[0:14] Okay, we ready to go ahead and get
started.
[0:27] Okay. Okay. So, we will go ahead and get
started with the May 1st uh work session
[0:34] for our regular town council meeting
coming up on Tuesday. Uh again, we're
[0:40] not making any votes tonight or taking
any votes. Uh just reviewing the
[0:44] information. So, first up, we have
discussion of the minutes from the
[0:49] previous meeting on April
[0:53] 1st. Are there any questions about
those?
[1:16] Andrew, for that last page, the last
bullet point, I think, was that
[1:22] Scott or whoever, were you the one that
brought it up? the minutes. Look on the
[1:27] last page, the last bullet point. Was
that you or was that I was thinking
[1:36] the last on the on the research on term
limit rule, etc.
[1:44] Okay.
I'll add that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I know
[1:49] that was a topic you wanted as well. I
think I brought it up here. Mhm.
[1:57] [Music]
[2:01] Okay. Okay. Are there any questions
about the
[2:07] minutes? If not, we will move on to the
budget and finance section. And as all
[2:14] of you should have in front of you,
Misty has prepared a new spreadsheet for
[2:18] us that um she had some assistance with
and she can fill us in on how this new
[2:25] spreadsheet came about and how to read
it um because it is a little bit
[2:31] different than what we were looking at.
Yes. But if you'll look at the other
[2:36] report card.
Yes.
[2:42] So um again 75% or more is good on
revenue. 75% or less is good on
[2:51] expenditures. So if you look at the
bottom
[2:53] line
96.02%. So that's slight more than the
[2:59] uh 75%. And then down at the
expenditures, the
[3:06] 67.56% is less than 75%.
Um,
[3:13] the thing that you're going to notice
the difference about
[3:17] is our drug account. So, the state 3A
pretty much stays the same. It will go
[3:24] up every month when we deposit that
check. But the uh drug fines are
[3:30] represented on here. So the
[Music]
[3:35] $12,17.75. So that's going to be on here
so you guys can see that the local
[3:41] government investment
[3:46] pool. Again, the correlating spreadsheet
on the back.
[3:52] So we had 4.29%
29% in
[3:57] March which gave us
7,8184 to add to it. So the total we
[4:04] have in there right now is the
[4:08] [Music]
1,950,7427. Um now the news
[4:14] spreadsheet.
So, I contacted our sister town, Keith's
[4:21] friends, and I told her that a lot of
the councilmen would rather have it
[4:27] presented in a
spreadsheet. Asked her what she used and
[4:32] um she sent it over to me. So, this is
the format that she uses. It has what is
[4:39] budgeted on the first column, what has
been realized that the month that you
[4:44] know we're representing. So that would
be
[4:46] March, what we have remaining and what
is
[4:51] projected. So some of these I have to go
down through and correct
[4:59] because we may know something that the
formula doesn't. as far
[5:04] as you know I was plugging it in and it
was projecting for next year too and it
[5:10] was projecting a number like for the um
in le of taxes considerably high because
[5:18] the reason it was so high this time was
because of the internet the ignite
[5:22] that's going around that's why they had
to pay us more so I had to go ahead and
[5:28] recalculate so you know take a good look
at it if you see anything if you
[5:32] question, anything, let me know. I'll
look at it, research it, but I haven't
[5:38] quite completely filled it out. If you
notice the descriptions in the back
[5:42] couple of pages, I haven't gotten it in
there.
[5:46] Can you educate me on what is
projection? Is that projection for next
[5:49] year? Um, no, at the end of the year.
So, like Oh, that's projecting what you
[5:55] think we'll be at. Yes. So, it's looking
at your budget and what you
[6:00] budgeted, where you are right now in it,
and what's remained and what they think
[6:05] is going to happen. So,
[6:11] end of the fiscal year. Yes. End of this
weekend. They're projecting we're going
[6:15] to sell a whole lot more beer.
It is getting warm outside.
[6:22] But this also breaks it down by the
parking. It'll show you what you're
[6:26] spending in healthcare, um, social
security,
[6:31] uh, Medicare, retirement, all of that.
It breaks it down every line in every
[6:42] [Music]
department. One last element just as an
[6:47] F forgive me if I interrupted. I'm
sorry, Scott. Um,
[6:51] uh, I love the breakdown. He's There are
ways that we can designate controllables
[6:58] versus
[7:00] uncontrollables like for instance you
like utility services that's an
[7:05] uncontrollable we can't affect that
right so that way it would very quickly
[7:09] for our eyes and I think that would
probably just be a one go over it
[7:12] probably copy paste every month but that
way we can quickly see what's something
[7:16] we could do to change that number versus
well it is what it is right just
[7:23] I can work on
[7:29] I was just going to ask for column
percentages of project.
[7:34] I'll have to actually click on that and
see what it is. I plugged in the
[7:38] numbers, but it came out. It's okay.
Okay. This is so beautiful. Well, thank
[7:43] you. It is really good. Thank you so
much. Well, and something that I really
[7:47] liked was she has in here
um when it comes in the things that we
[7:53] get from the state, you know, what month
you
[7:56] can be looking for that.
Um trying to find the business taxes. I
[8:03] thought it
[8:05] said she is um I don't know like there
it is, which we had discussed last time.
[8:13] So, I was like, I'm pretty sure May is
like a grace
[8:18] period and they all usually get it in by
[8:26] then. There we go. And if you guys like
this, I can continue to do it and
[8:32] um just do the local government
investment pool on
[8:37] a
[Music]
[8:41] pass in your stocking Christmas.
[8:47] Well, I mean, Kelly, seriously, she
might need something a little extra in
[8:51] her stocking cuz I reached out and she
was like, "Yeah, let me see what I I did
[8:56] mine." And then I'm like, "Hey, that's
beautiful. I'll take it."
[9:04] Great. Do we have any questions over
[9:13] it? This one is simplified. So if you
guys rather have a simple one to look at
[9:20] instead of No, I I find this more
simple. Okay. Simpler.
[9:33] Why, since you mention it, why is health
insurance so high?
[9:38] That's the rates that we
[9:43] That's a common question across America.
[9:50] Hello.
[9:57] projected salary.
[10:02] Well,
[Music]
[10:05] so I know in the police department it
kind of fluctuates. Um because I know he
[10:12] was short at
[10:16] times and are you talking about general
or the police department?
[10:22] General. Um and that can be affected by
a lot of things.
[10:27] Um, we did have some money set aside to
do consulting and um, we had someone opt
[10:36] out of that. So that may be why we're
going to be coming in less than what
[10:42] we projected before. What does O A
sound? It's a combination of your
[10:48] Medicare and social
[10:58] security. I've been ordering office
[11:04] supplies. It just gets different.
[11:17] I think this will help us better to
prepare too.
[11:46] And it does have your special funds on
the back so you can see your state 3A
[11:50] and your drug.
It is a I just but it is a real
[11:57] question. What what is up with office
supplies?
[11:59] We budgeted for
$268,000 and we're now projected to only
[12:04] spend 22,000. That's a pretty big deal.
Is that something that if it's
[12:11] administrative?
[12:14] See, I'm used to working off the
business.
[12:22] Yes. So, those are some um remember we
did put some in there for uh cyber
[12:29] security. We ended up getting the grant.
Yay.
[12:35] Um so, we're going to come in under
budget.
[12:51] And the grant for the fire department,
it's not in here yet cuz we haven't
[12:56] completed all of that paperwork. Is that
correct?
[13:12] Um and I would have to say it's receded.
Okay.
[13:17] So, it is more than likely receded in
the general government grant
[13:23] area, but we have the
um the amended budget that we're going
[13:30] to look at. They're going to change the
expenditures of the fire department for
[13:35] the brand area. What was the machinery
and equipment item? Because I'm assuming
[13:39] that the machinery equipment under fire
department was service or most likely a
[13:44] truck, but above under police
departments and machinery equipment. Is
[13:48] that the
paper? I'm sorry. I know I'm throwing
[13:52] the
but then we didn't budget for it. So
[13:56] question. Yes. So, and I call it period
so that we can put that in.
[14:23] So, like I said, we will be filled out
um in better detail on the back pages
[14:29] um as soon as I can sit down and do it.
[Music]
[14:56] Okay, any other questions before we move
on?
[15:02] [Music]
Okay, we will move on to item number
[15:05] three which is discuss on first reading
an ordinance amending the fiscal year
[15:10] 2024 2025 town of white glove budget
which is also our current year
[15:17] budget.
So do you want to discuss this as well?
[15:22] Yes. So, um the general
fund we we got the grants, we got some
[15:29] donations. Uh we had loan proceeds like
for the um the police vehicles and the
[15:37] fire truck, the tanker. So, we kind
of we're going to amend the
[15:43] expenditures, but I talked to the um I
talked to John Pool and he said go ahead
[15:49] and amend the revenue, too, so that when
you're looking at your budget, you can
[15:52] see where the revenue came in and where
it's going out. So, we did revenue
[15:57] first. I went ahead
and we've got loan proceeds in there of
[16:04] 815,500. That's the fire truck and the
police vehicles. Um, I also added loan
[16:12] proceeds
into our report so that I could take it
[16:18] out of miscellaneous so that it would
give a better a clearer view of where
[16:22] the money is, what it's for.
Um, grant. We got the cyber security
[16:28] grant and we also got the
um, well, the cyber security grant we
[16:34] already had in there. Sorry, I'm stuck
on that. we got uh the grant for the
[16:38] fire department. So, we amended the
revenue there and the library was a
[16:43] donation of $5,000. So, we amended that
so that she could spend it. And if you
[16:48] turn the page and go to
expenditure, the general fund, the
[16:54] police department, it went up. We added
that for the cars from
[17:01] 840,996 to 1,200
uh,996.
[17:06] Why? Why did it go up so significantly
from what we budgeted for the cars? 300.
[17:12] Well, because you're taking your
original expenditures and you're adding
[17:16] 360,000 to that.
I thought we budgeted for those loans
[17:21] for the cars.
I'm sorry. I thought I'm I'm must be I
[17:27] thought we had already included those
expenditures in the original budget to
[17:31] purchase the vehicle. So why are we
having to add more? So we're balancing
[17:36] it out. Um you do have
the when you get in a large amount of
[17:42] money, it's like a capital purchase. It
comes in, it goes out. One lump sum
[17:47] coming in, one lump sum going out. When
you're paying for them, that's a debt
[17:51] service. So that's why there's a
difference. there's going to be a lower
[17:55] payment which is a yearly payment and
then there's going to be that one lump
[17:58] sum to show that the money went out.
So it went out
[18:04] to the board along the whole amount went
there but we didn't just pay for those.
