[0:16] Welcome to the Murfreesboro City Council meeting is September 3rd, 2026. Councilman Sean Wright has our prayer and our pledge.

[0:24] Our Heavenly Father, thank you for giving us the privilege of serving the great people of Murfreesboro. Please give us wisdom as we make decisions tonight. Congratulate my fellow servants as they got sworn in this morning. Uh, please be with those who have spoken and unspoken prayers, Lord. It's your name I pray. Amen.

[0:41] Amen.

[0:46] I pledge allegiance to.

[0:48] 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.

[1:02] All right, let's move to our consent agenda. You have 11 items on the consent agenda.

[1:14] Is there anything that needs to be removed for discussion? S1:

[1:17] Miss. Water. Miss Harris. Mr.. Maxwell. Aye. vice mayor Shacklett. Hi, Mr.. Wade. Mr.. Wright, mayor MacFarlane.

[1:26] I. All right, let's move to land use matters. You have ordinance 260 Z 29 rezoning of property along Elam Road and Jody Jackson Parkway Parkway. This is second and final reading.

[1:38] So moved. Second.

[1:40] Motion a second, please call the roll.

[1:42] Miss. Overwater, I miss Harris, Mr.. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Mr.. Wade. Mr.. Wright. Aye. Mayor McFarland.

[1:50] Aye. All right. Item 13, ordinance 2603 30. Zoning for property along Franklin Road, Gresham Lane and Ulmer Night Drive. This is second and final reading.

[1:58] Move for approval.

[1:59] Second.

[2:00] Motion a second. Please call the roll.

[2:02] Miss. Overwater. Miss. Harris. Mr.. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Mr.. Wade. Mr.. Wright, mayor McFarland.

[2:10] Aye. All right. Item 14, ordinance 26031. Zoning for property along Shelbyville Pike. This is second and final reading.

[2:19] So moved.

[2:20] So second motion in a second. Please call the roll.

[2:23] Miss. Overwater. Miss Harris. Mr.. Maxwell. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Mr.. Wade. Mr.. Wright. Mayor MacFarlane.

[2:31] I. Ordinance 26/28. Rezoning of property located along Rush Wood Drive and. This is second and final reading.

[2:41] So moved.

[2:42] Motion. Motion and a second. Please call the roll.

[2:46] Miss. Overwater. I miss Harris. Mr. Maxwell? Aye. Vice mayor Shacklett. Aye. Mr. Wade. Aye. Mr.. Wright. Aye. Mayor McFarland.

[2:54] I. Ordinance 26026, amending the zoning ordinance. This is automotive, automotive, motor vehicle repair and services use. This is second and final reading.

[3:06] So moved. Second.

[3:09] Motion and second. Please call the roll.

[3:10] Miss overwater, I miss Harris. Mr.. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Aye. Mr.. Wade. Mr.. Wright. Aye. Mayor McFarland.

[3:18] I. All right, let's move to ordinance. Ordinance 26034 this is adoption of building and codes, and this is second and final reading.

[3:28] Move for approval.

[3:30] Second motion a second, please call the roll.

[3:32] Miss overwater, I miss Harris, Mr. Maxwell, vice mayor. Shacklett. Mr.. Wade. Mister. Right. Mayor McFarland.

[3:40] I. All right, we'll move to land use matters. And this is new business plan of services and annexation for property along Elm Road.

[3:49] McFarland and members of Council. Um, our first of two public hearings tonight is for the plan of services and annexation for about 10.97 acres. Located along the east side of Elm Road. It's in the area colored in blue on the map before you. Um, as you can tell, it is bordered by the city limits on really all four sides. So we're closing in part of a donut hole right here. Um, this property, um, was previously developed with a single family home, but I think fire destroyed that single family home. So there are just a few outbuildings on it right now. It's currently zoned E, a C in the unincorporated county, and that stands for Employment Activity Center, which is a kind of a variety of industrial, commercial, office and residential uses. Um, the applicants are requesting its annexation. Um, as you can understand there, it would be relatively little issue providing services to the subject property, considering our rolling services are already in the area, um directly surrounding the area. Of course our Schwan cosmetics to the east, uh, there's an apartment complex directly to the south. To the north is the seventh seventh day Adventist church and school, uh, which was annexed, um, earlier this year. and we anticipate them moving forward with a, with, um, an expansion of their school facility here soon. Staff is supportive of this rezoning or excuse me, of this annexation request. Uh, because the development of this property will see or will see the extension of distribution drive. You see that distribution drive is directly to the east of the subject property and stubs into it. Um distribution drive connects with Elam Farms Parkway, Elam Farms Parkway, then goes south to a signalized intersection at Joe B Jackson Parkway. Um, the intersection of Elam Road and Joe B Jackson Parkway is very close to the interstate on ramp. And so this will get traffic on Elam Road to a signalized intersection and away from, um, this less than ideal intersection of Elam Road and Joe Jackson Parkway. So the applicants are ready to move forward with the development of this property. And when that property moves forward, if annexation is approved, uh, the the extension of distribution drive a public street would be required as a function of their development. And so this will support the city's transportation goals in getting that traffic on Elm Road down to a signalized intersection. There is no simultaneous zoning request with this annexation, since the property is already zoned E, a C in the unincorporated county, and as the E zoning district in the unincorporated county permits industrial uses, it would come into the city automatically with a light industrial zoning classification. So, um, there is no need for them to request rezoning simultaneous with annexation. The plan of services has been included in your agenda materials. As I mentioned, services services can be extended to the property upon annexation. Sewer is to the north and, uh, the developer would have to extend sewer from the north to serve this property. Uh, we'll need to conduct a public hearing on this matter tonight, and then vote on the plan of services and the annexation. I'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

