here, supplemented with landscaping. Uh, and then we do have kind of a stormwater management facility that would also provide some buffer between the roadway and the parking facility itself. Um, and look at.

[49:15] This just kind of shows you probably worth noting. So the area in red is, uh, the red and blue combined is the entire property. Uh, the blue is what we're asking for. The annexation and rezoning. The red would stay in the county and would be seller's residual property. Um, so this this little section right here. Um, actually will, um, will be maintained by the seller, and we would have an access easement across that. So, uh, this provides this show and provide them the frontage that this would need to, to meet city requirements. Um, one thing I didn't point out earlier, there is a colonial gas transmission line that runs through here and bisects the property. Uh, we've been in constant communication with with them, have met on site with colonial, uh, done some hydro excavating, done some kind of digging to to make sure where their lines are and make sure we're not impacting those. And then I think there was mention about the sewer, just to kind of give you an idea of this, where the sewer is, there's a sewer manhole up in this area here that the plan is to extend sewer kind of along Um, Shelbyville and then come up to. To serve the store this way. So, uh, kind of work that out. Worked with colonial about crossing their line. So we feel we feel good that we've kind of got, uh, that concept pretty well nailed down at this point.

[50:34] Really? Just kind of a landscape plan. Obviously we'll we'll meet or exceed the current codes, but this was intended to, to comply with that. Um.

[50:46] The building, um, there's the building. Like I said, the architect is here to answer any questions you might have on that. We think, obviously, we believe this is a good looking building that will be an asset to the city. Um, with that, I think I will stop presenting and, uh, happy to answer any questions if you guys might have any.

[51:04] The only question we've had a lot of discussions, not just with Lowe's, but a lot of organizations that have used their parking lots for storage. Um, so just for the record, the area that you guys have designated for the seventh seven month, um, variance for storage. That will be the only area in your parking lot that will ever have rental equipment, trees, mulch, uh, anything that would be for sale would just be in that area.

[51:39] Close, but not quite. So, um, so I guess it probably shows up better on the site plan. Um, maybe you can see it. So we've got these spaces right here. You all probably noticed, you know, sheds and utility trailers. Yeah. We would be proposing to put the sheds and utility trailers in those spaces there, and then these spaces along the garden center on both sides, those we are designated as permanent. So that's where we're planning to put the mulch. And that's why we're have kind of provided the the screen walls here, because they are going to be more permanent in nature to try to screen that material. But but give that so. And we do believe it provides good service to somebody who wants to come in and buy 50 bags of mulch, right? To be able to drive through there, load them quickly and get them out.

[52:27] I just think it's good for us that, you know, we get asked these questions sometimes from competitors who will ask, well, why are they allowed to do it? And we're not. So, you know, our team will be able to go back and see that we've had this discussion. Because sometimes what happens after this is past. Maybe the general manager of the store, it slowly creeps to one aisle and into a second aisle. And so it would be great to say the areas that are shaded in this site plan. That's the only places that we that can be used for lawn mowers. All any, all things are for rent or for sale.

[53:08] Understand your concern. You know obviously we do. At the end we put a document together and say this is what you're allowed. But obviously new store managers come in and and full transparency. Sure, we'll all have to help police that I think. But yeah. But yes, I think this does kind of at least put something on paper that these are the allowed areas.

[53:31] All right.

[53:32] Any other questions before the public hearing.

[53:36] I guess on the additional two months. Is that what we're letting the Loews on Old Fort do in November and December for Christmas trees? Do we let Home Depot your competitor, do that? I'm just going from a fair is fair. We're looking at two very similar businesses.

[53:56] Mr. Romney.

[54:02] So it's my understanding Mr. Newman was working closely with Lowe's at their existing location. It's my understanding that.

[54:10] That.

[54:11] Three months was what they were allowed at that location, and that was brought up during the Planning Commission meeting. I think the Planning Commission's opinion was that because this site was designed with that storage in mind, as opposed to the storage kind of haphazardly happening after the fact, that it was more acceptable for a longer period at this store just because it was being done purposefully as opposed to haphazardly. Home depot. Um, I don't know if the top of my head. I know our, um, our inspectors have been working with Home Depot, and I think they've they've done quite a bit of work in getting Home Depot cleaned up. They had a, you know, a lot of construction equipment and, and trailers and back. Yeah. And I think as at least as of a few months ago, I think they had moved all of those off site. And um, Home Depot was waiting on, um, kind of some internal direction to determine how they wanted to, proceed, but we have not had any contact with them in several months. About. About them bringing those back in.

[55:18] This is much better in my opinion, going through where you're designating and showing this on the plan as opposed to, you know, I know Kelton just came through or not. Ace hardware, the new Ace Hardware on Memorial, they came through, did an outdoor area, designated their area. But what you hate to see is, you know, 404 hundred parking spots, and then it turns into 200 after you're using it for outdoor storage.

[55:43] So.

[55:43] Yes, sir. And we were, um, we're we're well aware of that. It's it's it it can be kind of a constant battle. And, um, so we were we were very intentional with them during this process to make sure that it was done in a very thoughtful way.

[55:58] Yeah.

[55:58] So so Lowe's old Ford is three months and this will be five months plus the months in November December.

[56:09] But to be fair though, those other stores, they don't have any designated. They would have to redo a site plan, come back with a new site plan and show. This is going to be designated area.

[56:23] And they've they've done that several times and we've worked with them. But still it's kind of it's kind of fitting a square peg into a round hole sometimes with, with a site that really wasn't meant for it. And so we try to work with them as best we can. But, um, you know, it's within reason, I suppose.

