Former Council member Emily Evans comments on the Boston Globe AMP story

A few days ago, The Boston Globe reported on former Mayor Karl Dean's failure to get the AMP approved and blamed it primarily on the influence of American's for Prosperity which is an organization funded by the Koch brothers. Frankly, I appreciate the Koch brothers, but I think their influence in stopping the AMP, while helpful, was overstated. To read the Boston Globe report follow this link. 

This report in The Boston Globe has created considerable comment and discussion. Here are the comments of former Council member Emily Evans that were posted to  the Nashville Neighbors Google Group.

The reporter, bless his heart, was used by people that wish to exploit the narrative of dark money influence on local issues. That narrative gets Karl completely off the hook for bad planning, communication and, as Margo has pointed out, compliance with federal process. That I suspect is the point of the article.

Let us not fall for such deception. Mass transit is an important issue that deserves our time and attention. Excusing the failure of the AMP effort to Kochs or anyone else with a fat wallet means success becomes more elusive not less. 

Emily

Top Stories

How the Council voted on same-sex Metro benefits & who simply did not vote.

On July 3rd the Metro Council passed a bill on second reading that would extend metro benefits to the domestic partner of same-sex couples.  The measure is estimated to cost between $400,000 and $900,000 a year.  While the cost is reason enough to oppose the measure, in my view a more compelling reason is that we should not be normalizing what is a perverted life style.  We should not treat as if married, two homosexuals who live together.  If we wanted to say that any two people who share a household and have financial entanglement could be treated the same as a married couple, then I would have less problem with the bill.  I am sure that among Metro's employees, there is a son caring for his elderly mother who lives with him, or there is a mother carrying for her disabled son who lives wither her, or there are two "old maids" who share expenses but do not share sex. If we want to extend this service to people who may be dependent on each other, why is it contingent that they have a sexual relationship?

The vote to approve the bill was 25 in favor, 6 opposed, and 3 voting to abstain.

 BILL NO. BL2014-779

An ordinance amending Title 3 of the Metropolitan Code to provide domestic partner benefits for Metropolitan Government employees. The bill was approved by the Budget and Finance Committee and Personnel-Public Information-Human Resources-Housing Committees. Mr. Westerholm moved to pass the bill on second reading, which motion was seconded and adopted by a the following roll call vote: “Ayes” Barry, Steine, Garrett, Tygard, Matthews, Harrison, Hunt, Banks, Scott Davis, Westerholm, Anthony Davis, Stanley, Moore, Allen, Gilmore, Baker, Evans, Holleman, McGuire, Harmon, Johnson, Potts, Bedne, Todd, Mitchell (25); “Noes” Pridemore, Pardue, Glover, Stites, Claiborne, Dominy (6); “Abstaining” Bennett, Blalock, Dowell (3).

Bill Pridemore
voted NO

Doug Pardue
voted NO

I am extremely proud of those six who voted "No" and want to put a picture with the face.  I am especially proud of the stand and comments made by Josh Sites.

Josh Stites
voted NO

Steve Glover
voted NO

Phil Clairborne
voted NO

Duane Dominy
voted NO

Three Council members voted to abstain. I do not understand a vote to abstain.  I think on controversial issues one should get off the fence and state how they stand.  Sometimes one votes to abstain when they have a conflict of interest. If a council member works for a company that is seeking a zone change, then a vote to abstain is appropriate, or if one has some other conflict of interest. On a bill like these there is no logic to a vote to abstain. Of the three abstentions  Karen Bennett and Davette Blalock who are both Republicans are very disappointing. I am not familiar enough with Jacobia Dowell to know how she would have voted, had she voted. I emailed Karen Bennett and Davette Blalock to give them a chance to tell me why they abstained, but I did not hear from either of them.

 Here are the pictures of those who chose to not take a stand and voted to abstain. 