[18:14] We actually got a loan. So we're paying
yearly to her federal on that loan. So
[18:20] that's why it's going out twice.
Okay.
[18:26] Uh, fire department expenditures went
from
[18:30] 401,549 to
[18:34] 888,49. Same example there. It comes in,
it goes out, but we have to represent it
[18:40] here in our budget that it came in, went
out. Cuz I understand double entry
[18:43] bookkeeping. Why was that not I thought
that we had already put that in there
[18:47] though, assuming that there was going to
be income and expenditure there.
[18:53] I think when I looked at the budget, it
had
[18:57] 62,000 down there. Um I think Melody had
estimated the yearly payment but not the
[19:05] total amount for all of the vehicles.
Okay. Um the library department their
[19:11] expenditures went from 33,000 to 38,000
to account for that 5,000 donations
[19:16] because they expended
um street a fine.
[19:21] So, we didn't have the budget
passed before we had to pay a street
[19:29] lighting. Um, so we went ahead with what
we had been doing and we paid it out of
[19:36] the street a fund. So, we have to amend
that to show that
[19:42] that 400
and pull it up here. I'm sorry.
[19:49] $4,400
[19:53] payment.
$4,958 payment came out of there when it
[19:58] was actually in when we budgeted it. We
passed it to come out of the street
[20:03] department and not the state
[20:08] street. And that's all of
the I did learn something. Um, you don't
[20:17] have
to do line items anymore. Um, it used to
[20:22] be very strict. You had to line item,
line item, line item. Uh, then they got
[20:27] a little relaxed. The county still have
to do that. Um, they got a little
[20:32] relaxed with the municipalities and then
it was
[20:35] department. So, if the department has
this much, they could spend this much.
[20:40] It didn't matter where it came out of.
And then um I talked to the auditor and
[20:45] he said now they're doing the whole the
whole budget. So if all in all we budget
[20:52] $5
million and as long as and it doesn't
[20:56] matter which department if they go over
their
[20:58] budget as long as it doesn't go over $5
million at the total expenditures then
[21:04] we're still good. We don't have to do
amendments.
[21:11] made it a lot easier for me.
[21:18] Okay. So, any questions about the
amendment? And this is
[21:23] uh on Tuesday. This will be a first
reading. Is that correct? Correct. We'll
[21:29] have public hearing uh and second
reading at the June. June. Okay.
[21:35] So this this was not like the last year
we where we had to amend the budget u
[21:42] because we needed to spend more money.
We just had to account for
[21:47] what in a different fashion.
I think this this time it's based more
[21:54] off of grants or
donations whereas in the previous year
[21:58] it's because there were unanticipated
expenses. Last year there was going to
[22:02] be a shortfall where we estimated a
shortfall. So we had to go ahead and
[22:08] amend
it to include the shortfall that this
[22:13] this work what we're doing this year.
That was an expenditure. So we we had to
[22:20] amend for that.
Yeah. When you amend your budget, you're
[22:24] really I mean including revenues is good
practice.
[22:28] you're in charge of expenditures, right?
Um so this amendment is saying we're
[22:34] spending more on this item than we had
anticipated and technically the
[22:39] government can't go above that number
till you bless it, right? Um or you run
[22:44] out of money, so you're doing it now
before the end of the year so that it
[22:47] balances up. But every time you do a
budget amendment, you're typically it's
[22:52] because either a particular category or
overall you're spending more than that
[22:56] cap. you effectively put on the budget
when you pass the big budget which
[23:01] you'll start seeing towards the middle
of the
[23:03] year. So it's always about spending more
money than you had originally
[23:08] anticipated with the budget you passed 9
10 months ago.
[23:12] Now the reason that they vary across the
board, it just depends year to
[23:25] year. Okay. So moving on to codes and
permits. Item number four, discuss the
[23:32] second final reading ordinance to amend
the town of White Bluff zoning ordinance
[23:36] by amending article 2 definition
amending article 3 general provisions
[23:42] section
3.10 accessory use regulations and
[23:47] adding article 4 supplementary
provisions applying to specific
[23:51] districts. Section
4.120 provision for conditional use
[23:56] accessory dwelling units and we will
have a public hearing Tuesday evening uh
[24:02] proceeding this agenda item a long
agenda. Yes, that's announceable.
[24:08] Um mayor, if I if I may, I'll go ahead
and recap this for the council. Um
[24:13] obviously this came from the planning
commission came to you. Um there was
[24:19] significant debate about subsection F in
ownership. Uh new language was created
[24:26] in that meeting with some directive to
me. Uh I took that language to the
[24:31] planning commission earlier this month.
And so just you know what you're looking
[24:35] at when you look at subsection F
there. The last sentence is part of what
[24:41] you added. Let's read it. The
application for an accessory dwelling
[24:45] shall only be approved if the applicant
or owner resides on the property or the
[24:50] applicant or owner intends to reside on
the property as determined by the BGA.
[24:55] So, that was one of the things we talked
about is because the BGA is a quasi
[24:59] judicial body, they'll be able to take
in evidence and see what the intent is.
[25:03] Uh I know some members up here were
concerned like hey if the builder's
[25:07] building it but I've contracted with
them can they go ahead and put that
[25:10] assessment
dwelling. What is in highlighted was
[25:14] what was deleted by
this. The planning commission
[25:19] unanimously rejected those deletions and
wanted them back in. So that is what's
[25:24] here for your consideration. Now, if you
choose to delete some or parts of that,
[25:31] you are free to do so on Tuesday night.
Uh because the planning commission has
[25:35] now weighed in on that new language. Uh
they've blessed uh the last sentence. Uh
[25:41] the planning commission wanted to keep
the language that limits the occupancy
[25:46] to immediate family members as defined
here being parents, grandparents, aunts,
[25:52] uncles, children, grandchildren or
siblings of the property owner uh and
[25:56] that it may not be leased or rented or
sold uh from the se uh separately from
[26:01] the principal unit and family members
may contribute to the property. Um so
[26:06] that is for your consideration and vote
Tuesday night. Obviously, Amanda and I
[26:11] are here to answer any questions you
have on this language or any other part,
[26:15] but this was the part that went back to
the planning commission and you have
[26:19] their response.
My legal question is if I build the
[26:24] accessory
unit, let's say this passes, I build the
[26:29] accessory
unit, can I move into the accessory unit
[26:35] and rent my main resident to him? So,
this came up at the planning commission
[26:42] meeting. And so, my response then, as it
is now, is we really don't have the
[26:47] ability to regulate the principal
structure. if you want to rent it, lease
[26:53] it. Uh we've got some Airbnb regulations
if you're doing short-term, but you
[26:58] really have a lot of freedom with your
principal structure because you only get
[27:03] one per, you know, parcel, uh however
big or small that parcel
[27:07] is. This is a much more constrained
secondary use is how I'm going to define
[27:13] it, but the accessory use uh accessory
dwelling here.
[27:18] Um So you'd be regulating that. You're
the owner. You can be in it. What you do
[27:24] with the primary residence is up to you.
Leave it vacant, rent it to anybody.
[27:32] It's just saying the accessory dwelling
is going to have these restrictions. I'm
[27:36] just I'm really really tortured as you
can all tell from the last how. You
[27:41] know, on one
hand, to me, you know, I don't want
[27:45] every house on my street to have an
accessory dwelling with a renter in. I
[27:49] don't think that's a good idea. On the
flip side of that, if all I got to do is
[27:53] move to the accessory unit or as as Roy
said, if I attach it with a roof line,
[27:59] it is no longer an accessory unit, is an
addition, and I can rent that out
[28:03] because it's part of the main structure.
It's like running out of room. Yeah. And
[28:07] so I don't know, you know, I don't I
don't know that you're accomplishing in
[28:12] this what is intended because there's so
many ways around it legally. Um, and I
[28:18] hate to step on property rights when you
can do it anyway with just a little bit
[28:23] extra effort to avoid this. So that's
where I'm at, but I'm open to
[28:29] conversation. I I agree with you. I see
is nothing but stepping on property
[28:33] owners rights because if I'm of the
mindset to make this as cashable in
[28:39] property as I want to, I would have
split the three bedroomedroom two bath
[28:43] into now a five bedroomedroom. I can do
that legally. I would add an accessory
[28:46] dwelling unit, but I'd add a nice little
adjoined roof line crosswalk to it. Now
[28:50] it's part of the primary per roy. That's
entirely fine. Now I can add two more
[28:53] bedrooms to it if I want to. I could
make myself a mini apartment basically
[28:59] if I was of that mindset. So, this is
not going to accomplish stopping any of
[29:03] that. What this will accomplish is
stopping a well-meaning law-abiding
[29:08] citizen who ends up with an ADU. Their
mom has passed away. They had her out in
[29:13] the guest house or whatever ADU and now
they decided to expand their means uh
[29:17] renting it out to their church members
young son. That's what this is going to
[29:22] stop. It's not going to stop somebody
who's going to just go after it for
[29:25] rentals. And so I view this as just
stepping on property owner tracks. Uh
[29:29] and and the wrong people that we're
trying to go
[29:32] after. That's my two cents.
How many people do I mean I'm talking
[29:39] from just my standpoint do you really
think are going to move out of their
[29:43] larger
home? Because if if if my husband
[29:48] suggested that we moved
in, he could do that.
[29:53] But but what I'm saying is how many
people do you think are actually going
[29:57] to try to get around that by moving into
a much smaller dwell? I think to be
[30:02] fair, I think the majority of people
would not choose that option
[30:06] unless financially choice. Let's just
say that that you know your your
[30:11] husband's passed away and you're living
in the big house and you've got this
[30:14] accessory dwelling and you can't afford
your your payment or your tax or
[30:18] whatever it is. I think by doing this we
might would force them to move to the
[30:23] smaller dwelling so that they could rent
the big bigger
[30:26] dwelling to make sense. I don't think
they would do it out of desire to do
[30:32] that. Yeah, I agree with you. I I think
we're we're hurting the wrong person
[30:35] here.
And I do I am concerned
[30:41] that what I feel is the reason we're
trying to do this because you
[30:46] know I think if you're not careful
everybody their mom money's tight for
[30:50] everybody is like oh I'll just build an
accessory shed and rent that out and
[30:53] that'll be an extra $800 a month. And so
if everybody on that street does
[30:59] that you know is that an issue? I'm open
to discussion on that as well. Is that a
[31:04] problem? I mean, if I would also argue
most people are not minded that way to
[31:08] expand their means that way. Most people
I would agree that they'll go buy a new
[31:12] car before they look to expand.
