This video captures a Metropolitan Council meeting where council members debated a grocery tax reduction proposal, illustrating the fundamental budget trade-off between providing immediate financial relief to residents (who would save $5-7 monthly on groceries) versus maintaining funding for essential long-term investments like affordable housing (Barnes Fund), childcare, and transit services. Council members argued that while every little bit helps struggling residents, the city must also invest in systemic solutions that address root causes of economic hardship, such as providing affordable housing units and childcare centers that can save families thousands of dollars annually.
Install our extension to search inside any video instantly.
06/15/26 Metropolitan Council Committee: Budget & Finance
Added:All right. I do detect a quorum with myself, uh, Councilwoman Allen, Councilman Duffle, Councilwoman Evan Seagull, Councilwoman Gamble, uh, Councilman Huffman, Councilwoman Johnston, Councilwoman Porterfield, Vice Chair Spain, Councilwoman Suar, and Councilwoman Webb.
We do have some individuals signed up for the public comment period. Pursuant to council rule 28, the public comment period at committee meetings is limited to items that appear on the committee agenda or related to the committee. All public comment speakers must present proof of Tennessee residency. Uh we do allow 8 minutes for public comment during committee. Each speaker does have two minutes. If there is any time uh remaining, we will um go to the wait list. Um because we are required to have a balance of opinions, I am going to move up uh Mr. Manning Hall who is in opposition to item number eight on agenda on the agenda. I will be moving him up to the number four slot and if there is some time remaining I will get to Mr. Adam Reese. All right. So first on the public comment signup sheet is Brenda Sanderson speaking in support of the seabed.
If you could come, Miss Anderson, if you are here, if you could come to the microphone at the back, >> you may start.
>> Oh, >> well, thank you very much. My name is Brenda Sanderson. I'm a resident of downtown on Church Street. Um, I want to thank you all first of all for giving me the opportunity to speak to you. I'm here to uh share with you my concerns if the CBID budget is not approved and if for any reason that the Nashville Downtown Partnership is not allowed to continue to work that the work that they do for us downtown. I serve on the Cabid board. I also serve on the Nashville Downtown Partnership Board. I've been a business owner downtown since 1993, a property owner, and a resident of downtown since 2000.
And I, as much as anyone else wearing all these hats, see a vibrant, clean, and very safe downtown thanks to the hard work of the Nashville Downtown Partnership and their ambassadors. But I al see also see a very fragile downtown environment that needs protecting and could go away at any time if we allow our area to become dirty, dark, and unsafe. I and I think most of the merchants downtown, especially on Broadway where my businesses are, could not express enough how important the SEABID funds are to maintaining our status as a worldclass entertainment destination. As you probably know, we host about 17 million visitors a year, and they can make a mess.
So can our 88,000 downtown workers and our 22,000 downtown residents.
Did you know that 70% of the downtown businesses are locally owned?
But here's the important part that affects your constituents no matter which council district.
>> Thank you, Miss Sanderson. Your two minutes are up.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you for coming.
>> We want this budget passed. Thank you very much. Next up is Miss Anne Butterworth speaking in support of the SEAB bid.
>> Hi, thank you. My name is Anne Butterworth. I am a resident of downtown and have lived downtown since 2009 after moving from East Nashville. I'm here in support of the SEAB's annual budget that was adopted by the board and presented to council for approval pursuant to a recent legislative change. One thing that I think is important for people to focus on is the SEID is funded by those property owners in the area. I have heard several people express concern about property taxes being used. The funds for the SEAB do not come from property taxes. They come from the special assessment of those property owners within the district. Um I have been active in the downtown area both from living here working here when I was working full-time. I work part-time in the downtown area. I've been active in the neighborhood association.
We originally had the Urban Residents Association. It's now known as the Downtown Neighbors Association. I've worked with the Historic Capitol Corridor Foundation, which worked on keeping Church Street Park a park through many different ways. I have worked with the partnership and the SEAB bid. We do not always agree on everything, but I will say they are wonderful to work with. They will listen. They will help explain the positions. Uh the services that they provide in the area benefit not only those who are residents downtown, workers downtown, our visitors, but also benefit um the rest of metropolitan uh government residents because so much of the tourism in our area occurs downtown. Please vote for the budget.
Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Mr. Steve Ryder speaking in regard to resolution 2026 2044 um asking to add language. You're recognized.
>> Thank you very much. I'm requesting the office of homeless services and Nepal uh contract. I would like to just add some other language uh specifically related to calls for service uh that they have there. If there has been uh call for service for fire or police, uh I think we should know about it. There have been some incidences that have taken place over there, but we uh continue of care was not aware of what was happening. So, if those could be put down there in the quarterly reports to the office of homeless services and that could be reported to uh the continuum of care, I think that would be greatly appreciated.
I think there's a lot of other people want to speak, so I'm going to step aside at this point. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Writer. Next up, we have Mr. Manning Hall speaking in opposition to item number eight.
Hey, I've been here multiple times to remind y'all that you do not have to approve money going to offduty Tennessee Highway Patrol officers. Officers that NDP cannot say were not officers that engaged in widely reported racial profiling last year and continue to work with ICE, especially through a brand new security company, Civic City, that says their approach is unarmed. Hm. THB officers are certainly armed. Clean and safe. That's what Tom Turner says his mandate is. How's that going? Well, Metro Nashville's insurance company is currently suing NDP and Blockbyblock, the company that also created Civic City. What did What did these guys do?
Well, guess what? They blew up the downtown library garage.
How did they do that? Well, here's what the lawsuit says they did.
Change the use of the property from a parking garage to a storage yard.
Couldn't do that. They failed to ensure that they NDP that block byb block did that. They constructed an impermissible combustible storage shed within our garage. Man, I missed that really cheap parking even though I don't drive. Um, and that Oh, that that discount at the library. You know, if you need to go downtown, that's a good deal. Well, that's all gone.
Let's see. Ooh, they allowed its employees to smoke in the property right next to a combustible uh what do they call it? A shed, a storage yard. That doesn't sound like a good idea. But why are we giving these people money? Let's see. They stored combustible, hazardous, inflammable materials in the property, next to our library, downtown, where people live, where people park. I'm so glad this happened in the middle of the night and nobody could have seen worse effects.
I'm once again asking you all to consider voting down this resolution until NDP, the CBID, block by block come back and be responsible with their funds, be responsible with our space, be responsible with our garage. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Hall. Next, we have Mr. Adam Reese speaking in support of the seabed and my apologies if I mispronounced your last name.
>> You actually hit it right on the nail on the head. That's a first for many first of very few. Um my name is Adam Ree. I just thank you guys for giving me the opportunity to speak. I had a whole thing written up, but I'm not going to pull that up. Stats. I just want you guys know what we do.
Not I'm not even going to tell you what we do. Tell you what, if you guys have any questions on what we do, go out Fourth Avenue, take a left on Murphy'sboro Road or Lefayet, go down a half a block, look at the boundary lines of what we where we work. Is it clean? Is it safe? Is it somewhere that you would want to work?
Is it somewhere that you would want to walk? Look at your tourists that come in town that are walking across Murphy'sboro Road down to Second Avenue.
you really look at that and go, "Hey, that's not that really that safe of a place." But you look at the ones that are walking down KVB, you look at the ones down Second Avenue, go to uh Walk of Fame Park, go to Riverfront Park, go to anywhere that we are inside the Interstate Loop. I finally moved down here cuz I feel safe. I walk my dog every night. Our homeless outreach program, we've interacted. I just pulled some I will say I pulled some stats.
They did over I think it was over a thousand interactions just during CMA week. With the time that the city pushes people out of Broadway, pushes people to other areas where they're not, you know, because it doesn't look good, our team was out there making sure they had resources, getting people into rehab, getting people into housing.
I would I would truly challenge some of these people that are making these accusations against the company that I work for to ask them, "What have you done to help your unhoused neighbors and friends?" I know what my company has done. I know what I personally have done. I know what those two gentlemen that run the outreach program sitting back there have done to help. They get people off the streets. They get people into rehab. Yes, housing does help, but guess what? When you're actively in the middle of a mental health addiction, how does that work? Or a substance abuse.
>> Thank you, Mr. Ree.
>> Thank you guys. Have a wonderful night.