[56:46] All right, let's have the public hearing. Uh, anyone wish to speak for or against the rezoning of this 616.78 acres? Please come to the podium.

[57:00] Mr. mayor.

[57:01] Members of the council, I'm Joe EPP, 1501 Cripple Creek.

[57:04] Road.

[57:05] I'm also CEO of Murfreesboro Medical Clinic. I'm glad I came tonight and first for all of the excitement earlier, but now I wanted to see how this development would improve the access to Volunteer Road and come to find out, it's going to destroy the ability of getting in and out of Volunteer Road and turning left headed back north where many of our patients may choose to come from. I think about the creation of a left turn, no left turn lane like you just did on Medical Center Parkway, coming out of the fountains, and you took a what was a pretty safe left turn lane out of the middle, moved it closer to Broad Street, and now you have a very short line of sight to turn left on Medical Center, heading toward broad. I see the same situation, and what could have been a site plan that aligned with volunteer does it, and created a little better intersection for both MCs and the Lowe's traffic. But this situation where the turn lane that we had to put in a few years ago when we developed that lot, is now essentially being destroyed. The ability to turn left out of that. I'm not aware of a lot of accidents that happened there now or since we've been open. Also, the residents of volunteer are county residents, so they don't have a voice in this. When you're going to tell them, they're all going to have to turn right out of their road, going home and can't turn left to go into work. Whatever they want to do, if they want to go to Murfreesboro, it's just a pretty disappointing design in my mind and what it does to disrupt our business and our patience and the traffic that's coming out of volunteer. Thank you.

[58:48] Anyone else wishing to speak for or against?

[58:53] All right. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing. We'll now consider on first reading ordinance 26001.

[59:01] We had talked. Thank you for speaking, Mr. P. We had spoken. Planning Commission about giving access to MC on the back side on where the intersection is on Tiger Hill. I don't remember where we ended up with that.

[59:17] The gentleman before mentioned the gas pipeline when we approached Colonial Colonial about building the bridge over the pipeline. It was going to be basically a a federal process. They were not in favour of it. The cost that was going to be required to meet their standards to go over it. I guess Lowe's is getting across that somehow with their building. The easement that he mentioned to access the existing road, that's not going to be an inexpensive endeavor to do that. And once that that was learned in Colonials objections, the city removed that requirement for us to build the bridge in conjunction with the developers that are doing the Wawa and the McDonald's to the north of our property.

[1:00:04] Thank you. Thank you.

[1:00:12] We had that. That was discussed at Planning Commission about MSI's clientele losing access to come back towards town.

[1:00:23] That the only option that you guys put out?

[1:00:25] Yeah, the storage and some of the split rail fence was discussed about also that the the fencing being similar to the fencing at Walmart. That was a lot of discussion that that was deemed very similar. But the traffic was discussed. So his.

[1:00:45] Point.

[1:00:45] Is there a better way to design that. And I'm not an engineer.

[1:00:50] Not either.

[1:00:52] I don't I don't see anybody here from traffic. But I think this.

[1:00:55] Is a requirement from t dot to dot was not going to they were not going to let us align volunteer with an entrance into Lowes. I don't know if the developer's engineer. Can can speak to that, but the way this is going to be designed to work is kind of like what we did on Asbury with medicine. You got to go down to the to the light. Take a a U-turn. So if you're wanting to go left out of volunteer, you're going to have to take a right and it's going to be designed with a U-turn at the signal at the entrance into Lowes. And that was not a it was not anything. The city was teed up, basically said, this is the way you're going to have to do it to allow this development here.

[1:01:42] Yeah. Just add a little bit of color to that. I mean, it was obviously through a number of iterations to to get where we are from, from an access standpoint. And, you know, probably the first iteration was, um, having access down here and having access to lines with a volunteer, and I think if I understood Doc's concerns correctly, it was the proximity to the existing signal and obviously Wawa and that development coming in that they didn't want another full access there, so they would not allow us to align with volunteer and kind of pushed us to, to really this, this design. So, um, you know, as it was mentioned, the idea would be if you're coming out of volunteer to go northbound, you come to to this, this will be signalized. So you'll have a, a safe movement to make this U-turn movement. So this will be a, a U-turn movement, either a U-turn or a left turn into the Lowe's. But it will be signalized.

[1:02:36] It will be signalized.

[1:02:37] Yes. Yes. Okay.

[1:02:40] T Dot has gotten much more strict about their civilization spacing. Uh, they're they're not letting. If you're not, I think they prefer somewhere around 15 to 1600ft between signals now. And if you're inside of that, uh, they they are, they call them J turns. I, they look like u turns to me. I don't know why they're called j turns, but they, they are starting to create that, uh, spacing between the signals so that you have that safe movement and you don't have as many left turns for those broadside potential crashes.

[1:03:20] So we're having to coordinate a lot of a to a much greater degree with t dot. Now, when we're talking about developments on state highways because they are dictating access much, much stricter.

[1:03:34] Yeah, I think it's fair to say to it, especially if that's going to be a signalized intersection further south. You know, you have a lot of people who use Volunteer Road, being one of those people who go to a ball tournament out at Barfield Park, and you have all of the ball games that leave At the same time, you have a lot of people who will back up at volunteer. They're trying to get across 231 to get back in to Murfreesboro, because that back that's the back entrance for Barfield that a lot of people will use to not have to go on to, um, Veterans Parkway, I guess is what it's not Barfield Road anymore. It's Veterans Parkway. So that makes me feel better. If you've got that, that's going to be a signalized intersection. Um, for people to be, to be able to get to get back around.

[1:04:27] So they would get an arrow and whip around.

