September 11, 2001 dawned bright and clear
across much of the United States, and no American
could have imagined,
as the sun first rose in the sky, the pain, loss, and bravery that would
be seen that day.
At 7:59 a.m., American Airlines Flight 11
departed from Logan International Airport in Boston. Only minutes later,
at 8:04 a.m., United Airlines Flight 175 also departed from Boston.
At 8:20 a.m., American Airlines Flight 77 departed from Washington
Dulles International Airport near Washington, D.C. Finally, at 8:42
a.m., United Airlines Flight 93 left Newark International Airport in
Newark, New Jersey.
At 8:46 a.m., Flight 11 was flown into the North Tower of the World Trade Center.
Seventeen minutes later, Flight 175 was crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center as the whole nation watched.
At 9:43 a.m., Flight 77 became the third jet to fly into a building, this time, the Pentagon.
At 9:54 a.m., the South Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed in a cloud of smoke and dust.
At 10:06 a.m., as brave Americans fought back in the skies over Pennsylvania, Flight 93 plummeted to earth.
At 10:28 a.m., the North Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed as
hundreds of New York's Finest and Bravest struggled to save victims
still trapped inside.
At 10:50 a.m., five stories of the Pentagon collapsed in fire.
This is part two of my report on the Council meeting of Sept. 6, 2016. For part one follow this link. This report starts at 2:39:21 in the video.
This was one of the more important and interesting council meetings. If you want to have
a better understanding of what is going on, follow this link for a copy of the agenda, staff analysis and my commentary on the agenda.
More Bills on Second Reading: BILL NO. BL2016-373, BILL NO. BL2016-374andBILL NO. BL2016-375 all make changes to Nashville's Short Term Rental Property regulations.
Bill
372 says that any advertisement for a STRP must include the permit
number. This passes on a voice vote without discussion.
Bill
374 would require and affidavit from the permit applicant that renting
the property as a STRP does not violate any HOA rules or Condo rules. I would have opposed this. I do not think Metro should get in the business of ensuring people are abiding by private contracts and an HOA reg or Condo rule is a private matter and Government should not involve itself. This passes on a voice vote without discussion.
Bill 375 would prohibit more than three unrelated
people from sharing a STRP. This would eliminate renting the properties
to bachelorette group. There are a couple STRP on my street, one two doors down from me and one across the street one door up from me. It
seems the majority of their guest are bachelorette groups. I see them coming and going getting picked up by Uber. I sort of enjoy having them on the street. They have
never presented a problem. I believe there are some people who are just not happy if other people are having fun. It may be that large groups have partied all night and caused a problem, but we have laws to deal with that already. This is way too restrictive and I oppose it. It was deferred one meeting.
BILL NO. BL2016-378 is the bill that would substantially reduce the penalty for possession or
causal exchange of up to a half ounce of marijuana. Currently one
can be fined up to $2500 and spend a year in jail. Under this bill one
would not be arrested but given a $50 ticket. Unfortunately, this bill is amended so that it is less attractive than the
bill as introduced. The amendments replaces "shall" with "may," saying police "may" issue the ticket for $50 instead of saying that shall.
Discretion is not rule of law. The police should not have that much
flexibility. It leads to unequal treatment and makes the policeman "the
law" instead of enforcers of the law. The amendment also removes the lessened penalty for casual
transfer. This is still a step in the right direction but a much smaller
step. To see my views on marijuana follow this link.
Dave Rosenberg makes a good presentation explaining his bill. Sheri Weiner makes an argument against the bill, in my view a weak argument. Sam Colman argues in favor and several others speak on the bill also. A couple council members make the argument that marijuana enforcement has a disproportionate impact on minorities although White people smoke pot at about the same rate as Black people. Councilman Russ Pulley, a former State and local law enforcement officer, makes one of the better arguments in favor. Also Councilman Hager makes a good argument and explains the complexity and waste of time spend with arrest, conviction, and expunging of records currently of people arrested under current law. Councilman Bedne makes the argument that marijuana is not a gateway drug and is not addictive. For more on this legislation as reported in The Tennessean see this link. The bill passes on a voice vote with some audible "no's." It appears the bill is in good shape to pass third reading without a problem. To view the discussion of this bill see 2:42:24 - 3:20:28.
Bills on Third Reading.
SUBSTITUTE BILL NO. BL2016-133is the inclusionary zoning bill. This has been debated and studied for about a year now. Inclusionary zoning
is a form of price-fixing mandating that a developer must price a
certain number of his rental dwelling units to be "affordable." This now applies to rental and not homes for sale. I adamantly oppose this bill. In my view it is
immoral to dictate to someone the price at which they must sell their
product. As a practical matter, this will produce very few units of
affordable housing and will most likely have the opposite effect and
make more housing out of reach for some people seeking housing. It will
also result in developers moving across the county lines and contribute
to urban sprawl.