>> All right, colleagues, moving on to the consent agenda. I'm going to read the items that are on the agenda. If you want to pull something off, if you could raise your hand and I will recognize you. Items on the consent agenda.
Resolution 2026, 2030, 2031, 2032, 2034, 2036, 2037, 2038, 2039, 2040, 2041, 2042, 2043, 2044, 2045, 2046, 2047, 2048, 2049, 2050, 2051, 2052, 2053, 204, 2055, 206, 207, 208, 2060, and 2061. Is there anything that needs to come off the consent agenda?
Seeing no hands, can I get a motion?
>> Oh, I'll go on it.
I will read the captions and if there's anything that needs to come off of consent, uh you can raise your hand and I will recognize you. Starting with item number five, which is resolution 2026 2030 tombs resolution approving amendment one to contract 6548212 between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County and National Safety Council to provide teaching materials and student materials for the General Sessions Court Traffic School. Resolution 2026 2031 Evans and Ellis resolution setting the compensation of the chair and members of the Mesh problem board of equalization.
Resolution 2026 2032 Bradford Tombs and Horton resolution to approve the first amendment to the lease agreement between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County and the Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority for use of certain real property located at Nashville International Airport in Davidson County, commonly known as the Luton Center.
Item number nine, resolution 2026, 2034, Tombs Hill, Allen, and Ewing. Resolution accepting the terms of cooperative purchasing master agreement with Blink Network LLC for electric vehicle supply equipment for the general services department.
Resolution 2026, 2036, Tombs, Horton, Welsh, and others.
Resolution to approve the first amendment to a grant contract for the constructing affordable housing approved by resolution 2024 709 between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County acting by through the Metropolitan Housing Trust Fund Commission and Southeast Community Capital Corporation, DBA Pathway Lending. Resolution 2026, 2037, Tounes, Horton, Welsh, and others. Resolution approving the first amendment to a grant contract for constructing affordable housing. Approved by resolution 202515 1524 between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County acting by through the Metropolitan Housing Trust Fund Commission and Urban League of Middle Tennessee. Resolution 2026 2038 Tombs, Horton, Walsh, and Allen.
Resolution approving a third amendment to a grant contract for constructing affordable housing approved by resolution 2022 1857 between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County acting by and through the Metropolitan Housing Trust Fund Commission and Be a Helping Hand Foundation. Resolution 2026 2039 Tunes Horton Walsh and others resolution approving a third amendment to a grant contract for the constructing for constructing affordable housing approved by resolution 2023 2251 between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County acting by through the Metropolitan Housing Trust Fund Commission and urban league of Middle Tennessee resolution 2026 2040 Tombs Huffman Welsh and Allen resolution appropriating a total of 573,833 from the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County act and bind through the Metropolitan Board of Health to Park Center Inc. for the provision of comprehensive wraparound recovery support services to individuals with opioid use disorder. Resolution 2026 2041 Tounes Health and Wells resolution accepting a grant from the Tennessee Department of Health to the Metropolan government act and buying through the Metropolan Board of Health to provide the community health access and navigation in Tennessee program to deliver comprehensive care coordination services to eligible families and children. Resolution 2026 2042 tombs Huffman and Welch. Resolution receptor a grant from the Tennessee Department of Health to the Metropolitan Government Act combined through the Metropolitan Board of Health for public safety partnerships in high impact areas to use available data to identify populations at high risk for adverse consequences from substance misuse and employ evidence-based interventions that are responsive to population needs.
Resolution 2026, 2043, Tombs, Huffman, Welsh, and Euing. Resolution approving amendment two to a particulate matter ambient monitoring network grant for the US Environmental Protection Agency to the Metropolitan Government back and buy through the Metropolitan Board of Health to assist with the necessary development, establishment, and maintenance of adequate monitoring programs for the prevention and control of air pollution in Nashville, Tennessee.
Resolution 2026, 2044, Tombs, Huffman, Allen, and Ellis. Resolution appropriating a total of 1,718,63 for the Metropolitan Government at combined through the Office of Homeless Services to Depal USA, Inc. and approving amendment number one to a grant contract buying between the Metropolitan Government and Depal USA, Inc. for the provision of property management, on-site support, and case management management services at Strobbo House Permanent Supportive Housing. Resolution 2026, 2045, Tounesville, Welsh, and others. Resol resolution appropriating a total of1,926,999 from the Nashville Public Library to various nonprofit organizations for the provision of free and high quality afterchool and summer programming through the libraries Nashville after zone alliance after school and out of school time coordinating system.
Resolution 2026 2046 Tounville, Welsh, Allen, Ellis, and Yuing. resolution appropriating a total of 2,452,26 from the Nashville Public Library to various nonprofit organizations for the provision of free and high quality after school and summer programming through the library's Nashville after zone alliance after school and out of school time coordinating system. Resolution 2026 2047 Tounesville Welsh Allen Ellis and Euan resolution approving amendment one to a grant contract with water walkers for the provision of free and high quality out of school programs through the Nashville after zone alliance.
Resolution 2026 2048 cap tombs Horton Evans Seagull and others resolution approving a license agreement between the metropolan government of Nashville and Davidson County buying through the Department of Parks and Recreation in the state of Tennessee acting buying through it commissioner of transportation to construct and maintain a multi-use pedestrian greenway in Davidson County Tennessee resolution 2026 2049 Taylorville and Welsh resolution approving a grant contract between the metro government of Nashville and Davidson County and the conservancy for the parthonon in Centennial Park as fiscal agent for celebrate Nashville at 501c3 organization to provide cultural event management services.
Resolution 2026 2050 Taylorville Welsh and Hill resolution accepting a grant from the Centennial Park Conserv Conser Oh my gosh conservancy to the Metropolitan Government Acting by through the Metropolitan Board of Parks and Recreation to provide funding for one part-time position in the Parthonon Museum store. Resolution 2026 2051 UN Tunes vote Welsh and Hill resolution accepting a grant from the friends of Warner parks to the Metropolitan Government Act combined through the Metropolitan Board of Parks and Recreation to provide seasonal staffing for the special work education and trails program at Warner parks.
Resolution 2026 2052 and Tunesville Welsh and Hill resolution accepting a grant from the friends of Warner Parks to the Metropolan government act through the Metropolitan Board of Parks and Recreation to continue funding staff positions and copier costs.
Resolution 2026 2053 Greg Tunes Bo and Wells resolution accepting an incind grant from the Battle of Franklin Trust to the Metropan government acting binding through the Metro Parks and Recreation Department to transfer a portrait of Frank McGavic and the inscribed silver spoon to the historic collection at Two Rivers Mansion.
Resolution 2026 2054 tombs Huffman Allen and Welsh resolution accepting a statewide fatality review technical assistance grant from the Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration Office of Criminal Justice Programs to the Metropolitan Government Act combined by through the office of family safety to fund and promote a coordinated multi-disiplinary approach to improving the criminal justice systems response to sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking crimes.
Resolution 2026 2055 Tombs Huffman and Allen. Resolution accepting a victim of crimes grant victim of crime act grant from the Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration Office of Criminal Justice Programs to the Metropolitan Government Act and buying through the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department to fund counselor and victim advocate positions to purchase supplies and subsidize travel. Resolution 2026 2056 Tombs Huffman and Welsh. Resolution accepting a project safe neighborhood grant from the Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration Office of Criminal Justice Programs to the Metropolitan Government Act and buying through the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department to reduce gun related violence in Nashville by by providing funding for overtime for the investigation of violent crimes involving guns. Resolution 2026 2057 tunes helping Ellis resolution approving an internet crimes against children grant application from the Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration to the Metropolan government acting binding through the Metropolan Nashville Police Department to continue funding for the internet crimes against children unit resolution 2026 2058 tombs Evan Seagull Welsh and others a resolution approving amendment two to a safe streets for all grant from the US department of transportation to the metropolitan government act combined through the Nashville Department of Transportation and multimmoal infrastructure to address safety issues along Nolanville Pike related to substandard indoor missing walking, bicycling and transit facilities, the need for pedestrian scale lighting and lack of crossing locations present throughout the project area. Resolution 2026 2060 tombs and Evans seek resolution accepting the terms of a cooperative purchasing master agreement with Rents Inc. for car washes and preventative maintenance for the heavy duty fleet for the department of waste services. Resolution 2026 2061 Tombsson and Evan Seagull resolution approving a contract between the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County and Ingresol Ran Industrial US Inc. to provide factory authorized products, parts and services for the Department of Water and Sewage Services.