Jacobia Dowell
Abstained

Karen Bennett
Abstained

Davette Blalock
Abstained

Twenty-five of the Council members voted "yes."  Many of them are obviously liberals and I am not surprised. Some of them I don't know well enough to have guessed how they would have voted. Some of them however disappoint me in how they voted. Maybe my evaluation of them was wrong, but these are the Councilman who disappointment. I am especially disappointing in Charlie Tygerd, and Carter Todd both of whom are Republicans.  

Here are the "yes" votes that either surprised me or disappointed me.

Charlie Tygard
voted YES

Emily Evans
voted YES

Carter Todd
voted YES

Tim Garrett
voted YES

There is one vacancy in the Council and Council Member Edith Langster was absent for the whole meeting. Other Council Member who did not vote at all and were present at least for part of the meeting were Jerry Maynard, Tony Tenpenny, Sheri Weiner and Robert Duvall. I do not know if Mr. Maynard was present for this vote or not. This vote was near the end of agenda and the meeting was almost five hours long, so he may have not been present and had a legitimate reason.  I did speak to Councilman Tenpenny, Sheri Weiner, and Robert Duvall. They all had left the meeting early with very legitimate reason. Council member Sheri Weiner had a health issue and Councilman Robert Duvall and Councilman Tony Tenpenny had family emergencies. I won't go into details but they all did what they needed to do by leaving early. All three told me that had they been there they would have been "no" votes and that they will continue to oppose this effort.

As disappointing as I am in those who I expected to be "no's" who voted yes and those who abstained, I am disappointed in the Christian community and those who advocate traditional values. The Social Conservatives were AWOL on this issue. Had the three who abstained voted "no" and the two of the four disappointing "yes's" voted "no" and Weiner, Tenpenny and Duvall been present, the vote would have been to 23 to 14. If there would have been a campaign from advocates of traditional values to stop this, I believe five more votes could have been switched and it could have been killed. An outpouring of opposition could still stop this between now and June 17th.

If anyone, I mentioned in this blog post would like to explain your vote or your abstention, please feel free to leave a comment, or email me and I will post your explanation.

Top Stories

Councilmenber's comment on Dean's plan to borrow to fund the pension obligation.

From The Tennessean: Dean looks to borrow $200M to cover pension obligations

Josh Stites

Metro Councilman Josh Stites called the administration’s plan irresponsible. “It’s the nature of pension bonds: You’re borrowing money to pay an obligation,” Stites said. “We, as individual taxpayers, don’t use our credit card to pay our mortgage. And that’s essentially what this is doing.”

Emily Evans

Councilwoman Emily Evans, a former municipal bond underwriter, said pension obligation bonds generally don’t work except in periods of high inflation, “and that’s not in the forecast right now.”

“This is widely considered in the municipal bond business to be a very bad practice,” she said. “To beat the interest rate, you have to take on more risk in your pension fund. And a lot of people out there are counting on that money who have no idea what we’re doing.”
 

Top Stories

What happened in the Metro Council on March 19,2013

Council OKs $1Bilion in debt. Emily Evans votes "no."

This council meeting is only 41 minutes long. I have not watched the video yet but will update when I have done so. The city issued $1 billion dollars in bonds.  Council member Emily Evans objected. The article below explains the issue.

Nashville council OKs $1B in bond issues to fund building, infrastructure projects

by Michael Cass, The Tennessean - Metro government will be able to issue more than $1 billion in debt to finance building and infrastructure projects after the Metro Council signed off on three resolutions Tuesday......
.........Councilwoman Emily Evans, who works in the municipal bond industry, said on the council floor that she was voting against all three resolutions because they didn’t comply with Metro’s debt management policy.

“We are supposed to repay debt on a level 20-year payment and we are supposed to use competitive bid,” Evans explained in a text message later. (read more)

Top Stories

Update on the 11/13/12 Council Meeting: Lifetime health care for Council members approved, EPA endorsement, fairgrounds ...