[7:43] Oh, and just as a as a note, um, the conceptual site plan was included in the agenda materials. That's just for informational purposes. No site plan has formally been submitted to our office, um, nor taken to the Planning Commission. We do expect the applicants to submit a site plan should the property be annexed. But that's just for informational purposes in your packets.

[8:06] Okay.

[8:07] All right. We need to. Any any questions for Mr.

[8:14] Blomley? S1:

[8:29] All right. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and will now consider on first reading. Resolution 26RPSA32.

[8:42] So moved.

[8:44] Second.

[8:44] Motion a second, please call the roll.

[8:46] Miss overwater, I miss Harris, Mr.. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Mr.. Wade. Mister. Right. Mayor. MacFarlane.

[8:55] Aye. All right, let's move to item 19. Rezoning for property north of Indian Park Drive.

[9:01] Thank you, mayor McFarland. The property is located, um, on the Hutchinson Development tract, which is. Mr. Hutchinson has been developing the Glenview Farm subdivision along Indian Park Drive for a number of years now. It's really the last remaining portion of the development tract that's inside the city limits. It's currently zoned Rs 12 single family residential with minimum lot sizes of 12,000ft². Um, the request has been made by Mr. Hutchinson and SCC to rezone it to Rs ten. Single family residential district minimum lot size of 10,000ft². It's surrounded by a variety of single family residential zoning types. Um, you'll see directly to the east there is a PRD. That's the cottage Glen townhomes, which is a single family residential attached product. Further to the east is the there's an apartment complex that used to be called Indian Park Apartments. Um, I don't recall what it's called right now. Uh, to the west is the Glenview Farm subdivision zoned Rs 12 and to the south. Also the Glenview Farm subdivision, but zoned RSA1, as well as the Oxford Hall subdivision, which is zoned RSA1. So there's a variety of lot sizes and housing types in the immediate area. So the, the, the intent would be to develop this with an additional section of Glenview farms. Um, the difference in yield would be probably about 5 or 6 lots. Um, just a rough calculation at the existing Rs 12 zoning would be about 31 lots and a rough calculation at the existing or at the proposed Rs ten would be about 37 lots, I believe. So an increase of about 5 or 6 lots total. Um the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter on July the 1st, and then voted to make a recommendation of approval to the City Council. Um, I'm happy to answer any questions. And Mr. Rob Malkin with SEC is here representing the applicant.

[11:11] Any questions? All right. Seeing none, we need to open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak for or against this 11.4 acre rezoning request or. Excuse me. Yes. The rezoning for 11.44 acres. Please come to the podium.

[11:30] Good evening, members of the council. My name is Joanna Fawzi and I live at 2505 Suwannee Place. We chose our home specifically for the quiet, low traffic environment this neighborhood offers. If this area is rezoned, that peaceful character will be permanently lost, replaced by significant traffic congestion and safety concerns. Thank you.

[11:47] Thank you so much. Anyone else wishing to speak for or against?

[11:54] Hay and those who are in the audience, y'all are welcome. If you have any other conversations, y'all can have those out there. But we need to show respect to the people who are speaking. Thank you. Thanks.

[12:05] Anyone else wishing to speak.

[12:09] All right. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and we'll consider on first reading. Ordinance 2633.

[12:22] Move for approval.

[12:23] Second, motion a second, please. Call the roll.

[12:25] Miss. Miss Harris, Mr. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Hi. Mr.. Wade. Mr. Wright, mayor McFarland.

[12:34] Hi. All right, let's move on. Resolution. You have 26 R 28. That is property for an interchange in a school site, Mr. Gore.

[12:52] Excuse me for loading this. I've been debating on whether or not to.

[13:01] Show Illustrations, but I

[13:06] picture says a thousand words, so maybe it will keep me from rambling so much if we get up here and just look at this, this particular item. So.