Is there anything that needs to come off of the consent agenda?
Seeing none, can I get a motion?
It's been properly moved and seconded to adopt the consent agenda. Is there any additional discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor I >> oppose? No. Any not voting or abstaining? Motion carries.
All right, colleagues. Going back to the items that were not on consent. Starting with item number one, resolution 2026 1961, Tombs, Coopin, Bradford, Huffman, Allen, Porterfield, and Ellis. Resolution reducing the local sales tax on the sale of groceries. Can I get a motion?
>> It's been properly moved and seconded.
Is there any discussion?
>> Council member Evan Seagull.
>> Uh, thank you, Chair. I'm going to be a no on this one. I while I appreciate the moral imperative of reducing taxes on groceries because we need them to exist.
I think that we should do it in conjunction with a property tax assessment, which we're going to be doing sooner rather than later this cycle, so that it is a meaningful amount to people. I think when we look at the tradeoffs for this, the cuts from MNS are going to kill a child care center expansion. the we still can't fund Barnes, which means we're not going to be anywhere near the unified housing study's um request for the base minimum funding needed to get to 35,000 affordable units by 2030. It wasn't a number that was made up from thin air.
It was a number that was based on what we have to put in to the Barnes fund in order to get housing for people. Um people voted for this amount of taxes on transit because transit is also a really large expense and being able to save money on transit was worth the trade-off for people to pay this amount of grocery tax. 5 to7 a month for a family isn't enough money to take your family to McDonald's. It is not enough money to make a difference in every the everyday lives of people who are paying the sales tax. Keep in mind sales tax applies only to cash purchases. It doesn't apply to purchases with for benefits or nonprofits pay or resailers.
So, we're really talking about people who are buying groceries with cash and not selling them or using them for a nonprofit. That five to7 dollars doesn't go nearly as far as the thousand dollars a month somebody's going to save if they can get their kid into an MNPS childare center. It doesn't go nearly as far as the thousands of dollars in rent somebody who can get into a Barnes development will save. Um it doesn't even make up for the cost that somebody who works at the library might have to pay for transportation. Um so because they don't have a place to park anymore. So I think that while being able to do this in a meaningful way, in a larger way is an important moral value for me, if we really care about the cost of living for people, this is not how we do it today. We do it by we taking those big unmeable things that people who really can't pay for them um need off of their plate and we give them a home and we give them a place for their kids to be while they work. and we give them a pl a way to get around town.
>> Council member Sora.
>> Thank you, Chair. Um, I'll be honest.
When the mayor first announced the grocery tax reduction, I was one of the people that felt it was too little uh that we should do everything that my colleagues said we should do. Uh but I changed my tune after talking to Metro employees and one of my last conversation budget conversation centers around the cost of living adjustment as well as the increase in benefit especially insurance. And what I heard loud and clear from the people that I spoke to is that every little bit helps.
While I'm sitting here in my chair thinking it's too little, it doesn't make any difference. There are people that felt like we could use this. And I think that's what it should be all about. And when you think about grocery, the people that spend the most of their money on grocery are poor people. A big chunk of their money goes to buying food. Most of us probably don't. Uh but for the people that use it and the people that we're trying to help, I think this means something to them. And those are the people that I want to listen to. Uh not how I I feel about it.
Uh maybe it would not make a difference to my family. uh but it does make a difference to some of our constituents.
And I do also remember that the chair said something uh that I didn't think about but I thought is very important when we do the bonds fund and we do all these other big things. We're doing things that benefit everybody, right?
And but not everybody need that. Not everybody needs the housing inbuds fund.
Not everybody needs and some of these people that we use this $72 or whatever it comes to may not need that. So uh for me I've changed my tone uh uh and and I and I want us to look at it from that.
Yes, it's not enough. There's a whole lot for us to do. There's more for us to do. I I agree with that wholeheartedly.
But for the people that lead needs the little that we can do, we cannot sit here and make the judgment that it's not applicable. I want to read something that I also found that I thought was very interesting. He says, "Privilege is often in invisible to those who have it.
Try looking at the world from another perspective. Listen to other people.
Then reconsidered." That's what I did.
And and I hope that I agree we need to do more. I hope that we continue to do more. I hope we do the big changes. But for the people that are looking to this, uh, let's give it to them. It does matter to them. Thank you, chair.
>> Thank you, council member. Council member Coopin.
>> Thank you, Chair. and I appreciate this discussion. Um I I agree every little bit um counts and I appreciate that cutting the budget um small or big means we're cutting important programs to people. I personally looked prior to the budget session um at what what it would look like to do a more substantive tax reduction. actually was looking at an 18 cent tax reduction which would have been $130 million cut and starting to figure out well what do we give up here or there or otherwise and obviously didn't didn't pursue that and a pretty you know but um I think that that and we even had pretty robust discussion in the budget work sessions about even a 1% tax reduction versus half% on the on the grocery tax and when you look at Maslo's hierarchy of needs right shelter up there Barnes fund things like that but also food and this is a really direct um ability to inject some money back into people's pockets on the thing that is most important to survival, which is being able to put food in your stomach and on your table. Um, and so I think that I appreciate that that it it yes, it's I mean that that's the nature of the budget, right? You take a little bit out of everybody's pocket and then that that's a big cut somewhere within the budget. But I also think that do nothing is not the right move either. So, I you know, I very much appreciated the the administration bringing this concept forward and looking at this reduction.
And I just think we owe it to the people of Nashville to u who are struggling who don't have time to wait for that Barnes fund unit to be built. Um right, who who need food on their plate tomorrow who are struggling to make ends meet, struggling to stay in their home. Um maybe this helps someone not have not get pushed out of their home and and um have to go get different housing. So, um I think that that we had some robust discussion. We talked about making it more. We talked about making it less. I think this is a happy medium. I think this is a great place to be and I would I'd recommend just leaving it leaving it where it is.
>> All right, Council Member Porterfield.
Oh, >> thank you, Chair. I rise in support of the um grocery tax reduction. Uh this is something I've been looking at for the last two years and was hoping that we would be able to accomplish and unfortunately we weren't able to get it across the finish line for various reasons. Um, and you know, the state passed legislation that allowed us to now be able to handle this within our own municipalities. Um, this is something that ideally the state would do so that all Tennessans could benefit from this. Um, but we know at this point in time they're not going to do it. So, we still have an obligation to take care of our constituents to the best of our ability. So, I'm thankful that the mayor brought this forward and I'm thankful that the budget chair has left it in the budget. Um, I agree with Council Lady Sorora. Every little bit counts. Um I growing up in Memphis, I grew up on wick. I grew up on food stamps. We did not have a lot of money. I my aunt and I joke that we didn't know that we were poor until we became adults. And then looking back on it is when we actually realized for the first time that we grew up poor and every single dollar counts.
And I know just from my own personal life growing up um and even from Nashvilleians that I speak to um now and constituents that I speak to now that sometimes are are piecing together $5 to buy food for their family. And for us like we are in a a somewhat place of privilege and I know most council members don't make a lot of money. So I'm not trying to say that we are balling because we're not. This $25,000 does not stretch far at all. But we do have a level of privilege that many of our constituents will never know and never never have. So for some people five or $10 does make a difference. That does make a difference of if they're able to ride the bus or not to get where they need to go. Thankfully now we have journey pass. We didn't have that to to um to uh uh previously we didn't have something like that. Um I was speaking with a constituent who is a professional with an advanced degree with a a medical degree and because of some federal layoffs. this person lost their job and they are a single parent raising their children and every month while they are looking for work they are literally trying to figure out how they're going to make the ends meet and how they're going to feed their family. So for us like $5, $10 doesn't make that big of a deal for many of us, but for so many of our constituents it does. And I think it's important that we protect this.
This is one of the few opportunities that we have to put dollars, physical dollars back into the pockets of our constituents. We don't often have that opportunity. We had it once before with a water credit and this body decided to go against it and that was the will of the body. But now we have another opportunity to put money in the pockets of our constituents and we have a decision to make on whether or not we're going to do that. So I stand in support of it.