[1:04:32] And I think it is fair to dot on all of their curb cuts on state roads. It's gotten extremely difficult with any even any city project.

[1:04:50] Any questions?

[1:05:09] We we've already we did the public hearing on the rezoning. Yeah.

[1:05:15] So and just a reminder to make sure the motion includes either the five or the seven months.

[1:05:22] Jeff I did close the public hearing. Didn't unless I meant along.

[1:05:26] Now I don't remember. Well.

[1:05:29] Public hearing is closed for the second time. So.

[1:05:33] Yeah.

[1:05:35] All right.

[1:05:40] Any discussion? S11:

[1:05:42] So the motion should include 5 or 7 months. The five is originally or the additional two, which would make it seven that they're asking for.

[1:05:51] I mean, I think this what we have had before us is the seven month. That's what's in the plan book. So I don't think we have to have an amendment that we what we've got before us is the seven months.

[1:06:03] And the planning Commission was good with seven months. I guess it just wasn't in the motion.

[1:06:07] Okay.

[1:06:10] Well, I.

[1:06:11] Hate to see that this imposes a problem on this piece business. They've been a valuable part of our community for a long period of time, but I do. We have it. We don't have a choice to say, come up with another solution. If he don't, we have to approve what TIF basically is telling us we have to do.

[1:06:36] Correct. There's no there's no other there's no other option as as far as ingress egress off of the volunteer when it comes to 231.

[1:07:03] I'll make a motion that we approve the seven day. And this was the seven days of approval.

[1:07:11] We. It's already in there. So we don't need the.

[1:07:15] We don't.

[1:07:15] Need it. Yes. Just. Okay. Yeah. Just a motion to approve.

[1:07:18] Okay. I'll make a motion.

[1:07:19] We approve.

[1:07:19] Okay. Thanks. Bill. We have a motion of a second. Second motion and second. Mr. Tucker, please call the roll.

[1:07:27] Mr. Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell.

[1:07:30] Hi.

[1:07:30] Vice mayor. Aye. Mr. Wade. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[1:07:35] Aye.

[1:07:36] All right. Let's move to resolution 2631. Water resources, fiscal year 27, budget, first amendment.

[1:07:43] Yes. We have a budget amendment tonight for water resources. This budget reduces total expenditures by 5.7 million and brings their budget in compliance with the state's requirements regarding depreciation expense. I'm happy to answer any questions and recommend for approval.

[1:08:01] Any questions for Mr.

[1:08:03] Tucker? S14:

[1:08:06] Uh, they spread it around several things wages, contractual services, I think, um, repairs and maintenance as well. Um, Doug, do you remember if there were any additional. I believe it's wages were the primary area. They and they're saying the same thing we're saying, which is payroll slippage.

[1:08:26] So payroll.

[1:08:28] So moved.

[1:08:29] Second motion and second. Please call the roll.

[1:08:32] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. Hi, Mr. Mayor. Hi, Mr. Wright. Uh, mayor McFarland.

[1:08:38] Hi. All right, let's move to ordinance 2603 for adoption of the building and codes.

[1:08:44] Good evening, Mayor and Council.

[1:08:46] The Building and Codes Department currently maintains exemptions.

[1:08:49] From the state of Tennessee that allow the city to perform commercial plan reviews and inspections, as well as residential building inspections and permitting. To maintain these exemptions, the city must adopt building codes that are within seven years of the most recently published code additions, which will soon be the 2027 code. We currently are under the 2018 codes. To satisfy this requirement, the city is proposing to adopt the 2024 editions of the International Building Codes and the 2023 National Electric Code. Rutherford County and the cities of Smyrna and Laverne have recently adopted the 2024 International Code Series as well. Updating the city codes will provide greater consistency and predictability for builders, contractors, developers, and design professionals working throughout Middle Tennessee. City staff have met with the Rutherford County Codes Association, members of the Home Builders Association of Middle Tennessee, and the city's Electric Board of Examiners to review the proposed code updates, discuss potential impacts, and evaluate local code amendments. Adoption of the 2024 International Code Series will maintain the city's state exemptions, while promoting consistency with neighboring jurisdictions and current industry standards. Glad to answer any questions.

[1:10:04] So moved.

[1:10:05] Second motion and second. Please call the.

[1:10:07] Roll.

[1:10:08] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. Vice mayor Charlotte. Hi, Mr.. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[1:10:14] All right. All right. Thank you. Kevin. All right. Let's move to, um, the purchase of a combination sewer street cleaner. Sheldon.

[1:10:22] Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Carson Elder, assistant director for the street department. We are requesting your approval to purchase a new combination sewer cleaner. This truck will be utilized by our stormwater crew to clean and remove sediment and debris from catch basins, drainage structures, culverts, and other stormwater infrastructure. This truck will be purchased from jetpack. Equipment through the source cooperative contract in the amount of $664,993.

[1:10:52] This is a budgeted expense paid from the fiscal year 27 stormwater fund. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

[1:11:01] So moved.

[1:11:03] Second motion and second. Please call the roll.

[1:11:05] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. Mr. mayor. Aye. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland. All right.

[1:11:12] All right, let's move to the purchase of a service truck. And you have a revised, um, communication that is on our desk, Mr. Miller.

[1:11:22] Yes, sir.

[1:11:23] Good evening, Mayor and Council.

[1:11:27] For your consideration is the purchase of a Chevrolet four wheel drive medium duty service truck from Donahue Chevrolet. The expense of $49,700 is funded from the FY 27 CIP fund.

[1:11:46] Any questions for Mr.

[1:11:49] Miller? S14:

[1:11:53] Second motion and second. Please call the roll.

