[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.

Town Council Work Session May 2025

Transcript