>> Thank you. Council member Council Member Johnston.
>> Thank you. If you don't mind, I'm going to remain seated. Um, I think we have a long way to go in Nashville as it relates to affordability and we've got a lot of different ways we can do that and I don't necessarily disagree with anything that anybody said quite frankly. Um, I think every little bit does count. I think it's really important for people to understand that our process when we reduce revenue somewhere, we have to rob Peter to pay Paul unless we're going to increase another tax someplace else.
Um, and so the question remains to council member Evan Seagal's point, what are we taking from and is we I hear this a lot. Is the juice worth the squeeze?
She doesn't think so. I don't think I think so. Um, I think we've got a lot of room in the budget in a lot of our departments in a lot of different ways that we could make some meaningful cuts because what's hurting people the most right now, I got two phone calls from two different constituents today alone that said they cannot stay in their homes, they are retired, they cannot stay in their homes and and be able to pay the property tax amount that they are being um assessed because it's increasing 150 50 to $300 per month on their homes. That's where the meaningful work can be done to reduce mortgages, to reduce rents, to really have a meaningful impact in people's everyday lives. $6 a month, the juice is not worth the squeeze. I find it really interesting that last year at the same time we had a possible budget substitute that was had a 17% less tax rate and it that was saving people over a hundred to $200 a month on average and that juice wasn't worth the squeeze. But $6 a month is worth the squeeze. We've got we need to start taking this much more seriously and really look in our departments and figure out what programming is working, what's not, what are we investing in that we're not getting the return on investment that we could reduce that tax rate so it's actually meaningful.
So, I hate to go on a diet tribe, but that this is not taking away little bits from different departments to to Council Member Evans Seagal's point, that juice is not worth the squeeze for $6 a month.
It's just not. And I'm one that wants to reduce taxes all day long everywhere. So that's it's it's kind of a big deal for me to say I don't think this is the right thing to do and understand do we have to pass it every single year or is it once we take it away it stays gone.
Can somebody answer that question?
Is that part of the budget every year that we have to not assess our portion of the property I mean of the um grocery tax every year or is it does it remain in effect until forever?
Director um Wilson, >> council member, this is a this would be a permanent reduction. This would not have to return to the body.
>> So in effect, what could happen is that it it it applies more pressure as we have to find that money. It applies pressure that then we just make it up when we increase property taxes again because we're going to find the revenue somewhere.
It's just this is not the right way to do this.
>> Council member Gamble.
Thank you, chair. Um, I'm not going to say a whole lot because a lot has already been said. I I totally agree with Council Member Sora and Porterfield's take on this. Um, I think it's important that we are that we look at this from a well-rounded equity lens.
I do agree that uh there are residents that are um hurting because of the property tax. Um and and there are things that are measures that are being taken. In fact, the uh trustee our trustee Erica Gilmore just announced this week uh some headway in helping with tax relief um that hopefully will help some of the some of our residents that we're hearing from in that way. Uh but this grocery tax um relief helps everyone. Uh not everybody owns property and so not everyone uh is is well they probably could be indirectly impacted eventually if if if property owners go up on rent, but this is something that really impacts everyone and would um um have a have a result for everyone. And I think we have to look at that. I I I understand people saying it's not much.
Uh we wish we could do more. I know the budget chair looked at doing more and I appreciate uh all the work that the budget chair has done and making sure that a lot of these um wish list items or items that are on the amendment that some of that funding would go towards are already in the substitute are already in the substitute budget. And I appreciate the um creativeness and the thoughtfulness that the budget chair took in and making sure that a lot of these important uh initiatives are covered in the substitute budget. But I do think we need to leave the uh sales budget sales tax reduction as it is. I know that there there are a lot of people in the city uh that will benefit from it and it's something that everyone can benefit and we do have to look at that as well. So, just want to speak in support. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Uh, council member.
Um, and seeing no additional hands, I I I do have a a comment. I have from the beginning been in strong support of the grocery tax reduction. Um, as has been noted, I tried to make it a larger um reduction uh and was unsuccessful in doing that. The numbers just would not work.
Um when you're talking about a grocery tax reduction, you're talking about a reduction in revenue to the city. It's the same uh kind of in a similar vein when we do tax abatements for affordable housing. We are foregoing the property taxes on that property because we see the value in having the affordable housing units. Um it's it's similar in this situation in which we see the value of providing some type of economic relief to all of the families in Nashville.
Yes. The Barnes fund is absolutely important. Uh we do a lot in our budget.
We fund a lot of nonprofits that do excellent work to their select populations.
The property tax I mean the grocery tax reduction applies to everybody. There are folks who don't qualify for government benefits, but they're still struggling to make ends meet. that5 to7 I can tell you as a mother of three who um still clips coupons that that five to7 dollars is a spaghetti dinner. It's taco night. Um that $72 a year is a tank of gas.
Any little bit helps particularly particularly in this economy when folks are struggling.
And so that's why the substitute left the grocery tax reduction intact.
Uh and I am in strong opposition to anything that takes the grocery tax reduction away. So I ask my colleagues to support this reduction that helps all of Nashville, not just select populations, but all of Nashville. I I hear you when you say um when there is concern about well we could use that money for other things. I I do want to speak uh to the the MNPS comment. Um we have a $3.8 billion budget. 1.4 billion goes to MNPS.
That leaves us with two 2.4 billion. 400 million goes to our debt payments. That leaves us with $2 billion for the general government and my proposed substitute moves around $ 8.5 million.
So I strongly believe that our schools can partner with us and absorb $550,000 in a $ 1.4 billion budget.
And I have three children in MNS school.
So I'm a strong supporter of schools and will always be.
So again, I ask for my colleagues to support the grocery tax reduction. Is there any additional discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor? I >> oppose. No.
Is that just two?
Councilwoman Johnston and and Councilwoman Evan Seagull. Any other nos? Any not voting or abstaining?
Motion carries.
Moving on to item number two, resolution 2026 2004 tombs and heel resolution adopting a new pay plan for the general employees of the metropolitan government of Nashville and Davidson County excluding employees of the board of health board of education and the police and fire departments effective July 1, 2026. Can I get a motion?
It's been properly moved and seconded.
Any discussion? Councilwoman Suare.
Thank you, Chair, and I hope it's okay that I'm sitting. I do not have any objection, but I just want to speak this into the record. Uh one of the things that came about in my budget conversation uh was the realization that we have three bodies that work on pay plan and compensation but there doesn't seem to be uh an alignment or collaboration between them right now doesn't seem to be I say doesn't seem to be because there's more conversation to be had but we have a board the civil service commission that recommends the increase but you have the benefits board that also look at employee benefits And so one of the conversation that came up was that employees were finding out the insurance were going up after they find out about the cola increases. I think there needs to be more conversation between all these boards and I think that the benefit conversation should be included in the calculation of the cola and everything else. So uh my goal is to continue the conversation with HR and the union and everybody involved so that we can u avoid a situation where it appears as if people are getting raises but part of that races is gone away uh with the benefits uh that increases along with it and so I just wanted to speak that in there and I'm hoping that there will be more conversation between all boards and there's a way maybe there are again but it appears uh from the conversation that there there currently isn't. So I I I want to speak that in and to uh let our employees know that we'll be continue to to look at that to make sure that the benefits piece uh is taken into consideration as we look at the compensation total composition.
Thank you.
Any additional discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor I oppose? No. Any not voting or abstaining? Motion carries. Item number three, resolution 2026, 2005, Tombs, Huffman, and Heel. Resolution adopting a new pay plan for the employees of the Metropolan Board of Health effective July 1, 2026. Can I get a motion?
>> Uh, it's been properly moved and seconded. Any discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor? I oppose? No. Any not voting or abstaining? Motion carries. Item number four, resolution 2026, 2006, Tounes, Huffman, and Hill. Resolution adopting a new pay plan for the employees of the Metropolitan Department of Police and Fire effective July 1, 2026. Can I get a motion?
Been properly moved and seconded. Any discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor? I oppose? No. Any not voting or abstaining? Motion carries.
All right. Item number eight, resolution 2026 2033. Coupen resolution approving the fiscal year 2027 central business improvement district budget and accepting previous central business improvement district budgets. Can I get a motion?
It's been properly moved and seconded.