Here is my summary of the council meeting.

There were no lengthy hearings on any of the bills on public hearing.

No resolutions were pulled from the consent agenda. The consent agenda consist of non-controversial resolutions, including memorializing resolutions. The council votes on the consent agenda has a group and passes all of the bills on that agenda by a single vote. Any council member may have a bill pulled from the consent agenda. If a bill is not pulled, then it is deemed that all of the items on the consent agenda have passed unanimously.

 I am dismayed that RESOLUTION NO. RS2012-478 was not pulled from the consent agenda. It puts the council on record as “supporting the reduction of greenhouse gas pollution under the Environmental Protection Agency Clean Air Act” and says that “climate change is not an abstract problem for the future or one that will only affect far-distant places, but rather climate change is happening now, we are contributing to it, and the longer we wait to act, the more we lose and the more difficult the problem will be to solve” and it urges “the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa P. Jackson, and President Barack Obama to move swiftly to fully employ and enforce the Clean Air Act to do our part to reduce carbon in our atmosphere to no more than 350 parts per million.”

 I, unlike some conservatives, accept the majority scientific opinion that global warming is a reality and that human activity is a contributing factor. I do not think that Al Gore cooked up global warming and that there is a grand worldwide conspiracy in the scientific community to perpetuate a scam. However, this resolution is a case of local government weighing in on an issue that the US Congress should be debating.

There is no end to issue the Council could express there will about if they want to start doing so. What about Agenda 21, the Benghazi policy failure and cover up, the decision of the Federal Reserve to inflate the money supply $40 billion dollars a month, immigration policy, the Supreme Courts Citizen United case, the looming fiscal Cliff, the issue of healthcare exchanges and any other number of federal and state issue? If the council is going to start going on record about national issues, there is no end to what they could opine about.

Why should we go on record that 350 parts per million is the correct level of CO2, why not 325 or 375 parts per million? With China building a coal-fired energy facility a month, does our minor curtailment of CO2 in the Nashville region make any significant dent in the problem.

Also, when Congress passed the Clean Air act, they never intended to declare the stuff we exhale as a pollutant. The Supreme Court has ruled that CO2 is a pollutant and the EPA has the right to regulate. This is a complicated issue. Metro Government should not have passed it. Metro Council should stick to local issues. I know we are locally affected by global warming, but we are also effected by issues of war and peace, a $16 trillion dollar debt and socialization of healthcare. If members of council members want to weigh in on those issues they should run for Congress or blog.

Next time you see one of your council members, especially one of the conservative council members, ask him why he voted for that pro-EPA resolution. He did.

Other Resolution, not on the consent agenda also passes without discussion

Bills on First Reading:

Usually all bills on First Reading are considered as a group and they pass unanimously. First Reading is simply allowing bill to move forward. Bills do not go to committee until after first reading.

Duane Dominy's bill, (BL2012-293) which would require the Fair Board to issue a Request for Proposals for private operators to lease and operate the fairgrounds while upgrading the site and maintaining current uses was objected to by Council Member Moore, which means it had to be voted on separately. (See 28:35)

Sandra Moore moved to defer “by rule,” the rule being rule 8 of the council which says that if a bill only effects one council district and the district council member is not a sponsor of the bill then if the district council member objects to the consideration of the bill on first reading , then the bill must be deferred one meeting. Council member Duvall raised a point of order and argued that the fairground is not an issue that effects only one district but is his overruled by Council staff. This bill will be back on the agenda on first reading on November 20.

This skids are being greased  to kill the fairgrounds and the advocates of doing so are going to pull out all of the stops.  Unless fairground proponents rally to save the fairgrounds, then it is a done deal. Call your council member and ask him to support Dominy's bill.