[13:19] Why are we putting this resolution before you tonight? I think in short answer that is to try to find a a to put into writing or put into a commitment format. Those things that we've been talking about with the Rutherford County School Board for the past year or 8 to 9 months, I think at the beginning of the year was the first correspondence I could find regarding Stones Battle Parkway and the Dismukes property. So looking at the history and kind of moving forward, uh, when we adopted the 2040 major thoroughfare plan in March of 2018, we actually showed two interchanges between 840 and Almaville Road. That turned out when we when we met with the T-dot in early 2024 and the choice lanes were rolled out. We actually were informed that we did not meet the distance requirements between 840. And this what I'm showing is a red diamond here of that first interchange. That first interchange was shown on the southern part of the Dismukes property. The region three chief engineer said we needed two miles between 840 and the interchange, and that there really was little to no hope that we would get two interchanges between 840 and Almaville Road at that time. When they brought up the choice lanes, that's when really everything did change. This was early 2024. They said that t-dot there may be no opportunity for an interchange. They were going to be looking at developing choice lanes, which are toll roads or lanes that you have to pay to, to utilize. Between, um, really, they were talking about Smyrna and downtown Nashville. They have later come back and they are looking at taking it all the way to 840. It was originally shown as a phase two of the choice lanes. Um, but now it's shown as part of the overall project. That Choice Lane developer was just selected a couple of weeks ago. I think the mayor has engaged with them or he's engaged with, uh, some part of that team. While this was going on at the time as well, back in 2018, we were talking about the Sazerac property and how we would at some point get to, um, I 24 with Sazerac development on an arterial road, you can kind of see we just have a proposed interchange and you can see this is the.

[15:55] Dismukes property under question. So when we met in 2024 with T-dot, and they told us that we didn't meet the separation criteria, we needed to move it farther north. It really broke into a much larger discussion of, are we even going to get an interchange? We need to start planning a corridor study, an area plan that shows land use, that shows trip generation, our traffic modeling, and really develop this plan as a sell some some somewhat of a carrot to this future choice land developer to to demonstrate the need for an interchange at this location. So that's, this is kind of the plan. It's a, it's a truncated illustration of the plan that we started in April of 2025. And really we concluded it in May of 2026. But now you can see that there is a. The interchange has moved farther into the property and at that time, I think there was some correspondence in January of 2025 or I'm sorry, earlier this year, January, where we let we understood that there was interest in the Dismukes property for a school site. So we kind of sent an email and said, hey, we were doing this corridor study. We really had also an interest in that property with an, with an interchange. We were working, working a plan. And when we got the plan done, I think in May, we sat down with with some members of the school board and tried to discuss, could we come up with a mutually beneficial solution where a school site could could be developed there. An interchange could be developed there. Mister Dismukes could could be satisfied with the sale of his property and basically create a win win win. Um, there was no intent to be underhanded or to try to go around anybody's back meeting with the school board initially. They brought up a very good point that said, if you were interested in interchange, if this is real, that you would have made an offer on this property for that right of way interchange. We took that to heart. We sent a letter to Mr. Dismukes stating our interest in it. It wasn't an offer. It was an intent to develop an offer for 15 or so acres, 12 to 15 acres for the interchange. And that we, uh, um, we had that interest and we were also trying to work a joint solutions where there could still be a school on the property. The only way these, these things work is if the city provides sanitary sewer to the school site. Um, we also talked about a 35 acre step fields there in the blue. You can see that potentially could be, uh, we could take that subdivision off of the step system and put them on sanitary sewer service and capture those 35 acres to incorporate into the school site. So we have been. We have been trying to develop a solution to. Competing interests and obviously some of that has not been well received. Some. But but there's no ill intent on the city's behalf. Even at the offer that was made to Mister Dismukes, there was an assertion that we tried to offer a little bit more than what the what the school board had had offered. And really we did not. We. I looked at the. It was 86 acres, less than an acre and a half of the Dismukes homestead. So it was 84.5 acres divided by 8.5 million or 8 5.5 million divided by 84.5. It came out to be $100,500 per acre. Uh, I did not intend to try to up the 100,000 acre that the school board had put together. I was just trying to to maintain the math and give an equivalent offer. So all this resolution and you can read the Whereases. I won't go through all the, the different, uh, trying to lay out the history and the benefits to, to all and what we're trying to achieve. But at the end of the day, we are trying, you know, we do need this. This is if we don't get an interchange, we still need a, a flyover bridge. So there's still some portion of right of way that will be needed.

[20:23] I will go into the fact that the, the, the, um, the resolution does commit the city to pay for the full, uh, purchase price of the Dismukes property, 8.5 million. It states in that, uh, resolution that we would reserve the 63 or so acres or 60 acres or so for a school site, we would put a deed restriction on the property. For that purpose, we would supply sanitary sewer service to the site to avoid a significant area that would be needed for a decentralized system or a drip feed system. Um, it does state that we are working with q d about those 35 acres. I did meet with Q d on Tuesday to discuss it. Um, there's no promises there, but there is a potential there that would, that would get, uh, significant 35 more acres. On top of that, the school board would not have to pay for the property. Um, the county would not have to incur debt to pay for the property. We would pay for it and hold it and work through the benefits of that for all parties involved to come up with a solution that would again, achieve that win, win win status. So I'm open for questions. We've you guys have seen a lot of correspondence on this topic, and we're just trying to act in good faith and put our cards on the table and be a good partner.