Council member Coopin. Thank you, Chair.
Back to our favorite topic, the business improvement district. Um, if I had a dollar for every time I said that word over the last 12 to 18 months, I'd be uh richer than a metro salary. Um but uh joking aside um and this is uh something that we I know um did not make the 21 vote threshold last meeting. Um and so I brought as next official member brought the budget back to a the CBID board. Um who discussed it um listened to the concerns that were shared by colleagues um had a robust discussion um around those different topics. um but decided that um given the fact that there were eight no votes and there were 20 in favor and it was a historically low uh turnout for Metro Council um and that a majority of those who were not present were also in support that they they felt that the the budget overall was supported by by the council as a whole and had it been pretty much any other night um it would have passed with more than the 21 votes. So they they did not see that they did not want to make you know a drastic change um to it. But again as I uh uh mentioned last time and continue to mention I am the exeicio member for the metro council on the CBID board. Um I continue to advocate and bring concerns like multimodal safety.
Um I have another resolution about that um here and um mult multimotal safety um dealing with things like the THP concerns. I continue to bring those up.
But to continue to talk about those holding a budget hostage um for that perspective to me is not the way we should be uh working with downtown partners and I um really appreciate that members of the seed board came out. I've encouraged them to come speak. A lot of them are are a little hesitant to come out come out here and speak but I've encouraged them because really what we are voting on is not a giving money to the downtown partnership. The only entity that in Metro that gives money to the downtown partnership is the Metro government for the library garage directly. That is a direct relationship, Metro Library Garage. That is not that is not how the bid works. We are we have a relationship with the bid and the district management corporation. And I think it's important to remember that that what we are voting on is the voices of 22,000 people that live downtown that pay into this rate bucket um for these for this cleaning, for the safety services. If there are concerns shared with, you know, something that the operator may or may not have done or been part of, again, those are concerns to share with me, I can share with the board. But really, the board is members of our downtown and members of our city.
And we just had a conversation few moments ago about um tax revenue and and grocery taxes being reduced or not, and how that's a reduction in revenue. And you know, a huge reduction in revenue would be if we didn't have a business improvement district downtown funding millions of dollars of investment into our core and generating sales tax revenue. Um, right. So, you know, when we look at our metro budget, we look at what generates revenue. This is something that people downtown pay into and the entire city benefits from. Um, so I highly encourage my my colleagues to support it. Again, the conversation doesn't end here. This is a continual effort. Um, and I appreciate the the support for this bill.
All right. Any additional convers uh discussion?
Council member Porterfield.
>> Thank you, Chair. Um I just want to get on the record. Um is THP still in this budget?
>> We have someone coming to the table in the back.
if you could introduce yourself and you're recognized.
>> Yes. My name is Ben Simpson. I'm the chief operating officer for the Nashville Downtown Partnership and an assistant executive director for the Nashville District Management Corporation. Yes, Councilwoman, there are four positions funded in this budget for the highway patrol.
>> Okay. Thank you so very much for that.
Um, and I appreciate u my colleague, Council Member Coopin, for um, his work on representing and and advocating for his district. Um, I will have to say that it was very disappointing for me to see uh, in essence the same budget coming back and um, this is kind of reaffirmed. Um, we believe we'll have the vote so we don't have to take into consideration what you all asked us to do. Um it's only eight votes. Um but that's eight people that had a valid concern and that brought concerns from people in the community about uh THP continuing to be in that uh budget. And uh respectfully is not holding the budget hostage. We don't have to pass it. We can choose to pass it if we are in agreement with it. And if we're not in agreement with it, we don't have to choose this. So this isn't saying that we don't appreciate the work that is happening. there are some good things that are happening and we do appreciate those good things are h that are happening but there are still concerns with this budget so obviously I'm still uh voting against it but I do have a question for the administration uh the last gentleman that spoke and I apologize because I didn't get his name uh but it I believe he was with the entity that the downtown partnership the vendor of the downtown partnership he made a comment about our city pushing it it my perception of that comment was that our city is pushing unhoused people out of the downtown corridor for for big events like the CAS. And I have a question uh to the administration. Is that what um is that what what our downtown what what our what we're doing as a city?
>> Someone from the administration want to take that.
If you could introduce yourself and you're recognized.
>> Uh thank you, Madam Chair. Dave Rosenberg with the mayor's office.
Council member, I'm not aware of anything like that happening.
>> Thank you. I wasn't aware of it either.
So, I just wanted to make sure that we uh cleared that up. Obviously, anyone can say anything, but when we have vendors that we're partnering with making accusations for our city, I think it's important to get the facts on the record. Uh, one other thing that I also wanted to address the the question that was made um asking what uh the naysayers have done and I think that um this place should be welcoming for anyone to come and speak and give their opinion and voice their thoughts and their concerns.
Whether or not somebody is supporting legislation or whether they are against legislation, this place is a place where we believe that people have the right to come and share their thoughts. And as a vendor attacking a constituent saying, "What have you done?" I believe that that is highly inappropriate. But also, I know what that constituent has done because I see all the time when he is out helping unhoused people. I have seen him and others in the community crowdsourcing, raising money for our unhoused neighbors, going out checking on people in the cold, taking out blankets, taking out uh sleeping bags, taking out warming materials and food.
So to make um just to assenuate that our constituents or that our community members or that our nonprofits are not taking care of our neighbors just because it doesn't look like the way that you're doing it, feel like it's highly disrespectful to our constituency. This has to be a space where everybody can give your opinion. I don't care if you're for it or against it. Everybody knows I'm against it, but that's okay. If you're for it, I'm still going to listen to you. I'm still going to respect what you have to say. But to to make that type of personal attack on a constituent, I think is very inappropriate.
>> Thank you, Council Member. Council member Benedict.
>> Thank you, Chair, especially for recognizing me while I'm not on this committee. Um I haven't been able to be here in the in the past few meetings. Um however, about six weeks ago, um the question which was prior to the pending litigation that's now going on, um I asked a question about um insurance requirements, liability requirements.
Certainly, there's a lawsuit now and I know that that changes things between all the insurance companies. However, the concern that I have was brought up in a committee last year when um uh uh uh legal director Wally legal director Deetsz was here and we were talking about the fire and we were talking about um liability limits and the what was stated at that time was of course nobody's putting any blame at this point on any entity but if it were blockbyblocks responsibility their liability limits would not cover the damage. And so the question was asked of Mr. Deetsz, who would then cover that?
And the answer was Nashville taxpayers.
So that would be people from Hermedage, from Belleview, from Englewood, from Goodletsville, from you know, all over the county would be responsible for that additional um coverage. So my question about six weeks ago, uh because I remember that question from way back then was, have those liability insurance limits increased? Um I spoke with um uh is it with Mr. Simpson um today about that and he said that they have not increased their standard to what metro requires. Um and so in my opinion that's not that's something we should be looking for folks. So they had no intention of increasing those limits even though they knew um that they were not enough. Now I'm not asking them to change anything. Here we are. Uh now there's litigation before us. there's pending litigation. I understand the bad look for them to make that change now.
But I wanted the um you my colleagues, I wanted you to know that um they are not interested as it was expressed to me today in increasing that which means that and and also I asked about who's the back stop since today Davidson County taxpayers are the backs stop for any coverage outside of those limits that they have. Um my concern would be that the sebid rate payers, fee payers, um assessment payers would be responsible for that backs stop rather than taxpayers in Englewood um and Madison.
Um so again, uh the other thing is I was concerned about um insurance coverage for civicity. And then I also was looking at that safety bid and um Mr. Simpson said that it was not competitively bid. So a $2.8 million contract if we went through a metro process. I guess this might be a a question chair for uh council or for the administration when we have a $2 million plus or two and a half or $2.8 million contract. Is that something that we require to be competitively bid?
Director Wilson.
>> Uh, no, Council Member, there are there are times when a contract of that size would be soul source.
So, if I could could you could you expand upon that as far as would it be like in the case of a renewal or I mean if it's sole source is it only because there's one company that can do it or could you explain the circumstances where soul source I want to understand that better.
>> You want to answer?
>> All right. if you could introduce yourself and you're recognized.