Um, so, you know, can we just monitor it
[31:19] and see how it goes? And just like our
billboard situation, you know, I'm I'm
[31:25] open for discussion. I'm just I'm
just in reviewing how to sidestep this
[31:32] is where my concern lies because there's
so many ways to do that. I mean, if we
[31:37] were to pass this and I were going to
build an accessory dwelling even for my
[31:41] family members, I would attach it with a
roof line because of this orphice.
[31:45] Because now you can't touch me. I can do
whatever I want to do. So, if I'm going
[31:49] to spend the money to build it anyway,
why not just attach it to the building?
[31:52] And that's my concern. It's like I'm not
going to even attempt to follow this.
[31:57] I'm just going to go around it
completely. Um now I may be one in a
[32:01] hundred that that thinks that way but
and who you're hurting. And I'll give a
[32:05] real life example. I had this sweet
couple down in Alabama church with her.
[32:10] Um they took care of his elderly mom. So
they built an ADU on their property to
[32:16] take care of his elderly mom. His wife
got cancer. She beat it thankfully. Um,
[32:21] once the mom passed away, they had
medical bills they had to pay for. What
[32:25] do you think they did with that ADU?
They put somebody they knew, loved, and
[32:29] trusted from the church in that ADU to
help expand their means to help pay her
[32:34] medical bills. That's who we're hurting.
We're not hurting people like you,
[32:38] right? So, like you said, you're going
to get around it anyways. And my biggest
[32:41] concern with this is what we added right
here at the plan commission approved is
[32:46] that I don't want to buy Jacob's house
who has an accessory dwelling already
[32:52] and rent Jacob's house to one tenant and
Jacob's accessory shed to the other and
[32:55] I don't have to live there at all
because now you're letting me basically
[32:58] do duplexes on every single piece of
property that has an accessory dwelling.
[33:02] So I do think that part is important
because that's what's going to happen.
[33:06] If you let accessories buildings start
going up, you know, people that's in my
[33:10] business are going to be like, "Well,
that's two rental properties in one one
[33:12] bank." So, we can't let that happen. Um,
well, I want to clarify. We talked about
[33:18] this planning commission. This is once
you get a permit, once you build
[33:23] something, you're in a slightly
different world. This is about how you
[33:27] get the permit. A little bit about how
you keep going on, but it's about how
[33:31] you get the permit. So, let's say I have
a house and it's a large enough lot. Got
[33:36] enough space. I build an ADU totally
detached, right? Put a pin in that. I'm
[33:40] going to come back to the connection or
not. Um, and let's say, you know, I die
[33:48] and my estate sells it to somebody. Mhm.
They don't live there and they rent out
[33:53] the boat. Can they do that? Right.
They're not getting a permit. The
[33:57] structure is already there. Right. So
you're saying in the beginning of this
[34:03] section that we are putting a
restriction on that still. Now you get
[34:07] into enforcement, you get into checking
in on that and what would be the remedy?
[34:12] Well, fines and injunction. That's
what's on the table.
[34:15] Um, so you
know, it's not going to be perfect.
[34:21] You're not going to cover everything.
What your zoning ordinance needs to do
[34:27] is espouse the policy you want. Some
people are going to get around that
[34:31] policy and we will work to fight it, but
it's never going to catch everything in
[34:36] that net. Um, this is saying, hey, if
you do that, you have the chance of
[34:41] getting caught. You have the chance of
getting fined $50 a day. You have the
[34:45] chance of getting an injunction against
you um if you get found out, right? Um,
[34:52] so But I wanted to make clear that last
sentence that's about at the application
[34:56] phase and directly through the BCA. The
BCA grants this special exception,
[35:01] they're no longer involved. I got right.
So it's all all back on code enforcement
[35:05] at that point.
Um you could build a mini apartment in
[35:12] your house. You could have the
detachment. You're saying if you're
[35:15] going to do this, you have to take these
extra steps. But if it is a completely
[35:19] separate house, I mean this is a house.
This is a small house, but this is a
[35:24] completely separate house. And our
general policy is that you get one
[35:30] per parcel, right? This is an exception
to that, a special exception as the BC
[35:35] would be evaluating. Um, and so it comes
with those parameters. If you really
[35:40] wanted, if the lot's big enough, split
it into two lots, put a second house,
[35:44] right? Like that would be that's my
other way of thinking about it is just
[35:48] build another house. Even if it's small,
you get the smallest lot allowed in that
[35:52] zoning district with those setbacks and
build a small house and you can sell it,
[35:56] right? And you can rent it to anybody.
You can do anything. This is if it's
[36:00] going to be on one parcel. You got your
main structure and a housing unit behind
[36:04] it. You're it's a really small set of of
circumstances that this is coming up in.
[36:10] Uh because if you got a five acre parcel
in R1, you can split that in two and
[36:15] just build another house no matter how
big, right? Uh we got some minimums, but
[36:20] you know, you put a minimum in here, but
um it's it's only covering a very narrow
[36:25] set of circumstances. And again, you're
putting forth what is your policy
[36:30] knowing that some people might hide it
or try to get around it, may never get
[36:33] caught, or maybe they do get caught. Um
that that's what you're putting forth. I
[36:37] don't know if you you've been working on
this more than me. So I agree. Thank
[36:41] you.
And the utilities everything has to be
[36:46] on the same meter as well. So if you are
trying to rent it out to
[36:51] different professional landlords ain't
going to do that. That'd be a pain in
[36:54] the butt because you don't have separate
address. You don't have separate
[36:56] utility. That's a pain in the butt. So
like I said, what you're hurting is
[36:59] you're hurting my friends like down at
Bayonette. That's who you're hurting.
[37:02] And you're saying, "Hey, uh you might
get caught. You might get fined for
[37:05] doing this." That's that's the people
we're going at it and I have a hard time
[37:09] with that. Well, if you're a separate
entity though, I don't know that I would
[37:12] really want to get into sharing
utility. Well, so again, you know, I'm
[37:20] probably the oddball of the bunch. But
if I were going, like for an example, I
[37:24] have a a garage and let's say I convert
that into accessory dwelling. I could
[37:29] meter the water and the electrical going
to that unit to subfill my tenant. So I
[37:35] could I could read his meter, read his
water meter, even though it's not an
[37:38] actual utility meter and and bill Jacob
for his part
[37:43] um as my pen. Is that how this is
currently written?
[37:49] Well, from what make sure I'm doing that
right I've done that before. It would be
[37:54] a private meter. I would correct. You
have your main public meter, but then
[37:58] you could have you want to know what's
going to your garage. I have people on
[38:01] larger land. They want to know how much
their farm is using, whatever. that's
[38:05] not getting read by the electric.
So you could Yeah, you if you're renting
[38:11] it out and you want to know what their
portion is, you could put a meter on
[38:14] that line, the electrical line or water
line to it. Yes, you could. And that's
[38:18] not going to be violent about this,
right? It's just the public line, the
[38:22] public meters one her lot. And it does
concern me. I mean, I'm
[38:27] not I'm not totally unaware of of the
importance. You know, I don't I don't
[38:32] know that it's a good idea that every
house on Main Street has an accessory
[38:37] dwelling that you're renting out so
somebody not in the family. People on
[38:40] Main Street would
have true, but you know what I'm saying?
[38:44] Like I don't know that I mean if you you
know, of course, obviously you'd have to
[38:48] meet
these we leave it as it is. You have to
[38:52] meet these guidelines even to fill it.
If we take this out, then you
[38:57] necessarily wouldn't I mean if
you you can bring it to wherever you
[39:03] want to. Yes. God. Yes. Go. I need I
need more into it. Well, I was going to
[39:10] ask about the electric
meters. You can have multiple electric
[39:16] meters at one address. I have You have
it now. I have it now.
[39:22] And depending on the distance that your
building is from primary building, it
[39:29] makes sense to
put an extra meter in for that.
[39:34] Sometimes
distance you can't
[39:38] run, you know, power to your house and
then run it to another depends on the
[39:42] distance. But under
this could be accessory. Gotcha. All
[39:48] accessory calling units shall have
electrical service consistent with the
[39:52] primary structure. I don't know what
that means. Is it same electricity or
[39:56] the same? Yes. Or same meter. Does that
mean like from the same company? Does it
[39:59] mean you can't have a separate meter?
It's designed to not have a separate
[40:04] meter because a lot of people do have
separate meters on their conduct. We
[40:09] cover that. So you're if you're talking
about a storage building or a barn
[40:15] agricultural purposes, you're not
talking about another dwelling unit,
[40:19] right? This is not talking about another
building. Yeah. This is not regulating
[40:23] any of the other buildings. You can do
that if the electric department won't
[40:26] allow it. This is saying if you do an
ADU, it's going to be part of the
[40:30] electricity that's to the main
structure. See, I I don't see where that
[40:33] benefits anybody. why you could not
I think it was probably one of the
[40:40] components to make it harder to rent to
the general public. I mean and remind
[40:46] all of us again or especially me the way
that our zoning ordinance is written at
[40:52] the moment are any accessory dwelling
units allowed as of right now?
[40:59] ADU ads. So that got into the code issue
and whether or not there was a kitchen
[41:06] and the kitchen kicked it over and so
you couldn't that's that's why we're
[41:11] that's why we're having this
conversation because the the board then
[41:15] silent on the issue. So the code said no
once you had a kitchen. So I mean could
[41:21] you put a shack in there with a bed?
Yeah, you could. But if you want to make
[41:26] it a treated home with all the you know
toilet shower kitchen. So part of the
[41:31] reason this is coming up is because the
zoning ordinance has been violated here
[41:35] in White Blood. Correct. There have been
instances where people have put shed out
[41:40] and they actually went as far as to run
separate utilities to at separate meters
[41:45] and so they were effectively putting two
dwelling units on one lot.
[41:50] And there's a precedence here that
somebody Okay. going to violate it.
[41:57] Somebody did what they wanted on their
own property. Yeah, I know.
[42:02] It's hard to It's hard to legislate that
because I mean, you can't I mean, what
[42:04] if somebody says they're going to put
out 10 tents in their backyard and rent
[42:07] out each tent? I mean,
[Music]
[42:13] we'll build an out house. I mean, this
is kind of still put two cents in.
[42:18] So if we pick out what we took out last
meeting to where you can rent
[42:25] it,
anybody, what doesn't matter if it has
[42:32] a a power meter to it. I mean, you can
already have one to any other type of
[42:38] building that you put out within your
property, but you can't have it for an
[42:44] accessory dwelling unit. That's
nitpicky. So then at what point does it
[42:48] just become a separate structure and is
inconsistent with our other zoning
[42:54] ordinances where we're saying you can
only have one house per lot if it's on
[42:58] one.