Bills on Second Reading

The bill that transfers the Transportation Licensing Commission to the Public works department (BILL NO. BL2012-281) passes by voice vote without discussion. While this does nothing to curtail Metro’s price and supply fixing of transportation services, it is still a good bill in that it will most likely end the bullying and abusive practices of the TLC, such as the inspectors illegally exercising police powers, carrying weapons and imitating police officers and intimidating taxi and limo drivers.

The speed cushions bill by Councilman Standley (BILL NO. BL2012-284) which was discussed quite a bit in the B & F committee was deferred to the second meeting in December and referred to Traffic and Parking Commission (see 37:40 for Standley’s explanation of his deferral)

Bills on third reading

The bill sponsored by Council Member Claiborne that would eliminate lifetime subsidized health insurance benefits for Members of Council after they leave office failed to pass. (See the discussion at 50:34 to 1:04:09) Emily Evans makes the point that this benefit is so expensive due to the turnover of the council. due to term limits. However, she urges her colleagues to vote against the bill and saying this bill does not really address the problem, which is term limits.

 Here is how members voted on the bill: 

“Ayes” : Barry, Steine, Garrett, Tygard, Banks, Jernigan, Stites, Claiborne, Weiner, McGuire, Blalock, Duvall, Todd, Mitchell (14)

Noes” : Maynard, Matthews, Harrison, Hunt, Scott Davis, Westerholm, Anthony Davis, Bennett, Pridemore, Pardue, Stanley, Tenpenny, Moore, Allen, Baker, Langster, Evans, Holleman, Dominy, Johnson, Potts, Bedne, Dowell (23)

This is a disappointing vote. Some of the people we think of as conservatives voted against it. For full disclosure, I receive this benefit, however, if I were serving in the Council, I would have voted for this bill. With the advent of term limits and a growing number of former council members, this is an expense the city cannot afford.

Top Stories

Council Member Emily Evans on Education: "What we know works....

Emily Evans

Emily Evans, Council Member District 23, gave a thoughtful and informative presentation Saturday on the issues surrounding charter schools and education reform at the meeting of the Green Hills Republican Breakfast Group. She explained the Tennessee’s “parent trigger” law, the name given to laws that allow parents to convert a regular school into a charter school, and discussed what education reform is needed to make real improvements in education.

 The "trigger law" is provided for in the state’s charter school act. It says that if 60 percent of parents or teachers at any school sign a petition, they can convert a traditional public school into a charter school, provided the local school board agrees to the conversion. Unlike when the local school board rejects a regular charter school application, however, and the applicant may appeal the decision to the State Board of Education, as happened recently when the Metro Board of Education rejected the Great Hearts application, there is no appeal of the local school boards decision regarding a charter conversion application.

She gave an example of a particular school that would be a good candidate for conversion. The school is under performing and has been plagued with problems. Last year, there was a five day period in which the school could not send home any homework because the copier was broken. "It is a place where people who care can't seem to break through and change it," she said.

She explained that if 60% of the parents signed a petition to convert, the Board would have to consider it. A PTO or any group of parents could launch the petition drive she said. Then, if the Board approved the conversion, the parents could put out a request for proposals and find a company or someone to manage it. If there were parents who did not want to keep their child in the converted charter school, they could send the child to the next nearest public school.

Council member Evans said that while vouchers and charter schools may be options for dealing with the failure of public schools that they are a response to a problem and not a solution to the problem of public schools. They are not a panacea and have problems of their own. One problem with charter schools said Ms Evans, is that they drain dollars out of the traditional schools. While the dollars follow the child, some cost in traditional schools are fixed or relatively fixed cost and do not decrease proportionately to the decrease in enrollment. She said the performance of charter schools also was a "mixed bag" and not all charter schools out perform traditional public schools. Also, if charter schools grow, we are going to develop a parallel system and these charter schools will want their own facilities of which they can be proud. Now, they are meeting in basements and old building.  They will want their own campuses which means building new schools in existing neighborhoods and that is difficult to do.