>> Mary Jay Wiggins Finance. Um there's a whole list I think of Soul Source. I'm I'm just not sure we could cover every situation because when it's presented to our procurement team, they go through there's a form that the requesting department would fill out and they would go through and review each one um on an individual basis. So there are things such as you know only one company but they've also taken into consideration if we've already been working with a particular company and we're invested in that and there would be a higher cost to a different vendor.
So there are various circumstances. I'm I'm not sure I could adequately cover all of them in this moment.
>> Sure. Thank you for that. And so I guess colleagues, what I'm getting at is if it were a $3 million contract for us for Metro, I think we would have more than just a, you know, um, phone call to others, I think we would want to look at scope of services. We'd want to look at references. And Civicity is a company that was just started and just, uh, began operating in March of this year.
So I think there's, you know, concern that that if I were a member um then of of the seab bid, I would want to make sure that the company we're working with is um experienced. And then the last thing is I happened to bump into somebody who I've known for years um and he had gotten a job with um uh block byblock to work with the unhoused community. and his feedback to me and this may just be anecdotal but his feedback to me was that they drove around and they counted people and that was the extent of the work. So um he left because he was hoping to have a bigger impact and you know that again that is anecdotal but I that was unsolicited. Um he told me that that was the job that he had and he left because of that. So I just find those things interesting um interesting.
Um, Chair, I appreciate you allowing me the opportunity to present this information to our colleagues. And um, and with that, I'll thank you so much, >> Council Member Coopin. And next is Councilwoman Evan Seagull.
>> Thank you, Chair, and thank you to everyone that spoke. And I want to clarify a couple things. First of all, um, I agree with Councilman Porterfield that there is no place to be criticizing anyone, making them feel unsafe, uncomfortable, um, or, um, attacking in in any ways. I didn't I didn't hear the comment at hand. I'll I'll go back and watch later, but uh um it that that's not okay. And I think that that speaks to also the feedback that I've heard from multiple um bid bid board members is that they worry coming to this council to speak um that they're going to get booed at and hissed at. And I've had people who have called me in tears after council meetings when they've come and spoke um for example, in favor of something like the CBID. Um, and I think it's an important reminder that regardless of whether someone is for or against uh any matter, um, that we need to make sure this place is safe and comfortable and that people can speak whether I agree with it or not or anybody else does. I think that's really really important and I think we we've lost that a little bit. But, um, I also want to clarify that at least I can speak for myself and the conversations I've had with the board. Um, it's not just only eight votes. The eight votes against I take very seriously. I take that into consideration. And again, my job as exeicio is representing this council. Um, so to me, it's not only um eight, it is I do take that seriously. I do take Councilman Evan Seagull's concerns about multimodal um very seriously. They spoke to ENDOT about making sure that that was continuing to be a priority and their role and it spoke to Downtown Partnership and SEBIT about it. Um same thing with the concerns about THP. Um but again the concerns are heard but the you know again the the the legislation is saying does the majority of the council support the legislation and and it it did and would have any other night of the the year and even even um and so to me having the budget the same again the the board reconsidered it they could have made a different decision um but they chose to do that they have shared their their feelings of unsafety downtown and their concerns. Um, again, I share we've have multiple constituents down there that um have been thrown to the ground and hospitalized, you know, as they're walking home. Um, and so safety is a big concern for downtown. But, but again, I think that um to not approve the budget because we're continuing to have conversations and work through things and um, you know, to me is not listening. We're not listening to the rateayers and people that are putting money into this. And again, I think that these are things that we will continue to work on and continue to have conversations around. I'm continuing to encourage board members to email the council and come speak um so that you guys can hear from them, my colleagues can hear from them directly. Um but I want to make sure that those the voices of both pro and opposition I I don't take them lightly. Um but I do believe that that the constituents downtown have said this is what we want. These are the services that we want. Um and I think it's important that we continue to to give that to them. And again, specifically talking about the THP, I've said and I will continue to say day, night, 4:00 in the morning, I don't care if somebody sees somebody that is THP downtown doing something um in in in the veins of which we've seen before. I I want to know, I'll come right down there and address it. Um I expect that that will not happen again. I know some of the concerns that have been shared um you know, in the downtown core with our unhoused friends and um that to my knowledge, you know, hasn't happened.
But again, I I've continued to say that my job as exeicio is to represent this body. And so I'm watching closely for those concerns. Um when we talk about the library garage, you know, my understanding was that there were some concerns with with um insurance with Metro. You know, I don't want to get into pending litigation um on the record and speak out of turn on that. But again, you know, I just want to make continue make clear that the relationship and the vote today and the vote tomorrow is about Metro Nashville Council and the District Management Corporation and the SEBID. It is not NDP. The CBID has chosen to hire NDP.
And if people think that SEIT shouldn't have hired NDP that then you can spoke speak to the CBID board, but really our relationship is with the SEBID itself and the budget that they're putting forward. Um and again the relationship with the garage and with um Metro Council and Metro is is a direct relationship. So that that is something that perhaps we can explore in um one of our committees. But again, I think it's important to really get clear with who the parties are and who whose voices we're we're um choosing to either listen to or not listen to.
>> All right. Um thank you, Council Member Evan Seagull, then Councilwoman Sarro.
Thank you, chair. Um, I I I guess I'm a little concerned that the response to my concern that safety was very narrowly defined by choice, by the seab bid.
The response to that concern was, "Sorry, that's transportation. when somebody walking down the sidewalk gets hit by a car that jumps up onto the sidewalk.
Think it's a public safety issue. Always thought it's a public safety issue. I will continue to think it's a public safety issue and it is my hope that the seed can think about what public safety means from a holistic perspective. So, I'm still going to be a no, which I think everybody probably knew and I didn't need to say, but I want to get that on the record. And what I also want to ask because there have been some accusations that people here don't support bids, that we don't support the money. Um I know that it's going to be on third this next meeting, but I was wondering, I believe it was a voice vote, but um the Gulch uh budget passed I think unanimously on voice vote on uh second reading and also on the consent agenda on first. But could the special counsel confirm that for me?
Director Wilson, >> I can confirm that it passed unanimously on first reading and by voice vote on second. I don't recall a no vote from the full council on second reading.
>> Okay, thank you. That's what I thought.
I just sometimes worry I'm reading legisar wrong, especially when something hasn't like gone all the way through, it's kind of hard to like tell what the vote is. Um, so I just want to like make sure people understand like this council supports bids. We passed the Midtown bid. We um unanimously have gotten the Gulch bid through two readings and I haven't heard any um concern about it.
So um to the extent folks are worried that we are somehow like anti- business or anti- bid, I think our our track record speaks for itself. What what we are is um elected officials who have a job by statute to review a budget to make sure that it reflects the priorities of the people of Nashville and we are voicing those.
>> Council member Sor.
>> Thank you, Chair. I wasn't going to speak uh and then I got upset with um the the comments that was made about the constituents and that that really infuriates me and I think that like council member Coopin said we have to do and council member Porterfield that we have to do better. uh um this whole conversation um centers around people I mean we've seen it in these chambers when you oppose something then everybody thinks he love it when you're on the other side and I don't like that that happens a lot um I think it's a conversation when people are expressing concern it's because we want to be better we want to serve our comm constituent better so I hope this conversation is one that continues and continues to get better and we continue to take the voices of council member and the constituent that they represent into consideration as we're formalizing all of this. Another reason why I decide to speak up, I feel that it also is not fair for me to be silent when I also know about some things. Um I do want to say while the budget did not change since the last uh meeting that we had the conversation about having reached downtown to address the mental health issue is still ongoing uh with Chief Swan in the mix. Uh since the last meeting, the um downtown folks have agreed to also uh look into paying for red frogs. Uh which is one of the reason why the budget was reducing the substitute because they agreed that this is a safety issue and they're going to take it on. And so all those effort, I don't want it to be as if nothing is being done or they're not responding to anything. As far as the safety and the and the sidewalk, what I heard was that and and there's so many cooks in the kitchen and there's so many conversations. Sometimes things get lost in translation. What I heard was that there was a conversation with Miss Hakon before she left and that those conversation will resume. I don't know what it means. I don't know what that is, but I'm just reporting that there's a lot of conversation. I'm still going to abstain from it because I see the progress that is made on the unhoused population. I see the progress that is made with red frogs and safety issue. I see the conversation ongoing with the sidewalks. I still have problem with THP. I understand the reason why I get all of that. But I cannot in good conscience vote for something that has THP after what the uh immigrant community went through after THP uh um collaborating with ICE. I cannot. And so, but I cannot in good conscious sit here and act as if nothing is happening at all as well. So, this is me just saying I'm going to be an abstension. I appreciate all the good work and the conversation that is ongoing. I want us to acknowledge that. But I also want the downtown partnership and NDP and the CBD to also take the voices of the council members and their concerns whether it's CHP or sidewalk into consideration because these are things that our constituent has said and we continue to look at program and projects and bid and anything that we come up with that works for everybody. So thank you >> council member Allen.