[22:02] I think I think it'd be good to give just a quick bit of context. And look, you know, we all have I say this routinely, the city council is looking through a telescope. We're not looking through a microscope. Some other depending on who you're elected to represent, you may be looking at a really small area. We're looking at an overall area. And so back, I want to say 18 months, almost two years ago, when the school board initially had a discussion at the meeting, Sam Huddleston, who had been working on this entire area when we were going through looking at the interchange, called and said, hey, can you call someone this? This property is being brought up for a school site. I called the leadership at the at the school board and said, hey, just a heads up, there's an interchange that is scheduled to go here. We. As a matter of fact, we had just gotten back from the state. Um, mayor Reed, Mayor Carr, several people had had convened the leadership with our state and our delegation. And we actually met with the Commissioner of T-dot at the time. Um, because this interchange is also part of the interchange that Smyrna is trying to get. I think it's their Rocky Fork road interchange is I can't remember what theirs is called. So it goes into this whole system. Well, this all got bogged down by the the Choice Lane project. So I mean, there was notification like, hey, this is on the county's major thoroughfare plan that the Rutherford County Commission has adopted and the city Council's major thoroughfare plan. And so that's gone. And look, I'm not going to get personal with. I watched the school board meeting and it got pretty personal. And everybody has different feelings about the situation. I hate that there's distrust with the city. That's not our intent. We want to work well with the school board. Um, but there was a contract written on this property August of last year before it ever came to the school board. And, and that was notified of like, hey, before you write the contract, know that this. So it has been very upfront that there's been an interchange plan to go on here. And, you know, a comment was made, well, these are just lines on papers. And yes, everything starts as lines on paper. But you look at Memorial and the widening of Jefferson of Memorial Boulevard, going from Thompson Lane all the way to West Jefferson Pike. That's a $31 million commitment, either through the city and the county, $96 million from T-dot that we hopefully are going to get. And there's a lot of county residents who are going to use that road that the city of Murfreesboro put that we're talking about putting $25 million up. So we're all in this together on this network in the Long Cherry Lane network that that property was built or was bought, I think in the year 2002 from the Chadwick family, I think is when the Cherry Lane property was built. So just so everyone understands to try to find a compromise, here is what the city is offering. We're offering to fully pay for the land at the county school board does not have to go into reserves to buy property. The city is going to pay for it. The city is going to deed restrict that property, that it can only be used for a school and an interchange. The city is going to run sewer to that property at the city's cost to run the sewer. The city is going to work with CUD to get an additional 35 acres, hopefully to be able to add to the school site that they will be able to have for additional ball fields and those different things, and the city is going to pay for that and hold the property at no cost to the county until the county commission funds for a school to be built. AM I fair on saying that? That's it. So the county taxpayer doesn't have to buy the land. The county school board doesn't have to buy the money in a school site, is held for the county to build a county high school. So that's what we really. I didn't come up with the idea. I wish I did, but it is. I don't know of a better win, win win for the County Commission, the county school board and the city that the interchange would be able to be built. And realistically, I think the other part, the land we're really talking about land baking a piece of property that the funding for the school has not been allocated by the county commission yet. So that's full transparency what we're trying to do. You also have to take into account. And this is after many discussions with T dot you've got Vanderbilt Hospital that has been approved. The CON has been approved and Vanderbilt is going to build their hospital. This is an ideal interchange for people to be able to access that hospital for the community. Um, and so there's a lot of things happening in that area that we feel pretty confident that an interchange at some point, will it be built in the next four years while we're all sitting up here? Probably not, but there will be an interchange built there at some point. And we just want everybody to to try to find a way. That's a win win for everybody.

[27:24] A couple of things, I guess. We certainly need the road. There's no doubt we need that Northern loop. There's no doubt. Darren. Um.

[27:38] We, I can't. I mean, I've been here for years. I'll be here another four years. It's it's like we're forcing another entity in government. I mean, this is a resolution, right? It's it's not an ordinance. It's a resolution. It's saying, hey, County Commission, this is what we want to do. And the county commission is going to tell the school board. So we're indirectly telling the school board, this is what you should do. And we've never done that. I guess what I'm getting at. We've never passed a resolution to the County Commission on shared pennies. Um, and so I guess I've got a problem with the fact that we're indirectly kind of going around. They've got the money right now to buy it. They're waiting on a soil test. Um Mister Dismukes, that's what he wants is a school he can't control. We can't control. That's what t Dot said where the interchange needs to go. So I see all the good intent. Why not have a memorandum of agreement that we even thought about that. Here is an agreement. You guys buy it. And this is our section for the interchange. And this is your section for the school and the sewer. I guess that's why I'm asking.

[28:51] I think that's what this does. Because we're buying it. We're paying for it. They don't have to allocate. We put the interstate exchange or have it land bank for the interstate exchange. And then when, if or when they're ready to build the school, the land is there for them to build the school and we're going to run sewer to it.

[29:07] And Austin, I think the other part, I think Darren probably can speak to this. I don't think there was any appetite to have a memorandum of understanding to work on the property. I think the I wasn't in those meetings. That was Mr. Piech and Mr. Gore. But I also think that the other part that. And we've heard watching the meetings, that there's this distrust. And so we thought the right thing to do is to put it in writing and say, here's exactly what the city Council has voted on and what the City Council is going to agree to. Besides a lot of he said. She said it's like we're putting it in writing. Letting the county commission and the school board know that we're putting our money where our mouth is and that we're going to agree to be able to do that. That was the reason why. Austin. Yeah.