[1:11:56] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. Hi. Vice mayor Shockley. Hi, Mr. Wade. Mr. Wright. Hi. Mayor McFarland.

[1:12:03] All right. All right. All right. Let's move to agreement with, hmm. Professional engineers, Mr. Miller.

[1:12:08] Also, for your consideration, the approval for and in agreement with HMD Professional Engineers, LLC. For engineering services for the fleet service parking lot expansion and side improvement. Um, the engineering service fees are $60,000 and is included in the FY 26 CIP.

[1:12:35] The proposed improvements are estimated at S14:

[1:12:42] I'll be glad to answer any questions.

[1:12:46] Any questions for Mr.

[1:12:48] Miller? S19:

[1:12:49] Second motion and second.

[1:12:51] Miss singer's I, Mr. Maxwell. Vice mayor. Charlotte. Hi. Mr. Wade. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[1:12:59] Hi.

[1:13:00] Thank you, Mr. Miller. All right, let's move to item 23, Water Resources code boundary, amendment number 12. Miss Smith.

[1:13:07] Good evening. Council. Mayor. It's starting. Okay. Um, periodically we have boundary amendments, um, between Murfreesboro and Consolidated Utility District, uh, which typically would amend the boundary to assist the developer. In this case, um, the consolidated utility district. Um, Currently can't serve phase one of the development, so I'll go ahead to the next slide.

[1:13:44] As you can see, the, uh, Rutherford Boulevard is on the far left. And the blue area that is shaded is Murfreesboro water current water service area. The area highlighted in pink is within our area right now. And we are proposing to, uh, I guess, change the boundary for that to become, uh, served by a consolidated utility district. However, right now it will be with phase one of this development which we have been working with. Staff has been working with Murfreesboro SCC and Mr. Berryman, who is the development of the proposed middle Max subdivision here to um, service phase one of his development with Murfreesboro Water. Even though we are proposing to give up some of our service area to consolidate utility district. Phase two of the project goes from left to right across the page up to Elam Road, which is in the top far right corner and Consolidated Utility District has a large enough line along Elam Road to serve the phase two of the development, so they wished not to turn over any of their area to us to serve, knowing that they can serve the majority of the area with their line with phase two. So Cuddy would gain approximately two and a half acres, um, that would serve three of the lots that are on the cul de sac, uh, pointing to the southern part of this exhibit. Um, those those lots will face the cul de sac. And and so we will work out with consolidated Utility District how to um, best serve those three lots with Murfreesboro water. But, um, you know, they would be consolidated utility district customers. Staff was in agreement with this. Uh, the Water Resources Board also, um, recommended approval at the July meeting. So we would request for the area in pink to be dedicated to consolidated utility districts. Service area.

[1:16:10] Any questions?

[1:16:12] So moved.

[1:16:13] Second motion and second. Please call the.

[1:16:14] Roll.

[1:16:15] Miss Harris, Mr. Maxwell, I vice mayor. Mr. white, Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[1:16:22] Hi.

[1:16:23] All right, let's move to water resource recovery facility. Biosolids dryer SSR, task order amendment number three.

[1:16:29] Yes. Um, this task order tonight is, um, I guess SSR was bringing, uh, to us hat in hand. A lot of this amendment, uh, was not of things that they may have missed during design or issues that they had during construction. Um, with their design. Part of these are, uh, in the majority of these are them trying to move the project forward, uh, and work through issues that the contractor had with non conformance on their construction changes with Carmine Sanderson, who is the dryer manufacturer? Design changes. Uh, changes in the process with an RFP from the contractor. So SSR basically has had to, um, I guess, uh, do quality control on the design changes review RFCs in addition to what they normally would and are in all of these areas instrumentation and controls, structural process, and then electrical as well. So the amendment tonight is $196,240.

[1:17:46] Um, we have talked with the legal department knowing that some of these were out of our control and out of SRS control, but we feel like to move the project forward. We need to, um, actually keep the project moving forward. We're about 21 million in to a 33, $33 million project. And we can look at through the contract documents, you know, if if these costs and the city feels like that, that the city shouldn't be responsible for them. We can look at the contract and request these to be come from the contractor. But for tonight, we request that amendment three for SSR task order be amendment to include this amount. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[1:18:40] Any questions for Miss Smith?

[1:18:42] Move for approval.

[1:18:44] Second motion and second. Please call the.

[1:18:45] Roll.

[1:18:46] Miss Harris. Hi. Mr. Maxwell, vice mayor Charlotte. Hi, Mr. Wade. All right, Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[1:18:53] All right, all right, let's move to water resource recovery facility. Wet weather upgrades. SSR to amendment number three, Miss Smith.

[1:19:01] Similar to the dryer project, there have also been discrepancies with the wet weather upgrade project that have been beyond what SSR original scope is. Some of those are structural discrepancies. There were six in total. Um, and some of these we found during construction that were, um, you know, of nobody's fault. Um, cracks in the existing filter walls. We, uh, had SSR evaluate those and, um, decide if they were going to be an issue moving forward and whether they needed to be repaired with this project. Uh, SSR did review bypass pump alternatives. So the contractor during the construction is going to have to completely bypass 1 or 2 of the processes at the plant, um, so they can work on a particular area. And then one thing that was not known by the contractor or SSR, because it was not divulged by our UV, um, supplier, is that the cabling for our new UV channels were planned to be routed with the existing cabling for the our existing UV channels. And the UV manufacturer came back and said that you shouldn't root the cabling and the wiring for those in the same conduits because of the fear of overheating. And so we've had to redesign the route of that cabling. Um, and SSR has been involved in that as well. We will be bringing back in for that UV cabling design, in particular, a change order for additional time, uh, for the contractor to install the cabling. The extra expense for that will come back to you all through the use of the contingency fund. But for now, we request that amendment number three, um, be approved in the amount of $110,000.