It also most likely violates state law which prohibits rent
control. The Beacon Center of Tennessee has already announced they will challenge the bill in court. The position of Metro legal is that this bill does not violate state law because it does not "require" developers to sit aside units. What the bill does is require the set aside if a developer gets any type of variance to base zoning, which most developers have to do in order to made a development work financially. It will be up to the Courts to determine if this really is a violation of the Stare law prohibiting mandatory set asides to be priced as "affordable."
For a detailed
understanding of this bill, read it and read the staff analysis. One of the changes in the substitute is that it establishes a sunset provision, sun-setting the bill on 12-31-2019. It can be extended by a resolution of the Council. This is the same sunset date as Bill 343. The bill passes on a voice vote. I am disappointing that the three or four members of the Council who purport to be conservative did not make an argument against this bill and did not go on record in opposition. To see the discussion see time stamp 3:21:25 - 3:36:35.
BILL NO. BL2016-334 is an expansion of the PILOT program (payment
in lieu of taxes) for use as a tool to develop more affordable housing.
This will be a new use for this program. It is normally used by the
Industrial Development Board as a tool to incentivize companies to
locate in Nashville. This would allow MDHA to use this tool to encourage
development of affordable housing. It passes without discussion on a voice vote.
BILL NO. BL2016-342 is an Affordable Housing Grant program to encourage developers
to
develop affordable housing. This is not the Council's version of the
inclusionary zoning above; this is a
voluntary plan. It caps available money at $2.5 million and has a sunset provision.
Background and more information on this proposal is in the
press release from the mayor's office which you can find at this link.
The mayor advocated this bill but was neutral on Bill 133. Both developers and housing advocates support this bill, for the most
part. The grant program this bill creates could be the
carrot that works with the stick of bill 133, however it could have worked as a stand alone grant program. Projects getting the grant funding established by this bill would individually have to be approved by the Council for the grant. Councilman Cooper raises a problem with the bill. For the discussion see time stamp 3:40:22 - 3:47:09.
This was one of the more important and interesting council meetings. The bill lessening the penalty for pot possession passed, the one-touch-make-ready bill passes which will accommodate Google Fiber's attempt to bring high-speed internet to Nashville, and two affordable housing bills passed one of which is a real estate price-fixing bill called "inclusionary zoning," and the other an incentive program. Also the council made changes to the Short Term Rental Program and a resolution to purchase flak vest and helmets for the police department proves controversial.
At three hours and forty-nine minutes long, this is a long council meeting. I am breaking my coverage of the council meetings into two parts. This is part one. I am summarizing the meeting and pointing out the good parts with time-stamp notation so you go to those points in the video and just watch the more interesting segments. If you want to have a better understanding of what is going on, follow this link for a copy of the agenda, staff analysis and my commentary on the agenda.
Two names are placed in nomination for Speaker Pro Tem, Bill Pridemore and Karen Johnson. Bill Pridemore has served as Chairman of the Budget and Finance Committee for twice. Karen Johnson just completed a one year term as Speaker Pro Tem. The duty of this position is to conduct the Council meetings in the absence of the Vice Mayor. Some see the election of someone to this post as a battle between various factions in the Council and attach significance to who wins this position, others think it is nothing but a popularity contest and has little significance. Bill Pridemore is elected Speaker Pro Tem receiving 19 votes to 18 votes for Karen Johnson. To view the proceedings see time-stamp 3:05- 7:12.
All appointments to Boards and Commissions are approved which is the norm.
Public Hearings. I am only giving a superficial viewing of zoning bills on public hearing. They generally bore me and are of little interest to anyone except nearby residents of the proposed rezoning. These are the bills on public hearing that I find of interest.
BILL NO. BL2016-265 which would make it easier to declare a PUD inactive is deferred to the first meeting in November.
BILL NO. BL2016-370 is related to the redevelopment of Casey Homes, part of Phase I of the redevelopment. This rezones 4 acres for the building of 96 new units of housing. Those four acreas are now a city park. Later in the redevelopment of Casey Home, land which is now occupied by housing units will be turned into a park. This phased development is necessary so that displaced people will not lose housing but be moved within the development.
Casey A Homes in east Nashville is one of the worst pubic housing projects in city. It is to be
The New Casey Home Plan
redeveloped including nearby CWA housing that is a project that looks and operates like public housing. The new $602 Million development will be mixed income and mixed use. The plan for Casey is to not displace any of the current residents but to add residential units and mix market rate housing and "work force" housing with low-income housing. I am pleased with this approach and think it is bad social policy to lump all low income people together. In some public housing projects, children grow up never knowing people who get up and go to work every day and never knowing children who live in intact households with a mother and a father. One thing I do not like about this plan however, is that the free or nearly free housing for he very low income is the same quality and size as the full market rate housing. If the full market rate housing has granite counter tops, the free housing has granite counter tops. In my view those on pubic assistance getting free housing should not get luxuary housing.