Well candidly I think all of these
[43:03] provisions are up for debate. I'm going
to put that out there. The only thing
[43:07] that's going to be a red line for me and
please tell me if you agree or think
[43:11] differently or think there's more is you
can't parse it off.
[43:16] That's the red line. Um, if you want to
modify utilities or anything else, I
[43:22] think that's worthy of discussion, but
I'll be a strong advisor against it
[43:27] because otherwise just parcel it off and
go under the code for building a home.
[43:35] You know, this again, this is a
specialized type of use. You're building
[43:38] a guest house, a mini home on one
parcel, right? It is a separate
[43:43] structure. designed to be a separate
structure. Um, it just happens to be a
[43:48] little bit smaller.
Um, should it have its own meter? Maybe.
[43:56] I mean, that's a policy decision. Uh,
again, a lot of this was designed to
[44:01] keep it all in that umbrella of this is
one parcel. This is one owner. We're
[44:07] going to keep it under that umbrella. So
everything in here from A through O is
[44:13] kind of reflective of that policy.
[44:18] Um so you know
I it's the will of the council to tinker
[44:25] with this but um if you I will add
this if you change anything other than F
[44:33] it's going to go back to PC. So, just
prepare that in mind. If that's what you
[44:37] want, we'll make that work and it can go
at the May meeting. It'll come back to
[44:41] you at your your June council meeting.
Um, but that's I just want to make it
[44:48] clear that that's that was the policy
consideration
[44:51] of we're going to make this be on one
parcel. We're going to allow this to be
[44:55] on one parcel, but it has to stay one
parcel. And you can't 5 years down the
[44:59] road come in with a two lot pl and
separate it out and then sell it and all
[45:04] that. is going to be part of this.
Otherwise, go ahead and parcel it out
[45:08] and let someone or yourself build a home
and rent that out, right? It's a very
[45:12] specialized use. Well, wouldn't wouldn't
that be wouldn't you have to take that
[45:16] that property itself and change the
zoning of it? Well, depends on the size,
[45:22] right? Right. Uh depends on the size. Um
I mean, but that's that's what you're
[45:26] talking about is if you want to parcel
it out, you're basically turning into
[45:30] R2. Well, it's R1 or R2. uh is all the
ADUs allowed in again because we're
[45:37] under density zoning.
Um without an exact example, I couldn't
[45:42] tell you if R1 or R2 would work for
this. I mean, if you're dealing with a
[45:46] 3acre lot and you want to divide it in
half of your R1, you can do that. You
[45:51] can have two one and a half acre lots.
Or if you have a threeacre lot, you're
[45:54] like, I want to put an ADU, it has to
stay one parcel. But that's that's what
[45:59] I mean. I mean, you have between I go to
VDA or the zoning and and you split up
[46:07] and efficiently instead of one R1 it's
two R1 R1 R2 and R2. So I mean whatever
[46:14] the zoning is on it now if you just
split it up the zoning stays and you
[46:18] could ask for different zoning for those
parcels later or part of that process.
[46:23] But let's say you get three acre or one
lot and you're like I want two one and a
[46:27] halfacre lots. You just come in with a
two lot subdivision plat and split it up
[46:32] depending on if you have the proper road
frontage and all the other aspects that
[46:35] are required. Assuming you can do that
and you've got two livable lots with its
[46:39] own setbacks and everything. The ADU
under one 3acre parcel in this example
[46:45] you're just dealing with the setbacks
for that three acre lot. You got to get
[46:49] it to fit on the side. Right. The side
can't be further than the front of the
[46:55] house or anywhere behind it within the
setbacks. Right? That's what this is
[46:58] allowing.
[47:02] Can I ask a couple the these everybody's
asking some really esteemed questions.
[47:06] I'd like to go more juvenile. Um just
just because you know Yeah. This is I'm
[47:12] still I'm still
um so just for everybody's knowledge of
[47:19] what you're thinking like I I tend to
agree with Mr. Kincaid on a lot of his
[47:23] arguments. Um, and so I thought several
of these questions would be sort of
[47:27] geared in that same regard. When we're
listing in in the highlighted section
[47:31] here, parents, grandparents, aunts and
uncles, children, grandchildren,
[47:36] siblings,
[47:41] why I guess I'm just not going to try to
put other. Why not cousins? Why not
[47:45] great grandparents? Why not great great
grandparents? Like I to me this says
[47:50] these are special people in my life and
and and I I love my brothers but hey my
[47:57] my buddy that lives in Cookville is is a
good friend of mine too and like I just
[48:02] don't feel like we should be defining
who should be important in your life and
[48:05] who's not important in your life. Um so
if we were to adopt this language I
[48:09] think it should be opened up to cousins
and great grandparents are more likely
[48:13] to need this than grandparents. So let's
throw that in there. And how many grapes
[48:16] do you want to go? Um, and then my my
question and and I understand that's
[48:21] stupid. We can roll our eyes at it, but
I it makes a point, but also I think if
[48:25] you're going to have this language, you
should add in a couple of other uh
[48:29] exceptions. Um, and then furthermore, my
question would be, how does one prove?
[48:35] How do how do I prove before a board
that Brian's my uncle? Do I bring birth
[48:39] certificates? I mean, I'm being I'm
being curious here. Do I say Brian's my
[48:43] uncle and we just leave it at that? Do
you willing to say it under oath? Under.
[48:48] Sure. Okay. So, you would that would be
your threat. Okay. Okay. Just just
[48:52] clarifying that. Uncle.
And if we were I mean if we were foster
[48:56] brothers at one time, does that does
that violate this? Like I'm I'm just I'm
[49:01] just asking. No. So immediate family.
This is a pretty typical definition.
[49:05] Okay. Immediate family members. Uh you
could I guess the step up would be
[49:11] related which you go back far enough in
time we're all related. Um you know so
[49:17] go back where where do you want to go on
that line and again it was designed to
[49:23] be and again it's a policy thing. Y'all
can shift the policy that's why it's
[49:27] coming to you for this debate. Um, if
you want to say if you want to move away
[49:32] from immediate family members, uh, to
me, a lot of those middle grounds of you
[49:37] have to be related to or you have to be
special to, it's not worth it. Right.
[49:40] Exactly. I say get rid of it.
Um, or keep it to, I mean, if you want
[49:46] to
add great grandparents and great
[49:49] grandchildren in here, I think that
would probably be fine. Uh, but if you
[49:53] want to go far outside of that,
um, I I think it's it's going to make
[50:00] this virtually meaningless, right? No, I
I understand. I just wanted some
[50:05] clarification on on those things and
you've given me that. And then I guess
[50:08] my my other question would be um you
know, we had a a spectacle of the debate
[50:14] last time we were together and you came
up with this with this blue language. Is
[50:18] that correct? what we see in blue. Um,
is there have you exhaust I mean and I
[50:23] guess we it would be beneficial to
know those of us who are for this or
[50:30] against this, you know, it would be nice
to have those those conversations out on
[50:34] the table, neat and organized, and then
have you exhausted your legal language
[50:38] to to make this appealing to both those
who are detracting from it and those who
[50:44] are advancing for it? That's a
complicated question. Thank you. That's
[50:47] a good question.
Yeah, I draft language, you know, when
[50:51] this any process on this, whether it
starts at this body um or the planning
[50:57] commission or administratively really
it's the three of us work on a language
[51:01] to then present to the planning
commission, right? And it works its way
[51:04] up. Everybody's going to have a
different view to, you know, little
[51:08] wrinkles and you try to coalesce around
the top, right? Right. Um I draft
[51:13] language based upon your directives. So,
from our last time, you were like,
[51:17] "Let's give the BCA some discretion."
Um, if the owner isn't the owner yet,
[51:23] but they're getting it built for them to
go ahead and put an ADU. This allowed an
[51:26] ADU in a more broad process, then you
have to already own the property and
[51:31] then you go build it. Someone else who's
owning it, if you're under contract, you
[51:34] could present the contract at the BCA
meeting and make, okay, that's enough
[51:37] for me. I'm okay with that. Right. Um,
have I exhausted language? No. I do
[51:44] think so, but I I didn't think so. But I
I there was there was so many points
[51:49] raised and there's being a lot of points
raised right now. And I was just
[51:53] curious, you know, what of all the
arguments that were made, we this this
[51:58] blue text here is is dealing with the
the builder wanting to go ahead and
[52:03] build it even though I'm not currently
occupying it. You dealt with that. that
[52:06] you're intending to and that intention
can be interpreted by the BGA based upon
[52:10] the testimony given in the hearing.
Right. Okay. So,
[52:15] I think you know the mayor made a
comment about uh the billboards and I do
[52:21] agree with you.
However, the way I said that this is
[52:24] your home. So, to me, you know, it's
like happy on my home. You know, I'm I'm
[52:30] okay with some more restrictions on my
commercial entities than I am on my
[52:35] actual home. I do see what staff wants
to do because right now it's not allowed
[52:41] at all. So, if I've got a daughter that
wants a shed in back, I have anywhere to
[52:45] go. I'm going to sneak a kitchen into my
shed without code, build this little
[52:50] sheed, put her in there, regardless of
what the code says. At least for this,
[52:56] you you it's in, you know, I'm assuming
it's it's looked at. You're not just
[53:00] throwing up a shack because I've seen
some of the ones that they they've added
[53:04] without without any permission and
they're dangerous and they're not wired
[53:08] correctly and it's it's on the street.
I'm just really really torn about, you
[53:13] know, as much as I see the the
the reasoning for wanting it to be just
[53:19] immediate family, I agree with Jacob.
This guy's been with you since you
[53:22] fought in the military together. You're
best friends. You don't have a brother,
[53:25] but he's your brother. How can he not
stay there? It's your it's your home.
[53:29] So, that's that's where I'm I'm really
home. I think um Well, I do have two
[53:35] more questions, but I think
that people are focusing on who can or
[53:43] cannot stay there versus can it be
rented? And are you suggesting that your
[53:48] friend would rent the property from you
or that your friend would just stay
[53:51] there as a gift? I mean, I think that's
a good point as well. You know, if
[53:55] you're if you're and maybe that's the
bridge, you know, because well, again,
[54:00] it's your property. If your brother from
the military goes, "Hey, man, I'll give
[54:03] you a couple bucks while I get on my
feet." Or maybe your wife's best friend
[54:06] just is going through a divorce and
she's like, "I'll give you a couple, you
[54:09] know, hundred bucks or so just to just
to, you know, because I'm here." That's
[54:13] rent. Why can't you do that? That's my
thought. So So and you might give them
[54:18] like depending on hey I'll give you
three months to get on your feet and
[54:21] then after that could you give me 200
bucks a month just to
[54:24] whatever you know like Jacob said
everything is based on what you are
[54:28] willing to do. I mean so if I move Carl
in there I don't tell you guys and you
[54:36] know what are you going to do? You going
to get a warrant to come look? I mean
[54:39] how's that going to even go? And so I
don't know that you can stop once it's
[54:44] filled. I don't know that you can
control it. Um because, you know, if
[54:49] you're my best friend and you need a
place to stay, you know, I'm probably
[54:53] going to leave you in there and I'm not
going to say anything. And if it's
[54:56] quiet, you probably won't and nobody's
probably ever going to know. I mean, you
[54:59] know, party. So, two more questions.