[1:21:09] I'd be happy to answer any of your questions.

[1:21:14] No questions. I'll move for approval.

[1:21:20] Motion of second. Please call the.

[1:21:21] Roll.

[1:21:21] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr.. Maxwell.

[1:21:24] I.

[1:21:24] Vice mayor Charlotte. Hi, Mr. Wade. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[1:21:29] All right.

[1:21:29] And we're also.

[1:21:30] Going.

[1:21:30] To try to see if we can.

[1:21:32] Recruit.

[1:21:32] This money as.

[1:21:33] Well.

[1:21:34] Yes. Best wishes of the council.

[1:21:37] All right, let's move. Thank you, Miss Smith. All right, let's move to item 26. Funding. Statewide partnership program. Memorial Boulevard widening.

[1:21:44] Mayor. Councilman, thank you for the opportunity to present this tonight. This is a statewide partnership program. It's Memorial Boulevard. We applied for this last year, and we're unsuccessful to get on the T dot's five year plan. So this is a second swing at trying to, uh, put some local money into a project that would get a two lane or two lane road from Thompson Lane to Jefferson Pike into a five lane cross section. We know that when Cherry Lane is built over the next 2 to 3 years. Putting a five lane road into a two lane road is not good. That's going to create a real traffic congestion problem. So we are asking again. We've already got $3.9 million in proceeds allocated to this project, but we're asking council to approve a future $21.1 million borrow, bringing the total commitment to a $25 million local match on a proposed $62.9 million project. So it our 25 million would represent about 40% of the total of the total project cost.

[1:22:55] What was it last time there when they said no? Are we going up? We did it for our commitment.

[1:23:01] We have not. We stayed at 25. We actually had a meeting with them today, and we are meeting with some county representatives next Tuesday to again to try to see if the county can put some. We really would like to see the county go to help fund the section between the East Fork River bridge up to the intersection at Walter Hill. That's about 20% of the length of the project. If they could put 5 or 6 million into that as well. So we could get to that 30 to 31 million. Based on the meeting we had today that looked they current, Jim Kerr and I talked afterwards and we thought it was a very good meeting. So we think that if we get to that 30, 31 million mark, we think that we could have a real shot at getting on the five year plan.

[1:23:55] Any questions for Mr.

[1:23:59] Gore? S7:

[1:24:00] Motion and second, please call the.

[1:24:01] Roll.

[1:24:03] Miss Harris. Hi. Mr. Maxwell, vice mayor. Mr. Wade. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[1:24:10] I have one boarding commission appointment recommendation. After many, many years, Jeff Davis is asking to roll off the Historical Zoning Commission. Mr. Dayton Brown is a downtown resident, but also also recommended he is a contractor, and Mr. Davis had thought it would be very beneficial. With a lot of the things that come to the historical zoning commission, if they had someone living downtown that had construction experience to be able to to provide insight. So that's the recommendation.

[1:24:45] I'll move.

[1:24:46] Second.

[1:24:47] Motion a second. Please call the.

[1:24:48] Roll.

[1:24:48] Mr. Gill. Singers. All right, Mr. Maxwell, vice mayor Chatelet, Mr. Wade, Mr. Wright, mayor McFarland.

[1:24:55] Aye. All right. You have several beer permits?

[1:24:58] Yes, Tucker. We do. One is for an ownership change for a bar at 225 River Rock Boulevard. We also have an ownership change for a grocery at 1159 Northwest Broad. We have two new gas station locations one at 3355 Elam Road and the other at 5208 Veterans Parkway. And then we have a special event permit for the Ascension Saint Thomas Rutherford Foundation on October 24th for wine around the square. All applicants submit our requirements and we recommend approval pending any final building and codes inspections.

[1:25:34] Any questions? Second motion and second. Please call the.

[1:25:38] Roll.

[1:25:38] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. Hi. Vice mayor Shockley. Aye. Mr. white. Mr.. Right. Mayor McFarland.

[1:25:45] All right. All right. We'll move to two statements for legal fees that need to be paid.

[1:25:52] Any questions for Miss Tucker? S14:

[1:25:54] Second.

[1:25:54] Motion and second. Please call the roll.

[1:25:56] Miss Harris. Hi. Mr. Maxwell. Vice mayor Charlotte. Hi, Mr. Wade. All right, Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[1:26:03] All right.

[1:26:04] Um, you now have under other business fountain's phase two TIF reimbursement review. Mister court.