>> Thank you madam chair. I just want to build on on what council member Suarez said. I think I think this is a really important discussion to have and I and I do think it's important that the concerns of the council continue to be um elevated to um to the commission and I appreciate council member Coopin's offer to continue to do that. I don't think we're done yet, but and I do want to acknowledge that, you know, the fact that we are now looking at a detailed budget as opposed to just a single line item in our overall budget is progress.
and the fact that there are um annual reports that I hope will become quarterly reports on encounters uh downtown that will give us better data on how those actual um safety uh encounters are happening with uh people downtown so that we can know uh either that things are improving or they're not improving. So, I would I would encourage um the the bid um board to continue to be open to our concerns and our broader definition of safety. Um and to look at uh just being more thoughtful in their response in terms of, you know, we we know that it's not just hiring more people with badges, that there are an awful lot of other ways that we can make this this place safer. and and as the uh the responses um with dealing with funding of red frogs and reach show, I believe that that message is being heard, the more that can be emphasized, I think that would be helpful. So, I agree we're not done yet, but I am going to support this um this budget in hopes that we can continue to keep moving forward. Thank you.
>> Thank you, council member. Any additional discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor? I >> oppose? No.
Have two nos, any not voting or abstaining, one absention.
All right, colleagues, moving on to item number 10, resolution 2026, 2035, Allan Huffman, Ellis Gamble, and others.
Resolution amending exhibit A of ordinance number bill 2022 1170 to adjust the mixed income pilot program.
Can I get a motion?
>> It's been properly moved and seconded.
Councilwoman Allen. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, this is an improvement over a program that we created a couple of years called the mixed income pilot that creates a tax abatement for any um developer, nonprofit, for-profit, whatever, that will include a certain percentage of affordable housing for people earning 50 to 80% AMI in their multif family structure. It's run through the health and ed it it um it maxed out in terms of people who applied for it. It it looked like it was going to be very popular. And in fact, one of those who um who was given an aotment built a project that became nationally recognized for innovation in affordable housing, which is I think very exciting and also telling it the success of this. Unfortunately, then market conditions changed and the way we had set it up was simply too rigid to be able to um to be successful in the market conditions going from 0% interest essentially to 6% interest. So, we have adjusted that calculator. Um the planning department has in through the housing division um based it on a a model out of Chattanooga that is working well there. We have tested it and run it past a whole lot of the stakeholders in Nashville to ensure that they feel like it'll work better than what we had before and they have all been very supportive of the changes that have been made. So, the program that's spelled out goes from a tiered program to a a calculator that will be published on the planning website and updated on an annual basis to adjust to market u conditions as needed. Um, and I would like to thank all my many co-sponsors and move for approval.
>> It's been properly moved and seconded.
Any discussion?
I did have one question because in the last analysis that I read it it seemed like the cap was going from 3 million to two. Okay. Why is the the cap being lowered?
>> I'm I'm going ask planning to deal with that.
>> If you could introduce yourself and then you're recognized.
>> Good evening. Thank you, Chair. Angie Hubard, director of the housing division at Metro Planning. Um in um part of our um analysis of the overall investment toward the unified housing strategy, we looked at the impact of the tax abatements um that we have both the low-income housing tax credit abatement that MDHA administers, the mixed income pilot, and then potentially a tax abatement for permanent supportive housing. Um we we believed that reducing the um cap for mixed income pilot from two to three from three to two million first of all um would still yield um a good number of units that um around the 300 range and then um take that 1 million for a future enabling legislation for a permanent supportive housing pilot.
Any additional discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor? I >> oppose. No. Any not voting or abstaining? Motion carries.
All righty.
Just make sure.
Moving on to bills on third reading.
Item number 36, BL 20261377.
A bill to be entitled Sponsor Tounes. A bill to be entitled the budget ordinance of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee for fiscal year 2027. Can I get a motion?
>> It's been properly moved and seconded.
Um, can someone move the tomb substitute?
>> It's been properly moved and seconded.
Uh council members, um you all have seen uh the proposed substitute and all of the items uh that it adds to the mayor's budget. Um total allocation is $8.5 million. As we know, we don't get any new revenue for the substitute. So that includes taking items from various revenue sources uh and moving them into the items that are listed in the the wish list. I will save a lot of my commentary for the floor tomorrow. uh but happy to answer uh any questions and I ask for uh your support on the substitute.
Any discussion on the tomb substitute?
Council member Suare, I'll make it short and we can do a lot of talking on the floor tomorrow, but I just want to um applaud the budget chair for a job well done. um stretching that 8.5 to almost 30 uses uh was impressive and I was joking with her on my budget conversation yesterday that there was an allocation there that was 108,200 or something like that. She was saving every every penny like she didn't even round it up to 102,000. Uh uh that was how meticulous she was. And so uh um we know we don't get to move a lot. We know it's a mayora budget and most of the money is is allocated in the original budget, but to be able to work collaboratively with your colleagues as well as with department heads and everybody uh to stretch it that far, I just want to say uh job well done. And I'm happy because I my stuff got funed so I can complain. Thanks. Thank you, council member. Any additional discussion on the tomb substitute?
Seeing none, all those in favor? I >> oppose. No. Any not voting or abstaining? Motion carries. Can I get a motion on the bill as substituted?
It's been properly moved and seconded to uh approve bill 2026 1377 as substituted. Any additional discussion?
Council member Evan Seagull.
>> Uh chair, I'd like to got two things on here. An amendment and a late filed amendment. So, I would like to first move the amendment with an explanation as to why.
>> All right. Is there a second on the amendment?
It's been properly moved and seconded.
Back to you, council member.
>> All right. Thanks. Um, I I said some of this before. I just want to reiterate the unified housing study says the floor for Barnes, not the goal, not the we need to get there number. The floor for Barnes to reach our goal is $30 million a year. um that's the minimum amount that we need to put in there if we're going to meet our goal on affordable housing. And housing is the number one cost that people face in their lives.
And it's the number one cost that when we can lower makes a difference in people's lives. Um I this amendment is it's not a substitute because I agree with everything my colleague said about the substitute. It is intended to be additive and to say if we did not reduce the sales tax, what would that have looked like? And one of the things it would have looked like, it turns out you can't, there wasn't enough in the sales tax to like go back and give the departments their full ask, for example, because that was roughly two and a half times the sales tax number. But what it does look like is it says the library doesn't have to eat half the cost of the shuttle. the library, one of our most underfunded departments, can't even open some of the branches on Saturdays because they don't have enough money for enough staff. Um, and and there are a few little um asks that were reduced where we asked nonprofits to reduce and and there are some of those it kind of makes up the difference here of 25,000 there that folks had asked for. Um, but it says mainly on this one and then we can get to the late filed one in a second. Um it it is approximately $6.5 million more to Barnes which get would get Barnes to 29.5 million which is almost the minimum that that we need under the unified housing study and that year after year after year we are asked to do and when we talk about the size of the budget which I think you did an amazing job explaining earlier I would say we haven't funded Barnes to the tune it needs. needs because we have chosen not to. It is not that in over $3.5 billion we can't come up with the money needed to help build affordable housing pe for people. It is that we have chosen not to. And make no mistake, if we reduce the sales tax and we don't put more into barns, we are making a choice to do that. And so I don't I don't I'm tired of hearing from people, we don't have the money to do. we don't have the money to do it. Like we have the money to do it. We've just chosen not to do it. And if that's a choice this body wants to make, then I think they need to take it out to the people and they need to explain that. The people need to understand that it is a choice we are making. The people voted for a half cent increase on their sales tax in order to fund transit. That was a an overwhelming vote. It was democracy in action and they said they were willing to pay for it for a government that worked that met their needs and for a government to work to meet people's needs. It also has to make sure that they can afford to have a roof over their head. Um so that's what this amendment does. This amendment was run through finance. Um I would like to thank finance and and particularly special counsel um and the council office for working um well well into the night last week um to get the numbers right. We thought we had the numbers right. There is a late filed because there was a small adjustment um that was caught I believe this morning. Um so there's this one and then the substitute just fixes that error that was found this morning after many many nights uh till midnight from the council office and others and weekends is are included in that.