One, accessory dwelling units, depending
[55:05] on how they're built, whether it's a
flat foundation or crawl space. If it
[55:09] was a crawl space, technically the ADU
could be moved in the future off the
[55:12] property. Correct. because you're a
builder. You would I mean I would say
[55:16] depending on the size we could probably
move most anything. I mean in Nashville
[55:22] literally I've
I would say that people So ADU is not
[55:28] going to be permanent in the sense like
what you were discussing or you where
[55:33] they could just extend the roof line,
add on another room and essentially have
[55:37] an apartment. That's going to be a more
permanent forever and ever unless a
[55:41] tornado hit. Cross spaces will still
have foundations though. They do, but
[55:44] it's easier to lift the existing
structure if someone wanted to the
[55:49] structure, but your foundation still be
there. Yeah, you could just take it out
[55:53] with the back. What if they do want to
put it on a slab? So, we're telling that
[55:56] now we're I'm just saying I don't know.
This would be his area, but I'm thinking
[55:59] if it's on a slab, it's a little bit
harder. I mean, I would say maybe for
[56:04] me, I would say be harder on slab. Yeah.
Okay. Not impossible. Not we can put
[56:09] them in from our perspective on the
legal enforcement side. If it's crawl
[56:12] space or fondant, it's a permanent
building. You're distinguishing that
[56:16] between like a fifth wheel placement,
right? Like of what can be moved or you
[56:20] take a shed and just put it on a couple
blocks, you don't really even have a
[56:23] foundation. That's different to me,
right? Rather than you excavate, get a
[56:29] foundation in there. Um, we treat those
as permit. Those are detached.
[56:36] I understand that administratively we
think that that is permanent, but in
[56:40] reality if you can move a portable shed
out of your backyard, you could
[56:44] essentially move ADU if you wanted to
and wipe out the foundation.
[56:50] On that point, anything could be used
though. Yeah. And and according to
[56:53] labels and laws and such, foundation is
foundation is permanent structure and
[56:57] that's what you
I'm talking about having the structure
[57:02] on site because you're asking what are
you going to do with it? Well, maybe
[57:04] somebody wants to sell it to someone
else as cool fishing cabin. So maybe
[57:08] they put it on a trailer or flatbed,
whatever, and they haul it off to the
[57:12] Tennessee
River. There are other outcomes than,
[57:17] oh, mom had passed away and now we have
this empty building in our backyard.
[57:21] There are other options.
And I guess my next question I've gone
[57:27] off on is um so the way that things are
written right now, we do not have
[57:32] anything in place for an accessory
dwelling unit. Correct. So going
[57:37] forward, if we wanted to, could we just
completely ban accessory dwelling units
[57:42] as an option as well? Yeah. I wanted to
emphasize kind of to your point, Mayor,
[57:48] this is a change in your zoning
ordinance.
[57:52] you can update it in six months, six
weeks, six years.
[57:57] Um, obviously I think not to speak for
Amanda or Jeff, but when we open a door,
[58:03] we want to open it a little bit and see
how it goes rather than have it be wide
[58:06] open. Uh, but again, it's a policy
consideration that y'all get to decide.
[58:11] I think it would be harder if you had no
limitations. If you took the the yellow
[58:15] highlight out, I think it's going to be
harder to pull it back. That'd be okay.
[58:20] Uh, but I say it's it's say let's not
have these categories. You can't rent it
[58:25] or lease it and it'll only be to these
people staying here, right? And if you
[58:31] all start getting push back from people,
you got three or four people coming to
[58:34] meetings saying, "Hey, I really want to
do this." You can think about changing
[58:38] that. Um, the only other thing I'll
throw out there and and I may regret
[58:43] saying this,
but to u Councilman Pucket's
[58:49] point, have we legal language this out?
No, because you could just put a lot of
[58:54] this discretion on the BCA. That makes
me a little nervous. Uh, but say, you
[58:59] know, it has to be for, and I'm just
shooting from the hip here, some
[59:04] justifiable reason or some connection to
the owner. Now, could they lie? Could
[59:09] some Joe from the street rent from them
and say, "Oh, I've known him since we
[59:13] were in high school." Sure, they could.
Uh, but that that's some discretion.
[59:18] Say, "Look, we're not going to put
parameters on it, but there has to be
[59:20] some connection, and we need to figure
out if there's language that could work
[59:24] for that." Um, but at the end of the
day, you have these two sets of
[59:28] restrictions in there. Who can occupy
it? And can you lease and rent it or
[59:32] not? And you're saying a small group can
occupy it, and it cannot be leased or
[59:37] rented. That's in this version. It is
your discretion to take one or both of
[59:41] those
out or leave it in. What kind of
[59:46] ex-husband?
They are not immediate feminist. See,
[59:51] see, if I was to get kicked out and I
wanted to live in my dwelling unit
[59:56] because I own the property along with my
ex-wife. Well, if you own it, it
[1:00:01] wouldn't apply. This is This is for
nonowners.
[1:00:05] Yeah. If someone else owns it, it's
okay.
[1:00:09] Like like my father's point, let's say
you had a buddy in the military, saved
[1:00:13] your life, but he's got CDI now. He's
never going to get anywhere, get
[1:00:17] married, you need some help. He's not
your family member, but he is your
[1:00:20] family member in your heart. And uh he's
living off his his disability. Sorry,
[1:00:26] can't come unless you extend the roof
line. And and actually this is a real
[1:00:31] interesting thing because my neighbors
right now, this is real time, the next
[1:00:34] door neighbors, uh Travis is trying to
they're actually looking to move their
[1:00:38] mother-in-law right now. And so I'm
actually like actually told I'm like,
[1:00:42] "Well, hang on till we pass this bill, I
might have to tell you how to build it a
[1:00:45] different way because once she dies, you
may or may not want to do something
[1:00:48] different with it. And depending on how
we pass this law, you might want to put
[1:00:51] a cross in it." And I think if we're
going to allow it, then, you know, I do
[1:00:57] like that this requires you to get a
permit. So, somebody's looking at your
[1:01:01] accessory dwelling. It's not just a shed
that you bought from, you know, and dug
[1:01:06] it in there and and ran an extension
cord for power. I've seen that. So, I do
[1:01:11] like that. I I'm afraid if we just
squash this and we don't change anything
[1:01:15] and we leave it like it is, then you're
going to have exactly what's been
[1:01:19] happening. You're just going to have
people just put a shed in there and
[1:01:22] you're going to be like, "Oh, it's a
shed." Well, no. It's an accessory
[1:01:25] dwelling. I do like the inspection. I'm
just, you know, what we do with the rest
[1:01:29] of it. I don't know. But I I I would
prefer to have something rather than
[1:01:33] nothing because I don't think if we just
do nothing, they're going to continue to
[1:01:37] just do what they were doing, which is
basically doing it anyway. Well,
[1:01:41] assuming y'all pass some version on
Tuesday, you're going to have something,
[1:01:45] right? Your debate is how wide open is
that? Yeah. Right. Um, you know, that
[1:01:50] last that was added, you're at least
putting you have to be owner or the
[1:01:53] intended owner to get an ADU. You know,
you you have that in there. If you left
[1:01:57] that, say you strip out all the the
highlighted parts, you're still making
[1:02:01] the owner do it. It's not just some 40
unit subdivision coming in and saying,
[1:02:07] "Screw your R1. I'm going to put two
rentalful units on each of these." So,
[1:02:11] it's actually 80. And they didn't even
go through zoning, you know. So, there
[1:02:15] are some limitations. Now again, 5 years
down the road, you have this, you sell,
[1:02:19] you move, sell to somebody, they have
two things that they can rent
[1:02:25] independently. So that
one two. So are you making a little
[1:02:31] harder to just Yes, you are. Is it going
to be impossible? No.
[1:02:39] So it'll be for a public hearing on
Tuesday and then um you all have to make
[1:02:46] some motion andor amendment or with the
motion on how you want to see uh the
[1:02:52] language in F. And again, you're welcome
to examine any other part of this, but
[1:02:57] if it's a substantial change outside of
F, it will have to go back to I have one
[1:03:02] more juvenile question.
If I if if uh I'm I'm I'm living in your
[1:03:09] accessory dwelling unit, Andrew, and and
I and and uh maybe we're not maybe I'm
[1:03:16] your I'm your brother or something.
Okay. And and and I'm not you're you're
[1:03:20] I'm living there and and I can't I can't
pay you rent under this. Correct. Uh so
[1:03:26] you're saying you are an immediate
family member? I'm your immediate
[1:03:28] family, right? You can contribute. I can
contribute. Okay. Then that question has
[1:03:32] to answer. Okay. Yeah,
I understand as a contribute point.
[1:03:38] Okay. I was going to say, can I offer
you I want to thank you. Thank you for
[1:03:42] being so generous. I'd like to give you
$1,000. Does that violate rent at that
[1:03:46] point? No, we're not saying that's
right. We're saying it's a contribution
[1:03:49] so you can be whatever you want. But I
think that really came up because
[1:03:53] certain family members, and I've seen
this elsewhere, you know, the
[1:03:57] mother-in-law, they'll be like, I'll pay
for it if you build it. So that's like
[1:04:03] here's here's $100,000. Go build me a
thousand square foot awesome
[1:04:08] mother-in-law house behind your house.
It's saying that's allowed, right? It
[1:04:13] doesn't have to be money from the
owners. The family member can
[1:04:17] contribute. So that was so that So if
his friend moves in, doesn't pay rent,
[1:04:25] but because he's just trying to
contribute $800 a month towards the beer
[1:04:28] fund, is it still good? Well, the
contribution part of it currently at
[1:04:34] currently as drafted, it can only be
occupied by immediate family members.
[1:04:38] So, the friend would not qualify. So,
Frank can't even stay. So, now it's not
[1:04:41] even a guest house as the mayor was
saying because the friend can't even
[1:04:44] sleep over the night.