One thing that I think should concern advocates of affordable housing is that the units of affordable housing only have to remain affordable for thirty years, whereas traditional public housing remains affordable to low income people forever. If I am incorrect on this, someone please correct me, but that is my understanding. This does not particularly concern me and I think all traditional public housing should be phased out, but I am surprised that the activist advocating for the poor are not opposed to the plan for Casey because in essence it is a plan to phase out public housing.. To watch this public hearing and learn more about the plan for Casey Homes see time-stamp 37:04- 53:37.
There are 22resolutions on the consent agenda. Resolutions
on "consent" are passed by a single vote of the council instead of being
voted on individually.
RESOLUTION NO. RS2016-367
which appropriates $1,080,400.00 from the General Fund Reserve Fund (4%) for
the police department to purchase body armor and helmets is pulled off of consent at the request of Councilman Colby Sledge. This bill would fund military-grade flack
jacket and ballistic helmet, meant to protect police from sniper fire. Black Lives Matter protested outside the Court House about the militarization of police, chanted and holding signs that said, "where is my vest?" Colby Sledge made a weak argument against the resolution and then tried to straddle the fence. Several council members speak on this issue with a focus that funding this bill does not take money away from any other needs of the city such as schools or head start. Apparently this was argument made by the Black Lives Matter activist. The conversation also wanders into a discussion of diversity training. It passes by voice vote with no audible "no" votes. To view the discussion see time stamp 1:06:11 - 1:29: 33.
All Bills on First Reading pass. There are 36 bills on First Reading. First reading is a formality that gets bills on the agenda.
They are not evaluated by committee until they are on Second Reading and only rarely is a bill voted on separately on First.
All bills on First Reading pass by a single
vote.
Bills on Second Reading.
BILL NO. BL2016-257 would make changes to the Short Term Rental Property regulations. If someone was caught operating a STPP without a permit, a "stop work"
order could be issued and they could no longer operate their property as
a STRP and would have to three years before they could apply for a STRP
permit and they could be fined $50 a day for each day they were found
to have operated a STRP without a permit. Currently if found operating a
STRP without a permit, they must wait a year before they can apply. It is a little more complicated this however. It is amended so that those simply not in compliance out of ignorance can get in compliance but those willfully evading compliance would be severely penalized. It passes on a voice vote. To see the discussion see time stamp 1:30:25 - 1:40:53.
BILL NO. BL2016-343is the “One
Touch Make Ready” (OTMR) bill which would allow one
company the right to work on a utility pole and move all of the cable that
must be moved in order to accommodate a new company adding a cable to
the utility poll. This is being proposed to accommodate Google Fiber,
which is trying to provide high-speed Internet to Nashville. Other
companies, such as Comcast, do not want anyone but their own people
moving their cable. Also, there are labor contracts that complicate
this. Also some in the music industry have an axe to grind with Google
over an unrelated issue and are opposing OTMR. There are as many as 14 companies using utility poles, not all on any one poll, but any one pole may have several users. Each user may take months to move their cable. The Mayor's office has
tried to work out a some agreeable accommodation but has not been
successful. Google Fiber has threatened to abandon their plans for
Nashville to get Google Fiber unless something can be worked out. After
Louisville passed a similar bill, AT&T sued the city arguing that
the city lacked authority to pass such an ordinance and they have
threatened to sue Nashville if this passes. For more on this issue see this link, this link, and this and read the staff analysis.
The committee recommendation was to defer and there were several amendments. The council voted 20-19 to defeat a motion made by At-large Councilman
Bob Mendes to defer the ordinance until December. The bill passes by a vote of 32 to 7. The electronic voting machine was not working and the roll was actually called.
Voting for the bill: John Cooper, Erica Gilmore,
Jim Shulman, Nick Leonardo, Decosta Hastings, Brenda Haywood, Robert
Swope, Scott Davis, Anthony Davis, Nancy VanReece, Bill Pridemore, Doug
Pardue, Larry Hagar, Steve Glover, Holly Huezo, Jeff Syracuse, Mike
Freeman, Colby Sledge, Burkley Allen, Freddie O’Connell, Mary Carolyn
Roberts, Mina Johnson, Russ Pulley, Jeremy Elrod, Davette Blalock,
Tanaka Vercher, Karen Johnson, Jason Potts, Fabian Bedne, Jacobia
Dowell, Angie Henderson, Dave Rosenberg Voting against the bill (7): Bob Mendes, Sharon Hurt, Brett Withers, Ed Kindall, Sheri Weiner, Kathleen Murphy, Sam Coleman
The Council was lobbied hard on this bill. For more information on the council actions on this bill and to see how members voted on the motion to table and the motion to defer, see this Tennessean article. To see the discussion see 1:42:45 - 2:39:20.