Also magnet schools and academies are a solution for some parents who seek a superior education for their children but by "skimming off the best and brightest" out of existing zoned schools, the zoned school from which the children are pulled suffers from the loss of these students. Rather than charter schools and vouchers and magnet schools and academies, we need real reform of the education system.

What needs to happen is we need to change the culture of public education. We need massive reform but real reform will be difficult to achieve. One impediment to reform said Council Member Evans is a state law called "maintenance of effort," which is interpreted to mean we cannot cut the local school budget. Thus a mayor may not force reform. He can't put condition on the money that goes to schools. There is little a mayor can do to improve education.

The primary problem says Council Member Evans is that we have too much bureaucracy at both the state and local level. There are too many rules and regulations. The rules governing schools makes Medicaid look streamlined and efficient. Principals really don't manage. They obey the central office and comply with a bunch of arcane rules that make no sense and often become nothing more than paper pushers for the central office.

Local schools need autonomy she said. "What we know works, and it works wherever we are, is that a great principal who can hire and fire and manage his budget and develop a curriculum around the population he serves can create a great school."

If you get a chance to hear a presentation by Emily Evans on school reform, don't miss it. She made more sense than anyone I have ever heard speak on the topic. She has identified the problem and knows what needs to be done to fix it.

Top Stories

GREEN HILLS GOP SUMMIT, Metro Council Member Emily Evans

 Rise & Shine

Join Your Fellow GOP'ersGREEN HILLS GOP SUMMIT

 THE HOT TOPIC IN PUBLIC EDUCATION:
CAN WE SAVE UNDER-PERFORMING NASHVILLE
SCHOOLS VIA TENNESSEE'S "TRIGGER LAW"? 
 Saturday, October 27th, 2012
Green Hills Satellite Campaign Office4108 Hillsboro Pike (Next To McDonald’s)Coffee, Pastries and Fellowship at 8:30am
Program Begins at 9 am

Please Bring Along A Chair Or Two For Use During The Meeting

 Metro Council Member Emily Evans

Will address the:
--Background
--Current Issues
--And Potential Of The Tennessee 'Trigger Law'

Don't miss hearing from one of the 'movers and shakers'
on this compelling topic.
**PLEASE RSVP TO: GREENHILLSGOP@GMAIL.COM**

 Event Chairmen - Peter and Gail VoyseyKathleen Starnes, DCRP Chairman
This event sponsored
by the
Davidson County
Republican Party

Top Stories

Final update: What happened at the 9/18/12 Council meeting: Midtown rezoned, poll books bought

09/18/12 Metro Council Meeting

Meeting of the Metro Council on September 18th, 2012 More

Click on the above link to watch the Council meeting.  Below are the highlights with notation of where to go in the video to see the more interesting portions of the meeting.

It is announced that Juvenile Judge Betty Adams Green resigned effective the day prior to the Council meeting. The Council will fill the vacancy. Nomination for the office are to be in the clerk's office by September 25, and the Council will fill the position at the Oct 16th meeting. It will be interesting to see who the Council chooses to fill this vacancy. The Council gets lobbied hard on filling vacancies for these plum positions.

Three bills are pulled from the consent agenda.  This rarely happens. The three bills are Resolution 412 which would appropriate $400,000 from the 4% fund to purchase electronic poll books for the election commission, Resolution 412 which approves an agreements between TVA, NES and Metro for the purchase, interconnection, and operation of electricity generated by solar units installed at two fire halls, and Resolution 428 which authorizes the parking of vehicles at the former Stokes Middle School property.

Discussion of Resolution 410 (purchase of poll books) starts at 16:10. Budget and Finance had approved unanimously. Charlie Tygerd explains that the issues surrounding the controversy of problems with the electronic poll books were fully explained at the B&F committee and half the books have already been purchased and the new poll books save time and money.