So, can we go used or occupied by an
[1:04:50] immediate family? Okay. So, now friends
can't even stay over in the couch in the
[1:04:54] main. Oh, so your friends can't stay
over either. Don't walk in. That's a
[1:05:00] little concerning, but we can we can
move on. I mean that to me that's the
[1:05:04] way that's written like that that's
that's really concerning that I'd be in
[1:05:08] violation of something and I wouldn't
even know that. But I think there is a
[1:05:11] difference between coming to spend the
weekend and making that your permanent
[1:05:15] residence. I I I I agree. But I mean
what Andrew just said though, you'd be
[1:05:20] there's not a
distinction. So that mean at least at
[1:05:24] the bare minimum may I think that's
something you can address either define
[1:05:28] or or something but I I can be good now
I'm ready.
[1:05:35] And what's one other question while
we're all together?
[1:05:40] So in this scenario someone buys this
they get the permit for a family member.
[1:05:45] They build it family member passageway.
They decide to sell the property. They
[1:05:49] sold it to a different party. At that
point can that party print out the ADU.
[1:05:56] Uh, not as
this runs with the land, so it has to be
[1:06:01] the owner of the property owns the whole
parcel and that owner's immediate family
[1:06:08] members can use or occupy the ADU
because Scott asked a question about or
[1:06:13] one of you asked a question about
enforcing it. At the planning
[1:06:17] commission, we did discuss a permitting
process where they would have to reapply
[1:06:21] for a permit once a year, every two
years, and we decided that was going to
[1:06:26] be too labor intensive for the code
inspector, but that part was removed.
[1:06:31] So, if there was a permitting process,
then yes, somebody would come back and
[1:06:35] check on a regular basis, but we chose
not to go that route. And I'll just add
[1:06:40] that that recurring type of permit
review is for more temporary uses. And
[1:06:46] again, this is a
full-fledged structure that is there.
[1:06:50] So, it makes it hard. I'm glad that was
because I don't want Uncle Sam drop my
[1:06:54] property ever so many years to take out
all Well, I'm just going to say this and
[1:07:00] then I'm going to move on. There was a
big to-do about billboards not too long
[1:07:04] ago. And I understand there is a
distinction between commercial property
[1:07:08] in your home where you live. But in
terms of property owners rights, if you
[1:07:13] own commercial property or you own
residential property, that is your
[1:07:17] property. And in essence, property owner
rights should apply to both types of
[1:07:21] property. So you guys were not okay with
having billboards in the center part of
[1:07:26] town because you didn't want to look at
them. In the same vein, there are other
[1:07:30] people in the community who do not want
to have a plethora of accessory dwelling
[1:07:35] units in the community because they
don't want to deal with absentee
[1:07:38] landlords who are renting these out or
people who are not maintaining the
[1:07:43] property. So, if you're going to be
concerned about property owner rights,
[1:07:47] be consistent in your concern about
those rights. And now, I'm going to move
[1:07:51] on. Again, I object to that because even
on the loan process, there's distinction
[1:07:55] between commercial and residential.
you're both property that you want to do
[1:08:00] things, but you can get a different rate
on buying a piece of property that
[1:08:03] you're going to live in it. And there's
actually distinctions on the rate that
[1:08:06] you get for your loan to buy. I'm not
talking about financials. I'm talking
[1:08:10] about the hard issue of property owner,
right? There's a difference in
[1:08:14] commercial and owner occupied. Everybody
sees that distinction and they're
[1:08:17] treated differently. That's what we're
doing. We're being intellectually
[1:08:20] consistent because we're treating owner
occupied. Well, I would say the people
[1:08:24] who own the commercial property who are
not able to put up billboards now and
[1:08:28] earn profit from that property, they
would probably disagree with you on that
[1:08:32] point. You're sitting, you're looking at
two of them sitting right here, and I'll
[1:08:35] take it.
Okay. All right. Um, at this point, at
[1:08:42] this point, I'm about ready for us to
consider banning a
[1:08:45] [Music]
separate all together. Well, uh, they're
[1:08:51] as we sit here, they're not allowed. So,
it's true. And they're still here.
[1:08:56] That's that's where I'm just It's just
So, when they're in violation, what is
[1:09:00] the process when somebody violates? Um,
is it just a simple fine or
[1:09:07] That's a really good question. If I've
got an accessory drilling right now
[1:09:11] today, can you legally as a city come on
my property and prove that? Yes. You
[1:09:17] have to go through a process. Okay. So,
it's a it's called an administrative
[1:09:21] warrant. Uh it's different than a
criminal warrant. It's similar enough.
[1:09:27] Um and then we would actually have to go
to chancery court for something more
[1:09:32] than a $50 a day fine. But it is
enforceable as we stand if we get to the
[1:09:37] point of
of if they don't take it down, you can
[1:09:42] give an order to take it down and charge
them for that cost.
[1:09:47] Is this the one extension cord was gone
from there? No, she's gone now. But
[1:09:52] yeah, it was there. I live in the mayor.
It was there.
[1:09:56] Okay. So, moving on to streets and
sidewalks. Item number five, we have an
[1:10:02] ordinance establishing Jordan Street and
White, Tennessee as a one-way
[1:10:07] street coming up.
[1:10:12] Mayor, we we continue to get calls. Um
the the latest incident was
[1:10:20] um school bus uh versus FedEx truck,
FedEx or UPS, I don't know.
[1:10:28] Um two vehicles like that cannot get
down uh Jordan Street. Uh apparently the
[1:10:34] school bus turned into Jordan Street and
and the school bus elected to then back
[1:10:39] up uh which was them backing up into
traffic uh which doesn't sound safe.
[1:10:48] Um so we continue to get calls uh about
that uh asking if we could consider
[1:10:57] uh making uh Jordan Street one way.
I've talked to the police chief. I've
[1:11:03] talked to uh Chief Hill and and they are
in agreement as well uh that um Jordan
[1:11:12] should be one way uh proposing one way
from the highway 70 old Charlotte Road
[1:11:21] area northward
toward town
[1:11:26] road. So it's it's back.
Um, I have a question. We've been
[1:11:32] talking about this for a while, even all
the way back in the previous
[1:11:34] administration. At both times, we were
told we had existing engineers that were
[1:11:38] looking at other projects that we were
going to ask to look at this as well and
[1:11:41] make recommendations. And we have yet to
get those recommendations. So, I'm just
[1:11:45] wondering where those engineers went,
where the recommendation went, and are
[1:11:48] we just
moving? Well, I mean, yes, we have uh a
[1:11:55] a
projected project uh to deal with this
[1:12:01] area. Uh it is currently um that was a
grant that the town received. Um we're
[1:12:10] hearing nothing about that grant now.
It's it's kind of in limbo, I think. Um
[1:12:16] so um but the engineers are in agreement
that that that is a viable
[1:12:23] solution. So we're asking to just pull
this particular situation out and and
[1:12:29] deal with it at this level. Um if if you
so
[1:12:35] choose. And this is an ordinance, so
you'll have to have two readings.
[1:12:39] There's no public hearing. Okay.
Okay. Any questions about street?
[1:12:47] I'm sorry, a double.
[1:12:51] Okay. Item number six, discuss the offer
of
[1:12:55] a a revocable dedication to accept
Timberrest Trail in Timberrest
[1:13:01] subdivision as a town street.
Yes, ma'am. Um, Timberrest, the
[1:13:07] development beside F&M Bank here on
Highway
[1:13:11] 47. Um, they have completed all the
requirements for that
[1:13:17] development. Um, they have petitioned
the town now for asking the town to take
[1:13:24] over that
street. It it does meet all of our our
[1:13:29] standards. Uh what you have in your
packet is the um um offer of irreical
[1:13:37] dedication form. Uh you also have uh
just some staff comments. Um the
[1:13:46] highlighted section uh staff recommends
acceptance of Timber Crest Trail at the
[1:13:51] town street. Uh we did ask the planning
commission to set a appropriate one-year
[1:13:59] maintenance bond amount which they did
at uh their April meeting uh they set a
[1:14:06] bond of 16,79250.
[1:14:10] Uh so
once if you all agree to accept the
[1:14:15] street then once we get that bond in
place then um that would be a down
[1:14:21] street.
[1:14:26] Okay. Any questions about timber crest
trail?
[1:14:32] So this is a actual bond is for
67170 but now we have to put up 1679
[1:14:42] the
[1:14:44] the so the current bond in place is
$57,170
[1:14:51] that's in place today. Um, if you accept
the street,
[1:14:57] uh, we the planning commission
determines the the one-year maintenance
[1:15:02] bond, and it's typically set at about
25% of the current bond. So, the the
[1:15:10] 16,000 number that I gave you is the
25%. That was what staff recommended and
[1:15:16] that was what the planning commissioned.
The
[1:15:19] main I didn't Yeah, the original bond
was actually 165,000 and you get a
[1:15:25] one-time reduction in this performance
fund which they did in 2022 down to 67
[1:15:33] uh they've done a lot of the work and
then this is the final phase where
[1:15:37] they're saying this is pound property
now where we make them reduce it to 25%
[1:15:42] normally just to say hey we're going to
take it but we want some assurances that
[1:15:47] in 364 days when we go walk out there if
there's any issues you're going to fix
[1:15:53] Um and then if there's no issues you
release the maintenance line. So you go
[1:15:57] from performance reduced performance to
maintenance to gone. That's the
[1:16:02] evolution.
[1:16:07] Okay. If there's no other questions, u
we are also looking at is it a street
[1:16:12] light edition at 4521 highway 47 east?
Uh yes ma'am. Uh we were uh that's the
[1:16:20] um there's four newer homes uh along 40
47 East is the one going towards Burns.
[1:16:28] Uh there's four newer homes that are
part of that Hazel Landing subdivision.
[1:16:33] Uh one of those homeowners there has
requested a street light. It's possible
[1:16:39] we may come back to you on Tuesday with
another poll or two. uh police are going
[1:16:44] to go out and take a look at it and and
and see what's appropriate. So, uh we
[1:16:49] think we want one there and we might
come back with one or two more. I'm not
[1:16:52] sure. Okay.
Okay. Under parks and recreation, before
[1:16:57] we move Oh, no. I apologize. I just had
a question for Jeff. I maybe I'm
[1:17:02] imagining. Did I see somewhere in one of
the emails you sent out an update about
[1:17:06] William Robert Lane? Yes. Um and and I
did take that off because it Well, it's
[1:17:13] good news. Uh
um the the property owner had until the
[1:17:19] end of April to uh do the required work
on William Driver Lane. Uh he did that
[1:17:26] work um and and did it uh had the street
department there to make sure it was
[1:17:31] done done correctly. Um so that's that's
resolved. Will we be then eventually
[1:17:38] seeing an offer of irrevocable
dedicated? Uh it it's a good question.