Part two of my analysis and commentary on this meeting will follow shortly.
Some Republicans are ecstatic that some recent national polls show Trump in a dead heat tie with Hillary Clinton. One poll even shows Trump ahead by one point. These are not just the low-information casual voters who are smelling victory, but informed Republican who should know better. I think it is wishful thinking. They seem to forget that as a nation we do not elect the president; as the people of the fifty states we elect a president. Who wins the national popularity contest is irrelevant, as it should be.
When you look at the electoral map, Donald Trump is losing big time. Some state that are normally considered solidly Red are in play, such as Mississippi where Trump leads by only one point. Some states that Romney won four years ago have Hillary in the lead. Some states that are consider swing states that Obama just barely won four years ago have Hillary ahead by double digits. The video above does a good job of explaining the race for electoral votes and that is what really matters. I do not see any way that Trump can turn this thing around. Trump does not have an organization with troops on the ground. He has no "ground game."
The people do not seem to care that Hillary committed crimes that normal people would go to jail over and they do not care about the pay-for-play scandals or Benghazi. Unless some revelation comes forward that is so big it cannot be ignored or unless the rumors about her health are proven to be true, Hillary is destined to win the election, not that I really care much. I think Hillary and Trump are about equally poor choices and dangerous. I see the choice as between corrupt Democrat A or egotistical in-over-his-head Democrat B.
What I hate to see is Republicans lose the Senate and possibly the House. If Republicans can hold the House and keep Democrat wins in the Senate below 60 seats, Republicans can stop Hillary from doing very much harm. They could even stop her from filling Supreme Court vacancies. It would be unusual, but their is nothing that would stop Republicans from refusing to confirm her Supreme Court nominees.
If Hillary does win the Senate, I believe we could retake it in two years and in two years increase the Republican majority in the House. Democrats vote less often in off-year elections than Republicans. In 2020 I believe any sane half-way decent Republican could win election to President over a second term for Hillary. Had our Republican nominee been Cruz or Rubio or almost any of the other major contenders we could have won this election. Hillary is not liked; she is only liked because she is not Trump. In four years people will be ready for a change.
Voting starts in some states in just a week. Republicans should recognized the we have lost the election for President and pull out all the stops and focus on holding the House and the Senate. One recent poll shows that a majority of Hillary voters are likely to split their ticket. Holding the House is certainly doable and holding the Senate is possible if that is where Republicans will focus their energies.
by Joey Garrison, The Tennessean, Sept 6, 2016 - The Metro Nashville Police Department has gone from being opposed to
Nashville’s proposed marijuana decriminalization ordinance to now having
a neutral stance on the bill following tweaks planned for the
legislation by the bill’s Metro Council sponsors. [Those tweaks passed] .... would lessen the penalty for people who knowingly possess a
half-ounce of marijuana or less to a $50 civil penalty of 10 hours of
community service. ... Police .. had initially opposed the legislation outright over language in the
ordinance that says violators "shall" be issued a citation for a civil
penalty of $50. [It was amended to "may" which I do not like. Too much discretion on the part of police leads to too much power on the part of police.] Anderson said among top concerns is the weight or quantity of marijuana
as defined in the bill. He said one-half ounce of marijuana is a greater
quantity than some people realize — enough, he said, to create 50
“joint” marijuana cigarettes. [I think that is a valid point. One should carry no more than he can smoke in an evening or share with friends, maybe half of pill bottle container full, or enough to roll four or five joints.]Under Tennessee law, people caught with one-half ounce of marijuana or
less face a misdemeanor charge that is punishable of up to one year in
jail and a $2,500 fine. (link)
by Joey Garrison, The Tennessean, Sept. 7, 2016 - The Metro Council, by a voice vote, advanced legislation on a second of
three readings that would add Nashville to the growing list of cities
and states that have passed measures aimed at decriminalizing possession of small amounts of pot. [I am surprised it was my voice vote. That opponents did not demand a roll call is a good sign.]
My Comment:My editorial comments are inserted in the news stories above in this text color. I am disappointed that the bill was weakened from the original but this is a nevertheless a step in the right direction. It may have been necessary to modify the bill in order to pass it. For more on my arguments in favor of decriminalization of marijuana see Metro Councilman Files a Bill to Greatly Reduce the Fine for Pot Possession.
There is speculation that the Republican dominated State legislature may pass a bill to nullify this effort, if the bill passes a final vote of the Council. I hope that is not the case and I will be very disappointed should that occur.