[1:26:11] Yes, sir. Council members. Mayor and council members. Thank you. This was normally, you know, we normally have our workshop on the second day of the month. So this is really more of a workshop item. It's not for your full consideration, but this is a preview of a of a upcoming ask that we will we will be bringing to you for consideration. But I wanted Mr. Scott Grabe is here. This is a TIF reimbursement proposal for the fountain's phase two. And it really does deal with the structured parking. And I've actually learned a lot through this process, even though I've spent two years on Keystone and they're Tiff issues. This one I wanted to really I'd talk to you all one on one about this, and I wanted to go through a real quick presentation on it. The, uh, the real the deal with the tiff is this. But for test. So a lot of I think a lot of the downtown tips we were talking about, we were really centering and focusing around the, the, the public need for parking and that these parking decks would provide a public, uh, improvement or public amenity for parking. That really isn't the question. Uh, the question is, is structured parking creates an extra ordinary cost that makes the TIF reimbursement eligible. And, uh, assistance is justified only through the statutory buffer test. And you may ask, why is there. Why is structured parking eligible? Well, it's because I'm just going to bring these two up. If you have surface parking, it's the lowest cost option developer. It's the lowest capital option. But it does provide for the least density on a piece of property. Structured parking adds millions and value to the to cost. But. And they're not easily paid for. You can't really pay back the parking deck with parking fees, so it does create an extra ordinary cost, but it allows for a significantly more dense development that creates more property tax and it creates more sales tax potential. This is a rendering of what it would look like with and without structured parking. You can see a scheme, a you can see the the the different amenities. Now we really are talking about, uh, building two a which is a two, you know, with structured parking, you get a 212,000 square foot, five story building with, with surface parking. You're only looking at a 400 zero square foot, two story building, and you can see the difference there. It's a $35 million asset that's built versus $115 million. So that that is about a 350% increase on property tax, uh valuation um the but for analysis. So if you don't allow. If we don't give the Tiff scheme a doesn't occur. You just can't get that kind of density without structure. Parking scheme B occurs. But it's. So it's a much much smaller scale. Uh scheme B shifts to that lower density development tax basis smaller as more land is consumed by the by the surface parking and scheme fails to secure the financing on the commercially reasonable terms to the gap. Right. That extraordinary cost in a multi-million dollar structured parking. So this is kind of the the different city annual. I didn't factor in the county tax revenues if you allowed for no tiff surface parking, 40,000 square foot building, you're looking at about $2.5 million in sales tax and property tax revenue over 30 years. If you look at the Tiff structured parking with the 212,000 square foot building, you do get three point 5,000,000/30 years. So there's a there's a pretty, pretty good increase there. But where you really hit the the I'm saying the accelerant is if you get you allow that hotel that structure parking allows a hotel to get there. Now that's not factored into the Tiff reimbursement right now because it is speculative, but it is planned and it can only be done with the structured parking. Um, so the Tiff outcomes, this is without the tiff, I won't go through these numbers. I just kind of went through them there in the presentation that you have here. But you can just see you're looking at a 40% increase city revenue with the Tiff 65 for the county. But you're looking with the hotel. If the hotel does come to fruition, you're looking at a 600% increase for the city and a 480% increase for the county revenue. So again, the statement in short. It's not the TIF really isn't based on the public benefit of parking. Structured parking creates that extraordinary financing gap. Without assistance, we go to a lower, lower density surface park development instead of the $115 million investment, it's 32 million. And so the TIF really does help enable the higher density mixed use project for that, that substantial increase in property values. Um, this is kind of a timeline that Mr. Grady provided, showing kind of the construction is on the bottom of the in the white blocks, and the ownership is on the red blocks or the burnt orange blocks on top. And you're seeing these, um, the mass timber erection, the atrium level construction and the condo finishes somewhere in the middle of 2028, if all goes well. So that's really it. Uh, and I'm open for for questions or comments or Mr. Graber, I'm sure, would be happy to chime in if he has anything to add. Again, this is just for information only at this time.

[1:32:08] Thank you, Mr. Gore.

[1:32:10] I would rename it instead of calling it scheme A, I'd call it plan A.

[1:32:15] Plan A.

[1:32:16] Instead of scheme. Yeah okay.

[1:32:18] We can do that. Bill's eyebrows go up when you said scheme.

[1:32:22] That's all.

[1:32:22] Understood. That's a yeah, that sounds a little too nefarious, I guess.

[1:32:28] Right? S1:

[1:32:30] Yes, sir. I one other thing. I'm sorry. I do want to address. Uh, I tried to kind of put the cool the back and forth down when we notified the county that a sewer variance was going to be required for them to, to to put a criminal or a justice center complex on the 52 acres off South Church Street. Uh, we let them know that based on the current, discharge of sewer from the jail, the existing jail, that it would be more the 52 acres. The allocation for sewer. It would not be enough to support a jail. Not only that jail, but a jail that's going to be bigger in size. So they came back in response a couple of days later trying to aggregate aggregate tracks. Talk about low flow fixtures. They talked about maybe even doing a hybrid system. We can put so much in the sewer and put so much into a a step system drip field, and I wanted your direction. I didn't respond back to that. I prepared a response, but I want to make sure that that you all are okay and and that for me to respond back to them at this point, to let them know that we do indeed see that Justice Center exceeding the allocation for that property that, um, they are going to they can't aggregate properties or transfer, uh, credits from one site to another. Uh, and that, uh, they, they will not be allowed sewer unless they come forward with the variance request and receive approval from this body, and they are invited to do so.

[1:34:17] Can I ask a question?

[1:34:19] Sure.

[1:34:19] What would we require? You know, I think the council has been pretty straightforward that whatever is required of others, we require the same for government. We don't write, we don't put rules in place and then say, that's for they, not for thee or not whatever. For other.

[1:34:40] To me, not for thee or thee, not for.

[1:34:41] Me. So if it was any other developer or government, what would we require?

[1:34:49] We would require them to solicit a sewer allocation variance from this body in the sewer allocation city code. The ordinance does not designate a free pass for any entity, so if it was ourselves, if it was a private development, if it was a state agency.

[1:35:12] So, for example, MTsU has got they're going to be building a hotel on the on the corner of Greenland and Middle Tennessee Boulevard, and they will be coming for a sewer variance.

[1:35:22] Yes, they will. And they had they actually had, if you remember, they had to come for a sewer variance for the, uh, the student housing, uh, complex that they're currently constructing out there as well.

[1:35:32] Okay.

[1:35:33] Haven't they come for that before? For like the schools where they've gotten access? I would assume they have asking mostly.