[1:17:44] Uh and it is a question that uh I was
going to talk with Andrew about. Okay.
[1:17:49] This was the one that didn't go through
the normal process. It didn't have a
[1:17:54] bond, but we reached an agreement rather
than getting into litigation that they
[1:17:59] would eventually just pave it and they
did. How we want to clean it up for the
[1:18:03] record, we we'll deal with that. But
yeah, it it may come before you. But in
[1:18:08] terms of the bond being involved, it's
okay,
[1:18:13] sir. And and the person in favor of the
deals.
[1:18:21] Okay. uh discuss a resolution delegating
to the friends of White Bluffs the
[1:18:26] authority to name areas of the Bib White
Bluff Nature Park andor interior and
[1:18:32] exterior ring of the nature center.
Uh yes ma'am. So uh the Friends of White
[1:18:38] Bluff is is a local 501c3 nonprofit. Um
Friends of White Bluff has been around
[1:18:45] over 10 years now. um and and did uh we
requested this same um uh procedure uh
[1:18:54] when the construction of the the White
Civic Center occurred. U the friends
[1:19:00] accepted the responsibility
uh as you recall Mr. Richard Bib donated
[1:19:07] the land uh to the town and also uh paid
for the structure uh and the friends
[1:19:14] accepted the responsibility of
furnishing uh the civic center with
[1:19:19] furniture and technology and that kind
of thing. So uh to do that uh we offered
[1:19:25] naming right uh consideration to certain
rooms in the civic center and that kind
[1:19:30] of thing. It worked out well. We would
we would request to do that same
[1:19:36] procedure again for the nature park and
the nature center. I think there's a lot
[1:19:42] of options there uh for for fundraising
uh and naming rights uh both within the
[1:19:49] park and within the the nature center
building itself. So, uh it's a process
[1:19:55] that we've done before. Uh we would like
to do that again to take some of that
[1:19:59] burden off of the town. Uh if you all
see fit, we would appreciate
[1:20:03] consideration. Question. This should
also allow I just want to be clear
[1:20:06] because I think it should allow that's
what I'm asking. Um then like especially
[1:20:10] with the nature park so trail.
Yes sir. Yes sir. The board's trying to
[1:20:18] figure out what can be named right now.
It's a little bit of a different uh
[1:20:22] beast than the civic center was large.
You know, rooms and rooms are one thing
[1:20:28] I was like, "Oh, that's kind of cute
having different trails." Correct.
[1:20:31] There's there's proposed outdoor
classrooms that could be named, things
[1:20:36] like that. Cool.
[1:20:40] Okay. Any other questions about the
resolution?
[1:20:45] Okay, there are none. Uh going back to
old business, discuss the litter cleanup
[1:20:50] date. I did reach out to the principal
at Wingel James Middle School and um she
[1:20:55] was very enthusiastic about having
students participate in this event and
[1:21:00] we both discussed how with school about
to end for this school year, it perhaps
[1:21:07] would be better if we scheduled
something for the fall so that we could
[1:21:10] have time to organize the event and then
promote it within William Page Middle
[1:21:15] School as well as reaching out to other
members of the community. So, um, a date
[1:21:21] has not been set yet. We just know that
we are looking at fall 2025 to do a
[1:21:25] clean up
[1:21:28] date. Okay. And then also discuss the
commerce advisory committee members. Um,
[1:21:34] if any of the council members, if you
have someone that you would like to
[1:21:39] recommend,
um, can certainly take those names. If
[1:21:43] you yourself would like to serve as the
council member on the
[1:21:46] committee, we would love to hear that as
well
[1:21:51] too. Anything you want to add? No, I I
just wanted to clarify we're only doing
[1:21:56] one council member on this committee.
Correct. Yes. I believe we discussed a
[1:22:00] council member and then four business
members starting out for now till we can
[1:22:05] kind of feel how this is going to work
and you know work out the details.
[1:22:13] Okay. Uh, anything about that before we
move on?
[1:22:19] So, are we you want to recommend
business members? Yes.
[1:22:24] Yes. Business members within the town of
White Glove. Um, I would love it if we
[1:22:30] could have a variety of different types
of business owners. Uh we also discussed
[1:22:35] about once this committee is organized
about having a Facebook page or social
[1:22:40] media pages created so that we can
promote our local businesses. We're not
[1:22:46] trying to compete with the chamber of
commerce. We're just trying to zone in
[1:22:49] more on the town of White Bluff and um
see how we can promote existing
[1:22:53] businesses.
So see a member is there is there
[1:22:57] probably like a membership for
businesses
[1:23:01] like like those
I don't think we were wanting to be that
[1:23:06] um structured right now. I think this is
more just uh advisory
[1:23:13] based about you know forming a think
tank. How can we promote these local
[1:23:18] businesses in town? Like we have our
main street festival and we know that's
[1:23:22] an opportunity for businesses that are
located in the core downtown area.
[1:23:26] That's a good base that we generate a
lot of foot traffic for those
[1:23:31] businesses. But how could we generate
business for those that are maybe
[1:23:35] further out away from the main street
core area? Well, I thought one of the
[1:23:40] issues was we wouldn't distance it from
the actual town of Luff and be an
[1:23:45] independent advisory board. So, I'm not
suggesting that we form a formal board.
[1:23:53] This would just be um you talking about
like a chamber of commerce type thing.
[1:23:59] That's that's what I'm thinking. it
needs to be because it's going to have
[1:24:03] to support itself. So, just to make the
distinction, at least how I'm viewing
[1:24:07] this, and if you don't see it
differently, please let me know. Chamber
[1:24:10] of Commerce is an independent thing
that's really not going to have a lot of
[1:24:14] connection to the town. But what a lot
of towns if they see growth and want to
[1:24:20] help the business community but also
kind of help direct it and this is the
[1:24:25] first step and the mayor and have talked
about this. You have to get some people
[1:24:28] in the room to start thinking about
policy and and what are some
[1:24:32] opportunities because the ne if this
keeps growing uh the next step is to
[1:24:37] actually enact an economic development
formal committee that will have certain
[1:24:44] delegated powers by this body via
ordinance. So it's much more tied into
[1:24:50] how can the the town be part to
business. If white club businesses
[1:24:55] themselves want to create their own
chamber promise they can do that. They
[1:24:57] don't need them. They're they're very
separate and and usually you don't want
[1:25:02] the government side directly involved
with your chamber of commerce. You can
[1:25:07] have them interact with but not be like
the source of the chamber of commerce if
[1:25:13] that makes sense. Well, I agree that I'm
just trying to eliminate the the
[1:25:17] situation that got this thing started in
the first place where a local business
[1:25:21] owner was upset because a town sponsor
town entity did not advertise his
[1:25:28] business like he thought it should have
been. Well, I think this entity or
[1:25:32] really it's not an entity, it's a ad hoc
committee, right, can talk about ways to
[1:25:38] address that and not let that happen
again. So this is like a stepping stone
[1:25:43] to an official unlike
like a standing committee that has
[1:25:50] powers that y'all outline and but it has
to start somewhere and I think the
[1:25:55] mayor's right in that you've got to get
somebody from up here who wants to serve
[1:26:00] and some business members in a room to
say how can a town support local
[1:26:06] business right? So for instance, the
parks board is heavily involved in the
[1:26:11] Main Street Festival. Correct. Yes. So
if we've had a council member who's
[1:26:16] meeting with these local business owners
and generating ideas, things that they
[1:26:20] would like to see implemented, then
perhaps we can involve the parks board
[1:26:24] or we can help, you know, gather the
resources to enact those things, you
[1:26:31] know, to make them
happen. But that was my thought. Right.
[1:26:36] I mean, I I originally thought that it
we were going to do something to promote
[1:26:41] our local business opportunities and
stuff like that that would not be a part
[1:26:47] of the town itself. it would it be
permissible for the town to perhaps for
[1:26:52] the future contribute a small amount of
money for marketing or um just resources
[1:26:58] so if the committee says hey we think we
want to do advertisement somewhere the
[1:27:04] town can maybe help fund that yes um and
I'll add I've got another jurisdiction
[1:27:10] that's finishing up its economic
development analysis and ordinance and
[1:27:14] everything so we'll actually have some
templates to use for y'all to consider
[1:27:18] but this is I like the stepping stone.
This is the first step in trying to
[1:27:22] figure that out. And it could go any
number of directions, but to be clear,
[1:27:27] it will not be a white blood chamber of
commerce. That would have to be
[1:27:30] something. Well, I know that we don't
get much of a help from the addiction
[1:27:35] county chamber of commerce. And that's
why I thought we were going to do
[1:27:39] something like that on our own. try try
to nurture and get it started and then
[1:27:45] say and that may be one of the policy
things that comes from this committee is
[1:27:48] saying hey we want to encourage local
businesses to go create the white bluff
[1:27:52] chamber of commerce that may be a
recommendation but it would still be
[1:27:56] separate um there was a white bluff
merchants association maybe 15 years ago
[1:28:02] and and it was pretty active for a while
but like all things it requires
[1:28:07] maintenance and you know new blood and
it just it kind of fell by the wayside I
[1:28:13] think after a while. So that's why I was
suggesting maybe if a council member is
[1:28:18] involved then we can kind of keep the
town connected not running it but just
[1:28:25] be connected somehow.
I like I like that little merch
[1:28:30] association but I also like to include
industry in it too. That way, you know,
[1:28:37] natural wires got some openings, you
know, what to
[1:28:42] fill, put that in on the social media
and stuff like that, but but still be
[1:28:49] entirely not.
[1:28:54] Okay. Any other questions about
that? Uh, if not, we will move on to
[1:28:59] item number eight, which is discuss the
bid for mowing of the town properties.
[1:29:06] And Jeff, do you want to discuss this
because you were at the bid opening? Uh,
[1:29:10] yes ma'am.
Um, so we we put out for
[1:29:17] bid as the mayor said, no town on
properties. Um, we advertised for that
[1:29:24] uh in the the Dixon Post. Uh, that ad
came out um April the 2nd. We also had
[1:29:32] uh the information on the town's website
as well as
[1:29:36] Facebook. Um you had four bids. We we
did the bid opening yesterday at
[1:29:43] 3:00. Uh you had four bids returned. You
see those on the bid tab uh document. Uh
[1:29:50] prices range from 30,000 to
125,000. Um,
[1:29:58] were there more bids that perhaps were
incomplete or was it just four total
[1:30:03] bids that were No, ma'am. There were
four bids. Okay. Have we worked with any
[1:30:07] of these festivals?
Uh, so Justin Hayes, Hayes uh Lawn Care
[1:30:13] and Landscaping is who currently does
the town's mot.