[29:48] I I'll say that, you know, it is a resolution and it's the it's taking a lot of what has occurred verbally and it's trying to memorialize and document what has been verbalized. And I think it is the framework for an MOU. I think it's a framework for a development agreement or a partner partnering a contract, if you will. So that because that that has teeth in it at that point when you make it into an MOU or to a contract. And I've also learned throughout my career that distrust, you don't need to really trust Darren Gore. You just need to trust what's been written down and what's signed off on. That's, that's, you know, I want to be trusted, but.

[30:28] I trust you. Mr..

[30:29] Thank you. Well.

[30:30] Again, not your PowerPoint.

[30:31] But I trust you. Well, again, it's you know, when you write things down and you have people sign off on it, then there's there's no you trust the document that everybody has has executed. And that's all we're trying to do. This is a this was an initial, let's put down what we've said we're going to do, kind of put our money and obviously and get the direction from from council to make sure that this is something you're willing to do.

[30:56] Yeah. Because if you we pass the resolution, we're committing to purchasing this property. I mean, or working with the school board and the, the, the, the, and I would say there's been several county commissioners that have discussed with and they're like, hey, this is too good to be true. Why are y'all doing this? And I think that's why I didn't want to speak for the council. Mr. Gore didn't want to speak for the council, wanted to put in a resolution that showed everything, and everyone can have that public discussion on it by statute.

[31:28] County commission funds the school board. Right, right. So school board says, hey, we want to build a school. They're going to go and say, we need the money to build this school. Now we're indirectly telling the commission to say, don't fund this because we're going to fund it.

[31:45] You see where I'm coming from? S7:

[31:47] Yeah, we're just buying the land.

[31:48] We would, we would. I guess what I'm saying is the land you know it. To me, it's better if it's a true memorandum of understanding, a memorandum of agreement versus a resolution, because you're actually boxing in that school board. And y'all know where I sit and where I sleep. Okay.

[32:06] Yeah, I know where you're sleeping tonight.

[32:09] I think you're sitting right out there.

[32:11] But I think yeah, I mean.

[32:12] I admit that, but the point is we're indirectly boxing in that school board. A memorandum of agreement, a memorandum of understanding is to me is better. I got one last question. You all sat down with Mister Dismukes, and he made an offer to the city at a price above or below 8.5 million.

[32:31] I have not seen any counteroffer above or below. 8.5 million. The $100,500 acre that we put in the letter to Mr. Dismukes for the 84.5 acres that was going to equal eight and a half. Well, I'm sorry, the initial letter was just for the the 15, the 12 or 15 acres for the right of way. This this is new in regards to putting it down as purchasing the whole thing. We've not made that offer before.

[32:59] But I do think there's one more important thing to for the Council to understand. We're. This is just my opinion. I think we're trying to let the County Commission know. Here's what the city is willing to do to partner with the County Commission and the County Commission or the. The school board. The County Commission is the funding body. And the bottom line, we're all Rutherford County taxpayers. So, I mean, you know, but the other part, too, if we don't find a way to work together, which I think everyone's tried really hard to do, we're going to be sitting across the table negotiating and advocating for T Dot or the city of Murfreesboro, to condemn a piece of property that the other government owned or works through to put an interchange there that has been on the plan that's been been worked on for years. So I think this is a much better way to say here's a way that we can all compromise as opposed to being adverse to one another, arguing why a piece of property should be condemned.

[34:01] And I'll say, if this is the precedent we're going to set, we need to start setting the precedent with regards to shared pennies.

[34:06] I'm down for that, too.

[34:08] You know, if this is what we're going to do, then that's the way it needs to be done. Now we need the road. We need the interchange. It's I, I use South Rutherford all day. We need this. There's no doubt. I just don't like the fact we're kind of forcing ourselves upon another entity in this way.

[34:25] And I get it. If if we. if in this property. Look at this from another standpoint. Say the school board bought this property and they gave us a condition that they would commit that property for the interchange, which is similar to us saying we buy the property and we're going to commit a piece of property for a school. It's just on the hands on the other foot. Now, the, the, the issue that I really think we ought to be able to resolve this, and I don't know whether it's a we've got a new commission. Maybe we try an additional time because the issue if there is $8.5 million in reserve that is committed for the purchase of this property, and the city is willing to pay that $8.5 million, then that $8.5 million could go towards the construction of the school. And and then we're closer to getting the school on the ground if we do this, but I I'm similar feeling similar to Austin is do we put the proposition out there or do we say that the will of Council is to purchase this so that the resources that the school board already has could be used towards the building of that school at a sooner date? Uh, and we'll purchase that ground and give them sewer and, and give them the property.

[35:57] That it needs to be stated. I mean, there's an existing contract between the school board and Mister Dismukes, us putting a resolution out there. Well, it's it's just it's stating our intent and our, our, our, it's an attempt to solve the issue and give everybody a mutually beneficial outcome that they desire. This by no way forces anybody into a corner because Mister. Dismukes. I know that he he wants to. He wants to sell it for school. He's not happy with the city. He wants to sell it to the school board. Um, this this resolution may if it gets passed tonight, it it may have zero effect. I mean, it doesn't have any it doesn't have any real power to. Other than we're trying to influence hearts and minds.