[1:35:40] Well, the last time the schools came, it was I think it was an outside city service request. So I don't know that they had to ask. I don't I don't think they actually had to ask for a variance. I think it was approving a development agreement to provide sewer to them outside the city limits.

[1:35:57] My whole view is if you got a low flush toilet, guess what happens? You flush it 2 or 3 times. I mean, you can say we're going to put in all this, but then today you're going to need a variance. And it's I'll just say this shouldn't say it. That's our busiest street in the city. We've already got the Regal in. Welcome to Murfreesboro. Look at the Regal in. And now let's look at the new jail. That's my $0.02 on it.

[1:36:28] Thanks, Alyssa. That's actually where I was going to. I mean, you got the busiest street in Murfreesboro that we would all like to see revitalized. You put a jail on that road revitalization.

[1:36:37] Over.

[1:36:38] Gone. So 77,000 cars a day, driving by the Regal in jail.

[1:36:44] As we talk about those, I think that all sort of ties into infrastructure. And you know what we would require of any other entity or developer that, you know, we passed that that sewer capacity ordinance back ten years ago to be able to say the city council has the opportunity to either give extra capacity or deny extra capacity. And so I think the thing that's important, and I don't want this to come off as any negative as the county and the city not working together, but this body put an ordinance in place. We have stuck to that ordinance and the process of that ordinance for almost ten years now, 2019. Yeah. So seven years now. And we don't bypass that even for ourselves. And so I think it's important, you know, I'm disappointed to some extent That you see. I thought your letter that you sent was just letting everyone know. Hey, here's the. Your job is to enforce the ordinances that this body passes. You don't get to pick and choose which ones you don't enforce. Absolutely. I guess you could do that, but you probably won't be doing it for very long.

[1:38:04] I wouldn't I wouldn't be in this position for very long.

[1:38:06] I hope the county understands that there's a process to go through, and if they want that process, they have to come through. I'm just concerned that and I appreciate Darren bringing this. What you don't want to happen is they go through that whole process and then the fingers pointed back at the city saying, well y'all, y'all are not giving us sewer. I think being transparent and open and letting everyone know this is the process that lets the commissioners know what's going on, it lets incoming administration know what's coming on, and then we can be very transparent on how that that works.

[1:38:39] Yes.

[1:38:41] The sewer allocation ordinance was set in place to protect the public welfare, to protect the sewer system, protect the treatment plant capacity. It's our probably one of our, if not our highest valued commodity. And we have you know, we we put that in place so that we would, um, distribute it in a proportionate manner that would not allow large developments to come in and take a disproportionate share.

[1:39:11] I think it's important for this body if everybody, everyone agrees. We are not saying that we will not give the county capacity, but what we are saying, you have to go through the same process. They are welcome to come make application to the water resources department, go through that part, that process, and then that can come to this body to either grant that capacity or not grant the capacity. But there is a process to follow.

[1:39:54] And I mean, is anyone on council wanting to bypass that process or or amend the ordinance for this process? S14:

[1:39:59] We have asked everyone to do that.

[1:40:01] So yeah.

[1:40:04] I mean, all the bifurcation that's taken part at MTsU with all of the apartment complexes for everyone to know. You know, when these complexes have gone from four rooms down to two, they've all had to come through and ask for that. MTsU has had to come and ask for it. We've asked everyone to come and ask for it.

[1:40:23] Yes.

[1:40:25] If if this development goes anywhere, it's the level of the development that we're talking about. So it would probably require a request for.

[1:40:36] Additional.

[1:40:37] Capacity if it was at another location.

[1:40:40] I you know, their current site, the new Salem Highway location. I know it was considered as an option to construct another jail. That was really the two options that were looked at was Church Street and and New Salem Highway. Uh, they would likely have to ask for if they're going to expand and create a new facility and expand the bed count. We would have to look at that acreage, I think, the same way. And how many acres and if it's zoned light industrial, uh, they they will have to. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say they're likely to have to come to, to, to do it, to do it on that side as well.

[1:41:19] And it's important to stress to the ratepayer of Murfreesboro expects us to maintain that system because, you know, all of these expansions that were were doing the ratepayer has to pay for that. So I think we're not asking Keeping the county aside. We're not asking anyone else to not follow the process. That has not been followed for seven years now.

[1:41:48] So correct.

[1:41:49] I don't think it would be fair for any organization to come and put the city council in a spot to say, we don't want to go through the process. And it's like, hey, you cannot go through the process, but you also proceed at your peril. If you start a project and you don't have utilities.

[1:42:09] Right. Okay. Okay.

[1:42:12] I think I received the direction I need.

[1:42:14] Yep. All right.

[1:42:16] Any other business from Staff council?

[1:42:19] I have two things. I was recognizing a new face. And when you were talking to the mayor before the meeting, I didn't.

[1:42:30] Are you our new recorder? Are you the new recorder? S1:

[1:42:31] Mr.

[1:42:32] Reese? S20:

[1:42:51] Yeah.

[1:42:52] Congratulations, Austin. Congratulations, Jamie. Jamie couldn't be here tonight, but, um, you know, I want to make one comment.

[1:43:00] I've got one, too. Yeah.