By Kerry Eleveld, Daily Kos, Wednesday Sep 07, 2016 - GOP Sen. Bob Corker, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, had a very rough go on MSNBC's Morning Joe Wednesday when he repeatedly had the chance to express any confidence whatsoever in Donald Trump’s ability to serve as commander in chief. Katherine Krueger writes:
“Can you explain why you think Donald Trump would be a better commander-in-chief than Hillary Clinton?” [Mike] Barnicle asked.
After a deep inhale, the GOP senator replied, “Well, look, I didn't come on the program to talk politics. You asked me to come on to talk about public policy.” ..... asked if Trump had a plan to defeat ISIS that he knew of. "No," Corker responded. .... (link)
My Comment: Congratulation Senator Corker for not faking some confidence. I have as about as much confidence in Trump as you do. I think Trump and Hillary are both untrustworthy and incompetent.
In Council action, Google Fiber wins passage on second reading of One Touch Make Ready and Pot decriminalization advances. Video and details to follow,
Nashville Will Have a Backstage Pass During
Corps’ Largest Community Event
press release, NASHVILLE
–
The United States Marine Corps has selected
Nashville to host
Marine Week 2016. The
celebration of “
Community,
Country and
Corps” will take place
throughout the city Sept. 7
–
11.
To play off Nashville’s long and storied musical history, the Marines have chosen a theme for
Marine Week Nashville
–
“Nashville
Has a Backstage Pass.” With Nashville as the stage,
everyone will have a backstage pass to the free and open public events
designed to give a better
understanding of the Corps
. There will be a dozen
events each day beginning with a 6 a.m. reveille
and ending
with taps at 10
p.m.
Scheduled events will include
musical performances
from the Marine Corps Band,
interactive
displays of the latest
Marine Corps technology, vehicles and aircraft,
daily workouts
,
and community service projects. Through these events and the numerous opportunities to visit
with the
more than 700 Marines who will be in town, the public will be able to learn what makes
the Corps so special.
New information and activities will be added frequently to the Marine Week Nashville website
during the coming months at
www.usmarineweek.com. Additional information can also be found
on Facebook@marineweek, on Twitter @marine_week and on Instagram @marine_week.
“The Marines are equipped with the latest advanced weaponry, which will be on full display,”
said Capt. Philip Kulczewski, Marine Corps public affairs officer. “Our greatest strength,
however, is the men and women
who
make up our expeditionary fighting force, and we are
excited for them to come to Nashville to share their story with the community.”
Mayor Megan Barry, the daughter of a Marine and champion for bringing Marine Week to
Nashville, said, “Our community is honored to welcome the Marines
,
and we look forward to
celebrating the spirit and dedication of the Corps.”
Previous Marine Weeks have taken place in
Chicago, Boston, St. Louis,
Cleveland,
Seattle and
Phoenix
.
#
My Comment: There is going to be a lot of activity from revile to taps, musical performances, art projects, appearances in Metro Schools, leadership seminars, work-out with the marines, display of military might and more. For a schedule of events follow this link.
Beacon Center, August 17, 2016 - As noted in the Tennessean, last night, due to a lawsuit by the Beacon Center against the city of Nashville, the Metro Council voted to repeal its unconstitutional restrictions
on homeowners’ use of signs related to short-term rental properties
(STRPs). Under existing law, homeowners cannot so much as put
a four-inch sticker in their window indicating that their home is
available on the popular short-term rental site Airbnb.
Beacon challenged Metro’s STRP ordinance in
court on behalf of two Nashville homeowners due to its
unconstitutionality, recently securing an injunction against the city’s
enforcement of the signage ban and another provision that would allow
the police to seize guest logs of homeowners without a warrant.
With last night’s vote—as well as a previous vote to scrap the invasive
police search of records—the Metro Council has recognized and acted upon
Beacon’s victory on these grounds in court.
This action was a direct result of the Beacon Center’s lawsuit
against the city on behalf of our plaintiffs, P.J. and Rachel Anderson.
The Andersons are seeking to overturn Nashville’s permit-cap on Airbnb
rentals and also challenged Metro’s STRP ordinance that banned
homeowners from placing a sign on their property to indicate that their
home was available on the short-term rental website.
Rachel responded to the news stating, “We are very excited for this initial victory and to have our 1st amendment rights restored. We look forward to more victories in this case as we proceed.” The Metro Council should be applauded for
taking a step in the right direction on how it treats homeowners.
However, as our pending lawsuit shows, there are still glaring problems
with how Metro regulates services like Airbnb.
While many have been looking at unfair and
ineffective regulations to solve some of the problems Airbnb has had in
Nashville, the Beacon Center has proposed a list of solutions that
will protect the property rights and economic liberty of Nashville
homeowners while preserving the character of our city’s neighborhoods
and protecting consumers.
You can read the Beacon Center’s policy proposal here and our lawsuit here.