[36:49] We're trying to put in writing what this. Instead of sitting in these meetings and going back and forth saying, well, we'll do this, we'll do that. We are putting in writing what the city will do. And, you know, I think the other part and this is after talking with the choice Lane representative today, either a flyover bridge or a interchange is going to be programed for that area to connect the West Blackman area all the way to the east side of Murfreesboro. So what we're saying is that It. We don't know what that's going to be yet. And, um, you know, I just would hate look, if, if, if the school board or the commission said right now. Yeah, we're we're not opposed to an interchange going there. We'll work with y'all to do that. But I unless I've missed something, I don't think that has happened as of yet.

[37:39] There's been no offer from the from the other from the county to secure a location for a interchange.

[37:47] So this is at least built an offer to say let's start the discussion holistically.

[37:53] Does it does it say that we will give them the land for the school for free, or at $100,000 an acre?

[38:01] I think we said we would hold it at cost so we would not. If it's ten years down the road, it would still be at the purchase price that we paid for it.

[38:09] Honestly, I don't see the harm in I mean, this is the best of both worlds for both entities. Speaking as a city council member and a county taxpayer, there's really no negative to this. Uh, like Darren and the mayor both said we could send it over to the county commissioner. They could tell us to kick sand, but, uh, I'll make a motion to approve. I don't see the. I don't see the negative from either governing body.

[38:36] I will second that motion.

[38:39] Motion to second.

[38:42] Any other discussion? S9:

[38:49] Fair enough. All right, Miss Tucker, please call the roll.

[38:52] Miss. Miss Harris. Mr. Maxwell.

[38:55] Nay.

[38:56] Vice mayor Shacklett. Nay. Mr.. Wade. Aye. Mr.. Wright. Aye. Mayor McFarland. Aye.

[39:01] All right, let's move to our next item. This is ordinance 26038.

[39:08] Fireworks permit administration update.

[39:11] Uh, yes. Thank you. We're recommending just an administrative change to change the fireworks ordinance to allow the building and codes Director to sign off on the permits instead of me. And this allows us just to simplify our process. And I'm happy to answer any questions and recommend for approval.

[39:29] I hope it has to be you. I'm just kidding.

[39:31] You don't like fireworks, Aaron? Come on.

[39:33] I mean, I love them.

[39:34] Second motion a second, please. Call the roll.

[39:38] Miss aber water. Hi, Miss Harris. Mr. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor Shacklett. Aye. Mr.. Wade. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[39:46] Aye. All right, let's move on. Motion. The purchase and sale agreement with the journey home, Mr. Gore.

[39:51] Yes, sir. Uh. Thank you. Council. Uh, our mayor and council. This is a purchase and sale agreement. It's, uh, on the city owned property that's adjacent to the existing journey home. We presented this at a workshop, I think, back in July or June. And, uh, we had a, a, I think about a two and a half or $3 per square foot price. The, the, the count council determined that they would like to sell this property to the journey home for a dollar. This purchase and sale agreement is consistent with that, that ask. And so we would request your approval. And I'm available for questions if you have any.

[40:29] Move for approval.

[40:30] Second motion a second please call the roll.

[40:32] Miss aber water. Hi, Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor Shacklett. Hi, Mr.. Wade. Mister. Right. Mayor McFarland.

[40:40] Hi. All right, let's talk about the hangar construction contract award. Mr. jerky. And I think you have several members of your airport commission here tonight.

[40:47] Yes. Mayor, members.

[40:48] Of the City Council joining us tonight are Ken Lowry, our vice chair for our airport commission. And also with him is Shelby Hunton. And also in the audience is Joe Nye with Barge Design Solutions, who helped us through this, uh, bid process along with our purchasing department.

[41:03] Thanks for flying over.

[41:05] Yeah, exactly. So in July 30th, we took bids. We received ten bids for the construction of an 1800 zero square foot hangar. That's Zero zero zero square feet of hangar bay and 3000ft² of office space. The total contract price provided by Barron Construction Barge Design Solutions reviewed all ten of those bids and determined that the lowest, responsive and responsible bidder that met all requirements stated in the invitation to the bid to be Barron Construction. The total contract price provided by Barron Construction is $4,350,196.

[41:44] The contract price includes $4,000,143.

[41:49] $4,143,044.

[41:52] Based on the bids submitted, as well as 5% owner contingency to be solely at the owner's discretion. The city. Uh, this is, uh, will be paid for through the general fund and the airport fund. And the airport fund is covered by the hangar rents, ramp fees, and fuel sales for both our base customers and the visitors that come through our airport every day. If you have any questions, I'll be glad to take them. At this time.

[42:19] There are no questions. I'll move for approval.

[42:20] Second motion a second, please call the.

[42:23] Roll. Miss overwater, I miss Harris, Mr. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor Shackley. Mr. Wade, Mister. Right. Mayor McFarland.