[1:43:01] I think we've all done this a long time. And I don't know that I can remember that I have ever had to ask people to leave, uh, our council chambers during the meeting. I think that is a first for me. So I think the residents of Murfreesboro expect anything to happen in this chamber. To happen with respect. Um, and I think you can go back and watch every meeting that this council has had. I think we always try to treat people with respect. I apologize if someone got offended that I opened my Diet Coke while they were speaking. I apologize for that. But one thing that we cannot have and we will not have, and I feel very certain the residents of Murfreesboro demand this. We're not going to have people who are going to call people names for speaking an opposing view. We're not going to have people who are going to call police officers in this room names and throw obscenities at them. That's not going to happen here. It can happen in other municipalities and you can watch it on TV, but it is not going to happen here. That's not what the residents of Murfreesboro expect. We will treat people with respect, and we expect people to treat others with that same exact respect. So moving forward, as we go through, if you come in this council chambers, um, you can get your point across to the council. Every single one of us will listen, but every other person that's in here has the right to do the exact same thing.

[1:44:26] So I agree. Um, you know, I had a statement. I'm going to kind of shorten it a little bit because it's been a long meeting. But I do want to thank everybody who came tonight to speak about, uh, flock cameras. You know, I appreciate them exercising their First Amendment right to speak. And, you know, I do respect their concerns even when we disagree. And we're not always going to agree on everything. But, you know, we saw this during the campaign. We saw it on social media. We saw name calling. We saw memes. Uh, we saw a little bit of that tonight. Some name calling. Somebody called somebody a boot licker just because they disagreed. Um, somebody cursed at one of our police officers. Um, dialogue creates change and better solutions. At the end of the day, I took a lot of notes. I've got some some questions to ask. Uh, but I do think in a way, the dialogue will help make this system Better, safer for everybody in Murfreesboro. And I think we're already doing a lot of the right things to make sure that the system is in place and protecting people and allowing the police and detectives that need to use it to use it appropriately. We already have those in place, so I thank them for coming. I thank them for sharing their concerns and comments. I don't thank them for some of the name calling and the rudeness that's not appropriate. I don't call them names. I'm not going to call them names. I would simply ask if they'd come back. Be respectful because I'll be just as respectful.

[1:46:10] Yes, sir.

[1:46:11] Just a reminder. Very conceptually, it kind of fits the mood anyway. Uh, our Citizens Academy is going to take the 2000. We're going to start the 2026 class. So I have we take applications until August the 20th. So if you'll go to the city's website and. It'll be Monday night starting in at. September the 14th through November the 2nd. And there are eight sessions. And you kind of pull back the curtain of how city is run. But I think what I saw as encouraging as anything, and it was kind of a reminder of what tonight is about. Uh, you know, the thing with human beings and there's an old movie that I remember that said, what we have here is a failure to communicate. Uh, we need to learn how to respectfully dialogue with each other and not necessarily assume the worst in someone else. And if we do that and contribute to the process and not assume the worst in the person that I'm talking to and really listen to what they're saying. we're not necessarily going to come to the same conclusion and agree. But hopefully, and I hope the culture of Murfreesboro will generate this, we can find a path forward. It is in the best interest of all of our citizens. No one's trying to stuff something down somebody's throat. We're trying to figure this out. This is new technology. What we heard about today, new technology. And after having spoken to a lot of different people on both sides of this issue, and I encourage you all, if you're on one side of the issue, come to speak to the council in general, but pick up the phone and call us and talk to us. I can't, I don't know a single one of my colleagues here that would not be willing to talk to you about these, the issues that are on your heart. Again, we we either have a lack of information or maybe don't have proper information. But if you'll respectfully dialogue with us, we can find a path forward. And I can promise you that the six and seven of us that are up here.

[1:48:39] Are.

[1:48:40] Trying to do what is in the best interest of our community. I thought there were some very well spoken that set up the dialogue, quite honestly. Public safety versus privacy. That's basically what we're talking about public safety versus priority. And both of those goals should be something that every single one of us in Murfreesboro should be striving for, to have a safe community that we live in and protect the privacy of our citizens. But if we'll listen to each other and we'll really commit ourselves to the process, I think we'll find a path forward. And I again, want to encourage you to if you want to get more involved and more knowledgeable about how the city runs, make application to the Citizen's Academy. We'll end that. Take applications up through the 20th, and then 25 people will be chosen to be the class of 2026. And like I say, you'll not only get to know a little bit better the people that are serving you in a staff position as an employee of the city or as a representative elected representative, but you'll get to know some of the other citizens. I saw some of the neatest conversations happen after the meeting had broken up. After we finished our sessions, citizens were talking to each other, finding ways to to represent their particular positions on an issue that we were discussing that evening. So I'll shut up and say Amen.

[1:50:13] Two quick things. Um, said congratulations to Chris Griffith, but also Bart fight. Um, yeah. After 40.

[1:50:22] How many years?

[1:50:23] Yeah, 49 years. Retired from sports comm. Uh, Bart is a living legend in sports. Sports comm. Yeah. Uh, and then also the, uh, Murfreesboro Little League team. I think we're going to do our best to have him them to city council. But the 14, uh, you Murfreesboro Little League team competed in the World Series this week and represented Murfreesboro. Well, he ended up going two and two. Um, but, uh, they had an escort out of Murfreesboro. Our our MPD escorted them from sports comm to the city limits. So we want to say thank thank you to those young men for representing Murfreesboro. They were on ESPN plus all four games. So it was pretty cool watching and seeing, uh, say Murfreesboro, Tennessee there. So, uh, lots of good stuff.

[1:51:09] And one wanted to note the passing of Larry Kirk are a long time Murfreesboro electric department. Larry was not only an avid Blue Raider fan, but he was a long time public servant to our community and want to offer our condolences to his family and particularly to Cathy Asawa.

[1:51:29] Also, real quick, want to congratulate Jim Kerr for his promotion in the Executive Director of Public infrastructure position. He's replacing Chris.

[1:51:39] So awesome.

[1:51:41] All right. No other business will stand adjourned.

City Council (8/13/26)

Transcript