The Metro Council will meet Tuesday, September 6th at 6:30 PM in the Council chamber at the Metro Courthouse. To watch the Council meeting, you can go to
the courthouse and watch the meeting in person, or you can watch the broadcast live at Metro Nashville Network's Government TV on Nashville's Comcast Channel 3 and AT&T's U-verse 99 and are streamed live at the Metro Nashville Network's livestream site. You can catch the meeting the next day on the Metro YouTube channel. If
you will wait, I will watch it for you and post the video and point out
the good parts so you can go to that point in the video and watch just
those segments. Also, I will tell you what I think about what happened.
Council meetings are really boring and I watch them so you don't have
to.
This meeting may be more interesting than most. There are some really hot issues on this agenda: the pot bill, changes to short term rental and the real estate price-fixing bill known as "inclusionary zoning." If you are going to watch a council meeting, you really need the agenda and the Council staff analysis or you won't have a clue about what is going on. Here is my commentary and analysis of the agenda.
Election of President Pro Tempore. The duties of this person is to conduct the council meetings in the absence of the Vice Mayor. This position is sometimes heavily fought over. It can tell you who supports who and can tell you how members are aligned. It is usually not conservative - liberal devide but some times that is a factor. Sometimes the divisions are pro-development vs. pro-neighborhood, or some other division. This is basically a popularity contest and sometimes the election of the person wining the seat simply means they are well liked by their colleagues. I have no insight as to who is likely to win or who is running.
Election of Council President Pro Tempore for a one-year term ending August 31, 2017.
There are 14 people up for confirmation to Boards and Commissions. These are people appointed to Boards and Commission by the mayor subject to approval by the Council. While this could be an opportunity for the Council to exert some influence on policy, the Council just rubber stamps whomever the mayor appoints. There are 8 appointees to the Hospital Authority. Metro is not required to maintain a charity hospital and yet keeps pouring money into this money pit. My view is we should get out of the hospital business but there is no move in that direction. I wish someone in the Council would use this appointment process to make the case for privatizing Metro General the same way we privatized the two nursing homes that Metro operated up until a few years ago. If I were on the Council, I would not vote for confirmation of anyone who did not commit to being open to privatizing Metro General.
There is one of those resolution on public hearing for an establishment that already has liquor license to be granted a beer license. Why does the Council not just change the law and make this automatic? It makes no sense that some establishment can sell shots of whiskey but not beer. The State grants liquor license and Metro grants beer license and they have different criteria. There are 26 bills on Public hearing. Most of them are zoning bills and I don't even attempt to gain an understanding or form an opinion on each zoning bill. Usually a rezoning only concerns a few nearby neighbors. Also the arguments in opposition are almost always the same: more cars, water runoff, over crowded schools and character of the neighborhood. It gets kind of boring. I am only calling attention to a bill if it looks like it will be particularly controversial or if it appears to be a partial taking of someone's property or is a bill disapproved by the Planning Commission or for some other reason it appears important. Here are the bills on Public Hearing, I find of interest.
BILL NO. BL2016-265 would make it easier to declare a PUD inactive. A lot of times, a developer will want to build more units than base zoning permits or he may wish to cluster building in such a way that violates some standard of the base zoning and he will present his desired plans to the Planning Commission and get the site approved for a Planned Unit Development. Often this is a much more desirable development than if the developer just build as permitted by base zoning. Not all PUD's get built. Sometimes the financing does not come together or for some other reason the development does not get built. After six years of inactivity, the Planning Commission can declare the plan inactive and the site reverts to base zoning. Before the MPC can do that however, they must make a determination that no construction has begun, and no right
-
of
-
way acquisition or construction of off
-
site
improvement has begun.
In addition to they may consider
“aggregate of actions” taken by a PUD owner. This would remove the "aggregate of action." I would think that there would be complex deals that are near coming together that should not be voided just because none of the other three conditions have been met. I will watch this hearing to see what people say about the "aggregate of actions" reason for extending a PUD.
BILL NO. BL2016-368 is a rezoning to allow development of 341 residential units and some mixed use commercial on Old Mathews Rd. I am watching this because anytime you have a rezoning to allow that many units, there is going to be some opposition.
There are 23 resolutions on the consent agenda. Resolutions
on "consent" are passed by a single vote of the council instead of being
voted on individually. If a resolution has any negative votes in
committee it is taken off
of consent. Also any council member may ask to have an item taken off
of consent or to have his abstention or dissenting vote recorded. Most of these resolutions are accepting grants or approving allowing signs to overhang the sidewalk. I
don't find any of the resolutions to be controversial but these are the ones
of interest.
RESOLUTION NO. RS2016-340 authorizes the Director of Public Property to go ahead and purchase the property that Metro has an option on, on Eagleview Boulevard in Antioch for a new school in the Cain Ridge cluster. The city is paying $850,000 for 13 acres.