[42:31] I, and Shelby Cannon. Thank you all for your hard work. We appreciate the service you all have for the airport. All right, let's move to Motlow paramedic program. Chief McClusky.

[42:42] I thought you would come and support this turnout purchase I needed. Uh, good evening, Mayor and Council. I come for you tonight to ask for approval to send seven of our EMTs to a paramedic class that is taught by Motlow State Community College. Uh, the total cost of this is $63,800, which that covers the tuition cost, textbooks required uniforms and testing and licensing fees. Uh, staff recommends approval for this consideration.

[43:14] Do you need more than 7 or 7? Enough.

[43:16] We. We had talked. That's probably about as many as we can send in a year's time with them being off work and the funding of it. But over the years we've gotten our paramedics up. We're almost right at 40 now. So if we get this seven, I'd be 47, which is a pretty good ratio.

[43:32] Okay.

[43:33] Good question.

[43:34] So moved. Second.

[43:35] Motion a second, please. Call the roll.

[43:37] Miss aber water. Miss Harris. Hi. Mr. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Hi, Mr.. Wade. Mister. Right. Mayor McFarland.

[43:45] Aye. Next item is the purchase of turnout gear.

[43:50] Seat. Lean back and lean forward.

[43:52] So, hey, I've got a video of Terry Spence if you want to see that.

[43:55] Really?

[43:58] It's another one I won't live down.

[44:00] So staff saw it to Austin.

[44:04] Chief, uh, tonight we come before you to purchase some turnout gear. Uh, 40 sets. It's for our new trainees and replacement gear for our five firefighters. Gear's expired. Uh, this request will go to Sourcewell contract purchase through Napco. And the expense of this is $174,960, which is funded under our operational budget.

[44:29] Move for approval.

[44:30] Second.

[44:31] Motion a second. Please call the roll.

[44:32] Miss aber water. I miss Gills Harris. Mr. Maxwell I, vice mayor. Shacklett. Mr.. Wade. Mister. Right. Mayor MacFarland.

[44:40] I thank you, chief. All right, let's move to the purchase of body armor from galls Chief Bowen.

[44:50] Good evening, mayor and members of the Council for your consideration this evening is a request to purchase body armor from galls. Uh, MPD officers are equipped with body armor, which is recommended to be replaced every five years. Currently, we have about 100 sets of body armor approaching their expiration date. Uh, this is part of our normal rotating process, and the total cost of this purchase is $180,000, and it's funded by the department's FY 27 operating budget.

[45:21] Thank you chief. Move for approval.

[45:22] Second motion a second, please. Call the roll.

[45:24] Miss. Overwater. Miss Harris, Mr.. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Aye. Mr.. Wade. Mr. Wright. Aye. Mayor McFarland.

[45:32] Aye. All right. State wood. School resource officer. Grant program. Um. Keep going.

[45:38] Yes, sir. Uh, for your consideration as a request to approve a grant contract for funding that has been warranted. The City of Murfreesboro Police Department. Uh, this is for the school resource officer program. Uh, the total award is $1,050,000, which will be used to offset the FY 27 salaries and benefits of 14 SROs assigned to our qualifying schools. I'd be glad to answer any questions you might have.

[46:05] Chief added one to our agenda.

[46:07] Yeah. So moved.

[46:08] Second.

[46:10] Second. Please call the roll.

[46:11] Mr.. Water. Mr.. Harris. Mr.. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Aye. Mr.. Wade. Aye. Mr. Wright. Aye. Mayor McFarland.

[46:19] Thank you.

[46:20] Thank you. Chief. All right. Let's. Item 28. Sewer rehabilitation. CSX permitting for 2025, Miss Smith.

[46:27] Good evening, Council, and.

[46:32] I am presenting to you tonight something that our Department has been working with legal on. It is an agreement with CSX. Um, we have found in our rehab project that a portion of the project is underneath CSX railroad, and there is no existing permit on file. The sewer main portions of it to the right, to your right. My right, if you're looking at your screens, um, has been installed since 1975, along with the portion under the tract and the portion to the left, which goes over to Lane's Trains and automobiles, was installed in 2009. So, um, the portion under the track is what needs to be rehabilitated. Uh, is corroding underneath the tracks. It's a 12 inch sewer main. And so we need to move forward with the agreement with CSX. So legal has had some changes to the contract that has been sent to CSX for their review. And we have not heard back. But we wanted to request approval for the agreement subject to legal approval of the agreement language, the fee for and also approve the fee for the permit, which CSX has assessed at $117,620.

[47:52] This fee was not included in our sewer rehabilitation costs, so we are bringing that back for approval and I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[48:01] Any questions for Miss Smith?

[48:03] Move. Approval.

[48:04] Second motion a second, please call the roll.

[48:06] Miss overwater, miss Harris, Mr. Maxwell.

[48:10] Aye.

[48:10] Vice mayor. Shacklett. Aye. Mr.. Wade. Mr. Wright, mayor MacFarland.

[48:14] Aye. All right, let's move to item 29. United system. Cellular equipment purchase.