[1:30:20] And just as a point of differentiation,
uh this bid is
[1:30:27] for like mowing from red light to red
light, mowing the town um here, town
[1:30:36] hall, the bid center, fire hall. Um what
our street department does is mows any
[1:30:42] of the the streets and intersections. It
cuts the weeds back for safety purposes
[1:30:48] and that kind of thing. This is for more
of the finished mowing, more of the
[1:30:53] pretty mowing, that kind of thing. So,
yes,
[1:30:57] um we we've worked with Justin for a
number of years. Um I I remotely know u
[1:31:06] Hunter uh Haggler. Uh he does a couple
of jobs here in town that I've been town
[1:31:12] only.
[1:31:17] No, you go ahead. Why why aren't
we putting out the bid doing all of our
[1:31:23] m
[1:31:26] um I mean aside from the fact we just
bought a nice new mower and
[1:31:32] tractor and piggy back off that and or
why aren't we doing this mowing either
[1:31:38] one. So if if so we would request
another street department employee
[1:31:47] um to to do that and um if for example
you were to take the low bid I don't
[1:31:54] think you can hire an employee and pay
benefits and come in that cheap
[1:32:01] also is an equipment
you'll have an yeah I mean because we
[1:32:06] don't have that equipment so the
equipment that we currently Um, it's
[1:32:09] more for rough mowing like the right
bush bush hog.
[1:32:14] Part of what was requested in this is
like he said more finish mowing but it
[1:32:18] also includes edging and it also
includes a certain amount of mulch um
[1:32:22] that was called out within the bid tree
trimming shrub trimming that kind of
[1:32:27] like DTR stuff.
[1:32:31] Um show uh so we will discuss this more
on Tuesday night and
[1:32:42] um okay um before we adjourn for the
evening I just I meant to point this out
[1:32:48] at the beginning communication from the
board will be presented Tuesday night
[1:32:52] but um the 2025 2026 budget was
initially on the agenda for this month
[1:33:00] of May. We are still making provisions
to the budget for this upcoming year. So
[1:33:06] if you have any questions about that, if
there are things that you want the
[1:33:10] department heads to include first
discuss it with the department heads. If
[1:33:14] you feel like what you're requesting is
not aligned with what they want to do,
[1:33:18] then you know, reach out to me. But the
budget is still uh in progress and it
[1:33:24] will be read at the June meeting. The
second reading will be July 1st. So if
[1:33:29] it's passed, it goes into effect
immediately. So it will be in effect
[1:33:32] July 1st. Anything else you want to add
about that? I just want to provide a
[1:33:37] very brief update. I know uh there are
some questions about some um research
[1:33:42] items and I won't there's nothing to
vote on for Tuesday. So I tell you
[1:33:46] tonight, probably June. They'll be in
the form of legal memos for you to
[1:33:50] review.
Um, the first one is, do we have the
[1:33:56] ability to alter who votes in our
elections? And the answer is yes. Um,
[1:34:03] I'm going to find out the parameters of
that. And what I mean by that is, for
[1:34:07] example, I know you can't live in
Colorado, own a little strip of land
[1:34:13] here, and vote on election. You have to
be a resident of Tennessee. And I want
[1:34:17] to make sure y'all are aware of the
parameters because you would have to put
[1:34:20] that in there. We have a private act
charter, so we have to go through the
[1:34:25] process of amending our charter. So that
would be something we would want to do
[1:34:29] before the end of the year so we could
take up take it up first thing to the
[1:34:33] general assembly in January. Um so it
would be in effect for the 2026
[1:34:39] uh
elections. regarding home rule and term
[1:34:42] limits and the reason they're tied
together, you are not empowered either
[1:34:47] through charter or ordinance or anything
to put term limits on elected officials.
[1:34:53] In order to do that, you would have to
switch to home rule. And for those who
[1:34:58] don't know, there's really only three
ways you could be incorporated as a city
[1:35:03] in
Tennessee. Prior to 1953, everyone was a
[1:35:08] private act. You drafted your whole
charter which is your mini constitution
[1:35:13] for your jurisdiction and the
legislature passed it and that's for
[1:35:16] your jurisdiction. We are a private act.
City of Dixon is a private act. Is a
[1:35:22] private act. Charlotte's a private
act. If you incorporated uh this is a
[1:35:28] hard date after 1990 uh but even before
um in certain instances you're under a
[1:35:34] general law. So there's three types of
governments that are just out there as a
[1:35:37] general law. You may have heard of board
of mayor and alderman or board of
[1:35:41] commissioners. Fairview is a board of
commissioners. They're under a public
[1:35:45] act which means every city that adopts
that is the exact same charter. Um you
[1:35:51] don't have the ability to amend it for
yourself. That's one of the downsides.
[1:35:55] Um, the last type is home rule, which is
much more similar to a private act, but
[1:36:01] after you go through it, you're no
longer going to the legislature to
[1:36:06] change your charter. You don't have that
option anymore. It is a referendum at
[1:36:13] the general election. So, I'll have some
pros and cons. Uh, money is going to be
[1:36:17] a big factor. Does it affect any of our
tax revenues from the state? I think
[1:36:21] we're going have to think about that.
Um, but that's the only way to be able
[1:36:26] to add term limits. So, you'd have to
adopt it. That'd be 2026. And then you'd
[1:36:30] have to put on the ballot in 2028 term
limits. So, it wouldn't apply till after
[1:36:35] the 2028 election. So, it would only
apply to officials elected in 2030. So,
[1:36:40] it is a process, but if you wanted to
start it, you could. Uh, but home rule
[1:36:45] is a really big change. Only there's 346
municipalities in
[1:36:49] Tennessee. 14 are home rule. That's like
4%. And those are most of them, not all
[1:36:56] are the big boys. It's Chattanooga, uh,
Johnson City, Knoxville, Memphis, Mount
[1:37:02] Juliet, Oakidge,
Severeville who really want to have
[1:37:07] separation from the General Assembly uh,
and not go to them asking for
[1:37:11] amendments. They're going to take care
of themselves. Um, but that also means
[1:37:14] there's not this plethora of information
about how home is affecting people. the
[1:37:20] sample size is a lot smaller than all
the other types. So, I will have answers
[1:37:24] for you. It's just going to take a
little bit of time. Um, it would be a
[1:37:28] big change. So, sometimes we tend to
change our charter and we can do it
[1:37:31] fairly quickly and go to the
legislature. That's not going to be on
[1:37:34] the table unless you want to have a
special election and those cost 20 to
[1:37:38] 30,000 a pop uh if you didn't do it
quickly. So, there's there's things I
[1:37:42] think you're going to have to think
about. So, I'm going to try to get you
[1:37:44] something this summer so you can be
chewing and lulling as we go into
[1:37:49] football season and maybe by the end of
the year you've reached a conclusion on
[1:37:54] that. And you don't have to treat home
rule and term limits in the same boat as
[1:38:00] property voting because that's available
now. You don't have to switch to home
[1:38:04] rule to change who gets to vote and
property rights uh allowing you to vote
[1:38:08] while you don't live in the city limit.
Uh but I'll have both of those for you
[1:38:11] and you can decide. But those would be
two separate resolutions you would have
[1:38:15] to pass to send up to the legislature
and then hopefully they come back and
[1:38:18] you vote again. Um, and that's a multi
process. So that's a brief update. I
[1:38:24] know we've talked a couple times and at
least two or three times about having
[1:38:29] a for
consideration the cost for this upcoming
[1:38:33] budget for overlays and of that nature.
I know we've talked a few times about
[1:38:38] overlay and and what it would what we
could do inhouse versus what we have to
[1:38:42] outsource to the third party. I'm just
wondering if if we've been able to get
[1:38:46] those numbers on how much that would run
to for at least consideration in this
[1:38:49] upcoming budget.
I don't have those at the moment, but
[1:38:53] let me talk to the mayor and Amanda
about that and I know we talked about
[1:38:59] 74, but
I we'll add it to the list.
[1:39:05] Yes sir. So you're talking about uh the
first thing as far as people who can
[1:39:12] vote in our election. Does that uh go
coincide with people who can
[1:39:18] actually be in the election and be
elected?
[1:39:24] That's in the constitution. You have to
be a resident within the municipal
[1:39:28] limits to run for office. This is about
who gets to cast a vote on that ballot.
[1:39:33] No ifsands or buts. Correct.
Okay. So, if I'm a property
[1:39:39] owner but not a not live on that
property because there's not a house
[1:39:45] that I still get to. As it stands right
now, you have to reside in a municipal
[1:39:51] period. There are some jurisdictions
here uh that says if you own land in the
[1:39:59] jurisdiction
um you also get to vote uh in their
[1:40:04] elections. So how do we get to that? I'm
going to get you involved. Okay. Thank
[1:40:09] you. But I think what he was asking what
was asking was to run for to run for
[1:40:16] office.
I that's not going to change. y'all
[1:40:20] catch up this one budget question. So,
in the past as well, we've been here.
[1:40:26] So, and I I didn't really realize this
until I've been on council for a couple
[1:40:30] years, but the request of the department
heads came to city
[1:40:35] administration. We were shown
what what the budget was after it was
[1:40:41] cut. And so, we didn't really get to see
what department heads had asked for. We
[1:40:46] just got to see what staff would like to
see passed. Last year that wasn't the
[1:40:52] case and and and a lot of people blamed
the mayor present time, not present
[1:40:57] mayor, past mayor. But in reality, she
presented what was asked and so we
[1:41:03] passed that based on what was asked for.
So, what I would love if possible is if
[1:41:11] staff does make cuts um because it can
be uncomfortable for a department is
[1:41:16] I've tried to dig in the past. They're
hesitant to say uh what they asked for
[1:41:20] compared to what got presented. I would
love for us to be able to see, okay,
[1:41:24] this is what got presented. These are
the cuts we made and these are this is
[1:41:28] why. Um because that gives us a better
understanding of you know because a lot
[1:41:33] of people's like you know why haven't we
bought a fire truck when they were in
[1:41:37] such bad shape. Well because it never
was presented and so even if he asked
[1:41:41] for it and I don't know if he did or
didn't but we didn't see it. And so and
[1:41:47] that's that's one of my bigger concerns.
I'm not opposed to cuts. I would just
[1:41:50] like to know if they're cut what was cut
and why we felt it needed to be. That's
[1:41:55] fair. And I would love for you, but I
would also love for our department heads
[1:42:00] to type these things up and have them
legible so that we can present them in a
[1:42:05] professional and formal manner.
[1:42:10] Not on the back of a
napkin and then I would be happy to
[1:42:16] share those with
every Thank you.
[1:42:21] Anything else? Okay, we're journal.