RESOLUTION NO. RS2016-367 appropriates $1,080,400.00 from the General Fund Reserve Fund (4%) for the police department to purchase body armor and helmets for the police.
Bills on First Reading. There are 36 bills on First Reading but I
usually don't review bills on First
Reading. First reading is a formality that gets bills on the agenda.
They are not evaluated by committee until they are on Second Reading.
All bills on First Reading are lumped together and pass by a single
vote.
Bills on Second Reading. These are the one's of interest. BILL NO. BL2016-257 would make changes to the Short Term Rental Property regulations. If someone was caught operating a STPP without a permit, a "stop work" order could be issued and they could no longer operate their property as a STRP and would have to three years before they could apply for a STRP permit and they could be fined $50 a day for each day they were found to have operated a STRP without a permit. Currently if found operating a STRP without a permit, they must wait a year before they can apply. For more information on this see, Nashville may ramp up penalty for Airbnb permit violators. BILL NO. BL2016-343is the “One
Touch Make Ready” (OTMR) bill which would allow one
company the right to work on a utility pole and move all of the cable that must be moved in order to accommodate a new company adding a cable to the utility poll. This is being proposed to accommodate Google Fiber, which is trying to provide high-speed Internet to Nashville. Other companies, such as Comcast, do not want anyone but their own people moving their cable. Also, there are labor contracts that complicate this. Also some in the music industry have an axe to grind with Google over an unrelated issue and are opposing OTMR. The Mayor's office has tried to work out a some agreeable accommodation but has not been successful. Google Fiber has threatened to abandon their plans for Nashville to get Google Fiber unless something can be worked out. After Louisville passed a similar bill, AT&T sued the city arguing that the city lacked authority to pass such an ordinance and they have threatened to sue Nashville if this passes. For more on this issue see this link, this link, and this and read the staff analysis. BILL NO. BL2016-373, BILL NO. BL2016-374andBILL NO. BL2016-375 all make changes to Nashville's Short Term Rental Property regulations. Bill 372 says that any advertisement for a STRP must include the permit number. I am OK with that requirement based on current information. Bill 374 would require and affidavit from the permit applicant that renting the property as a STRP does not violate any HOA rules or Condo rules. I do not think Metro should involve itself in private contracts and I oppose this ordinance. Bill 375 would prohibit more than three unrelated people from sharing a STRP. This would eliminate renting the properties to bachelorette group. There is a STRP two doors down from me and it seems the majority of their guest or bachelorette groups. They have never presented a problem. This is way to restrictive. BILL NO. BL2016-378 is the bill that would substantially reduce the penalty for possession or
causal exchange of up to a half ounce of marijuana. Currently one can be fined up to $2500 and spend a year in jail. Under this bill one would not be arrested but given a $50 ticket. Unfortunately, there are proposed amendments that will make this bill less attractive than the bill as introduced. The amendments would replace "shall" with "may." Discretion is not rule of law. The police should not have that much flexibility. It leads to unequal treatment and makes the policeman "the law." The amendment also would remove the lessened penalty for casual transfer. This is still a step in the right direction but a much smaller step. To see my views on marijuana follow this link.
Bills on Third Reading. SUBSTITUTE BILL NO. BL2016-133is the inclusionary zoning bill. It is a form of price-fixing mandating that a developer must price a certain number of his dwelling units to be "affordable." This applies to both rental and homes for sale. This bill needs to be defeated. It is immoral to dictate to someone the price at which they must sell their products. As a practical matter, it will produce very few units of affordable housing and will most likely have the opposite effect and make more housing out of reach for some people seeking housing. It will also result in developers moving across the County lines and contribute to urban sprawl. It also violates state law which prohibits rent control. If this passes it will be subject to a lawsuit. For a detailed understanding of this bill, read it and read the staff analysis.
BILL NO. BL2016-298 in Councilman Scott Davis's district would rezone 46 acres
now with various zonings including commercial zoning to a multi-family
zoning. I would like to know if this has the approval of the property
owners. I don't know. To downzone property without the consent of the
owner is a "taking" of property. BILL NO. BL2016-334 is an expansion of the PILOT program (payment
in lieu of taxes) for use as a tool to develop more affordable housing.
This will be a new use for this program. It is normally used by the
Industrial Development Board as a tool to incentivize companies to
locate in Nashville. This would allow MDHA to use this tool to encourage
development of affordable housing. BILL NO. BL2016-342 is an Affordable Housing Grant program to encourage developers
to
develop affordable housing. This is not the Council's version of the
inclusionary zoning above; this is a
voluntary plan. It caps available money at $2.5 million and has a sunset provision.
Background and more information on this proposal is in the
press release from the mayor's office which you can find at this link.