[48:19] Uh, so the equipment we're wanting to purchase are called Erts. They help the water meter readings, uh, report, uh, to, um, through cellular service to, to our, to our software that's housed on the cloud and the, our customers can use the, to, to log in and see what their usage are is and that usage is also reported to our billing system. It also, um, will these Erts new Erts that we're replacing are will also work with our mobile units, um, to see when people move in, move out and whether they're able to use the water or not. We need to replace the arts in stages, or we want to do it in stages. So it's not just a huge purchase. We're trying to do the installations of these arts that go on the water meters in house by ourselves. So we are trying to do a five year implementation, knowing that it may take longer than five years trying to do it with our in-house staff. So year one total for the purchase of the arts is 685,000. The existing arts that we have will be sunset in 2035, so we want to get a start on that, knowing that we will have over 25,000 customers that need to be changed out. So we request approval for the first 5000Hz.

[49:52] And I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[49:57] For approval.

[49:58] Second motion a second, please call the roll.

[50:01] Miss. Overwater, I miss Harris. Mr. Maxwell? Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Aye. Mr. Wade. Mr.. Wright. Aye. Mayor McFarland.

[50:11] Aye. All right, let's move to the disciplinary review board. Excuse me. Board and commission appointments. And this is for the Disciplinary Review Board. Uh, it's a reappointment of Rachel Windrow Ayers, and I believe Rachel, uh, require or fulfills the attorney requirement.

[50:27] Move for approval.

[50:28] Second motion a second, please. Call the roll.

[50:30] Miss overwater, I miss Harris, I Mr. Maxwell. Aye. Vice mayor. Shacklett. Hi, Mr.. Wade. Aye. Mr.. Wright. Aye. Mayor McFarland.

[50:38] Aye. All right, let's move to beer permits.

[50:42] Uh, we have two regular permits tonight. One is for a new gas station located at 1593 New Salem Highway. And we also have an ownership change for a restaurant located at 3053 Medical Center Parkway, suite D. And then we have two special event permits. One is for read to succeed on November 6th at the view of the fountains and the others for Saint Rose on September 13th at 1601 North Tennessee Boulevard. All applicants have met our requirements and we recommend for approval pending any final building codes inspections.

[51:13] They promise to serve cold beer. I'll make a motion to approve.

[51:17] Second.

[51:19] Okay.

[51:20] Motion and second.

[51:21] Miss aber water.

[51:22] I like warm beer. I don't know. Hi.

[51:26] Miss Harris. Hi, Mr. Maxwell.

[51:28] Hi.

[51:28] Vice mayor Shacklett. Hi, Mr. Wade. Hi, mister. Right. Mayor McFarland.

[51:32] Hi. All right. You have one statement to be paid.

[51:35] I guess we have one tonight. Payable to the Circuit Court for $100,000.

[51:39] Move for approval.

[51:40] Second.

[51:42] Motion second, please call the roll.

[51:44] Miss. Overwater. Hi. Miss Harris. Mr. Maxwell.

[51:48] Aye.

[51:48] Vice mayor Shacklett. Aye. Mr. Wade. Aye. Mr. Wright. Mayor McFarland.

[51:53] Aye. All right. We do this after every election. It's the election of the vice mayor.

[52:00] I'd like to make a motion. Um, Councilman Shacklett, you've done a great job the last four years. I've learned a lot from you. Um, but I hope you're okay with this. I would like to nominate my good friend, uh, who came in first last time during your cycle, Mr. Sean Wright.

[52:18] I will second that motion. He's not my good friend, though. He's just my.

[52:23] He's just a friend. Okay. All right, I get it.

[52:26] We have a motion or any other nominations.

[52:30] You okay, Mr.

[52:36] Shacklett? With that? S1:

[52:40] Miss overwater. Miss Harris. Mr. Maxwell.

[52:44] Aye.

[52:44] Vice mayor Shacklett.

[52:45] I.

[52:46] Mr. Wade. Aye. Mr. Wright.

[52:48] Abstain.

[52:49] Mayor McFarland.

[52:50] Aye.

[52:51] Yes.

[52:54] All right. Any other business from staff?

[53:02] Any other business from council?

[53:05] No, sir.

[53:07] We have a. I'll just say this. Can we next council meeting? Can we have some sort of an executive session to discuss some of the public comments and issues that have been raised surrounding flock?

[53:23] That would be. Jeff.

[53:26] There's been a lot of discussion and there's been some good information, I think. I just think as a council, we just need some time to discuss it, you know, in private.

[53:37] Particularly as it pertains to potential litigation.

[53:41] Correct. Yeah. I just need to make sure, you know, threatened litigation and that we've had, uh, it'll just be more informational, obviously, and questions you can ask of me. So yes, we'll get that scheduled. Okay.

[53:53] Bill, I want to publicly just say, um, thank you for all you do for this council.

[54:00] Every voice of reason. Bill. I learned a lot from you. So thank you.

[54:03] I would like to second that. Bill, you've been an inspiration and I look forward to following your footsteps.

[54:10] And I mean, hopefully I'm not going anywhere, but, um, I don't know. Pretty rough comments earlier in the meeting. So any other business? We'll stand adjourned.

City Council (9/3/26)

Agenda

Transcript