>> All right, council member Gamble I saw your hand first and councilwoman Sor.
Thank you, chair. I appreciate uh my colleague and and her amendment for wanting to put more money towards the Barnes fund and other items that are actually already in the substitute. But I I have to speak about housing and the Barnes fund. Yes, the Barnes fund is important. I I don't believe that it is the number one thing that we need to use to address our housing shortage. There are multiple multiple things that we need to do. There is not one silver bullet. The Barnes fund is not the silver bullet. It is one tool. We in the funding in the budget. There's also funding going towards housing preservation which is another tool.
Eviction protection which is another tool. There are several tools. And while I understand the um sentiment behind wanting to put more money to the Barnes fund, we need to spread the money around to so that we have several tools to address housing. Um and and so for that reason I can't support uh the amendment which would change um take away from the sales tax which we've already had that debate about the importance of that sales tax reduction but also just wanting to add another context or add another opinion about how we address our housing shortage and the Barnes fund is not the silver bullet. Thank you.
Council member Sara.
>> Thank you, Chair. I think Council Member Gamble was able to read my writing from over there and saw what I put down here.
Uh because that's exactly what I was thinking. Number one, I do not support uh I've said a lot about the grocery tax. Uh but like she said, um I was thinking about all the funding that went to housing in the budget, the revolving loan, the ERTC program. Uh uh and the chair also fund another million for Barnes fund. And I will say this as somebody who support Barnes fund wholeheartedly. I had the pleasure of serving on the housing fund and I was the affordable housing committee for a year last term. And so housing is something that is very important to me and if we have the extra money to give to bonds fund I will be the number one person to say let's do it without taking it away from the people and so this is not a question of not wanting housing.
Uh uh I support housing whole and I support us funding it but in a situation where we are where we are and knowing what we know and we're talking about impact daily impact on people uh I cannot support this amendment. Uh and so 24 23 million is not where it ought to be but it's a whole lot better than where we came from last term. I remember where bonds was only 12 million. I remember the years where we actually took money from bonds in order to balance the budget and so bans has come a long way and so 1223 million and had the 7 million revolving loan and had the 4.5 eviction rack to cancel and had the uh social housing money. That's a lot of money for housing. And so it's not the only tool in the toolbox. The pilot is there as well. Uh it's one of the tools and we have to keep using all of them.
And when there's enough money, free more money, we'll we'll get back to the 30 million. Thank you, chair.
>> Thank you, council member. Any additional comments?
I will add my own comment. Um colleagues, this is not a a friendly amendment to the tomb substitute. Uh um again, I hear the concerns and and that was the the point of the entire budget process. Uh making it a collaborative and transparent process, listening to the concerns of colleagues and trying to fit as much into the substitute as possible. And I and I think the substitute pretty much covered all of the wish list items unless there was an alternative funding source. Um I understand um yes uh the Nashvilleian many Nashvilleians the majority of whom showed up to vote did vote for the transit plan. I am one of those folks that voted for the transit plan because I'm a strong believer in transit and investing in it. Um I also know that there are folks who feel shut out from government uh who are again struggling to make ends meet who feel like they don't matter. Uh, and this is a opportunity um, keeping in the grocery tax reduction is an opportunity to show all of Nashville that they matter and that we are trying to look out for for everyone.
And it is correct. Um, when you decide to fund something over another, that is a choice. and I choose to provide immediate assistance um to the greater uh population of Nashville as opposed to the select populations that the Barnes fund and other things fund uh other things address in our budget. Um the Barnes fund is one of many tools. Uh we are going to enter into having a um using bonds for affordable housing hopefully later this year. which is a tool. We are starting the revolving uh loan fund which is another tool. We are looking at uh community housing which is another tool. There are so many tools that we use um as a city that are meant to address affordable housing.
So, I don't think that not reaching that $30 million threshold for Barnes this year is a hindrance to affordable housing because we are attacking it from so many different angles. I think $23 million is a significant investment in Barnes. Um, it is an opportunity to help as many people as we can in affordable housing and while maintaining the grocery tax reduction, also helping the the population at large in their everyday expenses. Again, that $5 to 7 is a spaghetti dinner. It's taco night.
Um, it's gas in someone's tank. Um, so I I can't support any amendment that takes away the grocery tax reduction. And so I ask my colleagues to vote against it.
Any additional discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor?
This is this is >> this is all.
>> All those in favor of the Evans Seagull amendment.
I.
>> All those opposed to the Evans Seagull amendment, no.
Chair votes no. Any not voting or abstaining?
Motion fails.
>> Okay.
>> Council member Evan Seagull. uh chair there's a late filed for the reasons articulated which I should have kept it on the topic last time but I sort of veered into why the late filed was filed we council office was diligently working with finance and me to get it balanced um it was intended to balance um and there was like a littleing um and I don't have like a red line I'm like a big red line person I only have the the red line to your bill which is not helpful for explaining it but I think the was around maybe there were there were more revenue you know, coming in then going out and I it looked kind of like the Barnes increased roughly $300,000.
>> Director Wilson is saying he can take over.
>> I believe the term was I can take the question, but uh yes, there was there were some changes made to fund balance.
Uh after those changes were made for fund balance, there was a little uh there were a slight amount of money that was left over that that remainder went to Barnes.
>> Thank you, special counsel. Uh if we could just have a widget for how the fund balance works, that would have probably saved you. And um uh poor Maria called her hours of work.
>> So anyway, the substitute um or the late filed is just to to fix the amendment. Okay. Any discussion on the late filed amendment?
Hearing none. All those in favor of the late filed amendment? I.
All opposed? No.
>> Chair votes no. Any not voting or abstaining?
Motion fails.
All right, we are back on Do we have to go back on the bill? Okay, we are back on the bill as substituted which has already been properly moved and seconded.
Oh, she not.
All those in favor of the bill as substituted.
I all oppose. No.
Any not voting or abstaining? Motion carries. All right. Last item on the agenda. Bill 2026 1378 tombs. an ordinance establishing the tax levy in the general services district for the fiscal year 2026 to 2027 and declaring the amount required for the annual operating budget of the urban services district pursuant to section 6.07 07 of the Metropolitan Charter. Can I get a motion? It's been properly moved and seconded. Is there any discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor? I oppose? No. Any not voting or abstaining? Motion carries.
All right, that concludes our agenda.
Meeting adjourned.
This has been a service of the Metro Nashville Network. If you would like to see this presentation again or for more information on this and other programs, visit nashville.gov.
Related Videos
Sudan Is Calling and Your Aid Is Answering
humanappealusa
2K views•2026-06-10
Mass Exit: Why Americans Are Turning Their Backs on These 13 States
DiscoverTheCities2025
2K views•2026-06-14
06-10-26 Part Two - The Seven Year Ache
CumulusNewsTalk
151 views•2026-06-10
90% of Professionals Lose to This "Lazy" Strategy
InvestMaxEng
116 views•2026-06-11
'WORK CUT OUT FOR HIM': Fed's new chair faces major challenge
FoxBusinessClips
742 views•2026-06-16
Jeffrey Christian: Gold, Silver, PGMs — My Summer Price Outlook
InvestingNews
911 views•2026-06-16
Best Bank Bonuses — June 2026 (One Pays 81% APY!)
NathanielBooth
174 views•2026-06-16
MAGA Voted For Tariffs-Now They've Lost Their Businesses
wokepolitics1
3K views•2026-06-10
Trending
This 80 year old corn is dangerous
NileBlue
1569K views•2026-06-10
Everyone around him is insane.
LeoinFrames-1
2406K views•2026-06-13
It does nothing, but men have worn it for 400 years. Behind the origin of the necktie
FineasJackson
1423K views•2026-06-12
Scientists Create Indestructible Medicine
DrBenMiles
628K views•2026-06-11