Both developers and housing advocates support this bill, for the most
part. If the inclusionary zoning bill passes this grant could be the carrot that works with the stick of bill 133, however this bill can work as as stand alone incentive bill. It is amendable on third reading. For those who want a deeper understanding
of this bill, you may want to watch the meeting of the Ad hoc Affordable
Housing Committee found at this link and the Budget and Finance Committee meeting found at this link.
You can't make this stuff up! Do you know why, according to the reasoning of liberals, college tuition has skyrocketed? Ready? Racism!
I read MoveOn.org and other liberal websites so you don't have to. I want to know how liberals really think. Often I feel liberals and conservatives do not really know how the other sides thinks but only known how their side says the other side thinks. I try to stay informed and read a variety of opinion including left wing opinion like MoveOn. Also, unfortunately, three of my four siblings and their spouses, my mother, and most of my nieces and nephews are liberal so I am exposed to the liberal point of view and should be accustomed to liberal logic by now, but I am still surprised from time to time when I hear a liberal explanation of some event, development or trend. Despite thinking I know how liberals reason, I am still amazed.
Here is an example of what I am talking about. This is an excerpt from a MoveOn, org email I received today.
What
if I told you that one of the main reasons that college costs are so
high for everyone—plunging students into decades of debt—is racism?
This year, presidential candidates have called for eliminating tuition and returning to debt-free college—but this is not some wild new idea.Not so long ago, public college was debt-free.
It wasn’t magic. It was a common-sense public investment in the
nation’s prosperity: enough public money to keep public college tuition
low and affordable for all.
In 1970, for example, UCLA tuition and fees were $475, or around $2,900 in today’s dollars.1
Now they stand at over $12,000, because in the last 25 years, states
have cut about a quarter out of every dollar in funding for public
college, pushing up tuition and forcing students to make up the gap with
loans that total a staggering $1.3 trillion dollars.2,3 The student loan crisis has placed an enormous burden on an entire generation, and threatens to drag down our economy.
Why did this happen? Racism.
Or more specifically—racism used as a political weapon to undermine the
very idea of supporting anything public that might include people of
color.
OK, think about that. First, look at the math. They are saying the reason that in today's dollars the tuition a student is charged went from $2,900 to $12,000 is because the government cut the funding to higher education by 25%. So, $12K- $2.9K = $9.1K which equals 25% of the government funding, so government funding = $9.1K x 4 = $36,400. So, what is the real cost of the student tuition without government funding? $36,400 + $2,900 = $39,300.
To double check the math and the logic look at it like this: In today's dollars, in 1970 the real cost of tuition in the absence of government funding was $39,300. The government funding of $36,400 left the student paying $2900. Today, the cost is still $39,300 but the government only funds $27,300 leaving the student paying $12,000.
Do people really believe that? Liberals are just not very good at math or logic or telling the truth. Do they not know that the cost of college education really has gone up? It has. To blame the increase of student tuition on a decrease in government funding is just false. In constant dollars, government is funding more then they did in 1970. This is known; it is verifiable.
Could the increase in tuition have anything to do with the fact that students loans are easy to get and guaranteed? No, it has got to be racism. Could it have anything to do with students not being smart consumers of education and doing a little cost-benefit analysis before they enroll or before they pick worthless majors? No, it has got to be racism. Could it have anything to do with students going to college unprepared and stuck taking remedial courses? No, it has got to be racism. Could it have anything to do with more students going to college in America than ever before? No, it is due to Racism. Could it have anything to do with a greedy crony system that pays teachers to be on staff but not actually teach much, if at all? No, it has got to be racism.
OK, now look at the logic of blaming racism. To punish Black people, the people in charge raise tuition and cut government funding to punish everyone because in the process of hurting everyone, they will hurt Black people. Come on, people; do you really believe that?
The example MoveOn gave is the state of California, perhaps the most liberal state in the nation. The governor of California is Moonbeam Jerry Brown. So, they are telling me that Jerry Brown and the politicians elected to office in California are racist? Not only are we to believe that the elected officials and the electorate of California are racist, we are to believe they are so racist that they would punish a lot of white people just for the opportunity to punish a few Black people. Who is buying this?
OK, I have another one for you, thinking like a liberal. Why are our highways in such a state of disrepair? (Actually in Tennessee and Texas and a few other places the roads are in pretty good shape, but in most states they are in bad need of repair.) Our roads are in bad need of repair due to racism. Black people will bust tires, knock their car out of alignment, and generally have more ware and tear on their cars than they would if roads were in a good state of repair. Yes, everyone one else will have the same damage to their car as Black people but it will be worth it to cause Black people financial harm.
I know I have a philosophical difference of opinion with liberals, but please tell me most liberals would repudiate this example of liberal logic. Do liberals really think like this?
As the author of A Disgruntled Republican I often post items which I think may be of interest to the conservative, Republican, libertarian or the greater community. Posting of a press release or an announcement of an event does not necessarily indicate an endorsement. Rod
Posts