Bo Mitchell who is running for a State House seat, gets a lot of TV face time grandstanding on the issue and says the B&F committee did not get adequate answers. He makes a motion to defer. Duane Dominy Speaks and says the answers to the questions raised by Mitchell were provided in committee. On a machine vote the motion to defer fails, 15 for deferral and 24 against.

Councilman Maynard attacks the integrity of the Election Commission and Charlie Tygerd defends the election commission. (This is good stuff. Maynard starts at 29:45; Tygerd at 33:25.) Tygerd gets frustrated and heated and does a great job responding to Mannard. Councilman Tony Tenpenny also takes to the floor revealing his frustration. Several other members speak on the motion and the resolution passes by voice vote. The way I see it, those who are attacking the election commission are simply not wanting to understand the explanation that were offered and are grandstanding.

Resolution 412 which approves an agreements between TVA, NES and Metro for the purchase, interconnection, and operation of electricity generated by solar units installed at two fire halls is discussed. Thanks to Charlie Tygerd, the questions I wanted asked were asked. (See it at 37:10) The return is a twenty year return on investment. That is a bad deal! Great job Councilman Tygerd! 

 Councilman Stein points out that the money has already been spend and all this bill does is enter into a contract to recoup some of the money already spend. On a machine vote, the resolution passes 37-2 with the two "no" votes being those of Tygerd and Duvall. If I had been in the Council, I also would have voted no. This measure was nothing more than a feel-good green project that was not in the city's best interest. The Council should have voted against this bill and sent General Services a message to stop the feel-good green stuff and only engage in green projects if they are good investments.

Councilman Evans explains her opposition to Resolution 428 which authorizes the parking of vehicles at the former Stokes Middle School property. (see 42:52) The resolution passes on machine vote 34-4-1

Each proposed charter amendment is considered separately.

• RS2012-279 by Tygard which would have Nashville’s mayoral, vice mayoral and Metro Council elections at the same time was withdrawn following a recommendation against the bill from the Council's Charter Revision committee. 
• RS2012-280 by Gilmore that would prohibit the Metropolitan Government from inquiring about a job applicant’s criminal history on the initial job application is withdrawn following a negative recommendation of the Council Committee. 
• RS2012-377 by Garrett, which would clarify the duties of the sheriff’s office passes. 

ORDINANCE NO. BL2012-237 on second reading amends the Metro Code to implement a number of the recommendations of the study and formulating committee pertaining to employee and retiree benefits and pensions. This ordinance basically curtails the benefits of employees going forward. This is a wise move. Many cities are going broke because of liberal defined benefit packages and retirement plans. The bill passes.

An attempt is made by Councilman Clairborne to amend the bill so that going forward, former council members would not be eligible for the subsidized health insurance unless they had served 10 years and then they would pay the same rate as retirees who had served 10 years. (see 1:09:15 for discussion) Councilman Clairborne withdraws the amendment after several council members raise objections that the amendment has not been to committee, but he promises to bring it back as a separate bill.

Prior to term limits there were not that many former council members; with term limits there is growing number of former members of the Metro Council. Claiborne's proposal should be adopted.

ORDINANCE NO. BL2012-241 by Dominy, on second reading to require the annual contract for services between the Metropolitan Government and the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce for the Partnership 2020 economic development program to be approved by resolution of the council and would require 21 affirmative votes to be approved, is deferred for two meetings.

BILL NO. BL2012-195 which would rezone more than 1500 properties over a 450 acre area in Midtown (between Charlotte and West End from I-440 to downtown) passes. The discussion starts at 1:32:50.

Below are news reports regarding this council meeting.

Council approves Midtown rezoning
 also. approved purchase of poll books


by Michael Cass,The Tennessean, Sep 18, 2012

The Metro Council voted Tuesday to approve a 455-acre rezoning in Nashville’s Midtown area and agreed to put five proposed charter amendments up for public votes in November.

 The council also voted to appropriate $400,000 to buy controversial voting equipment for the Davidson County Election Commission, agreeing to honor a contract with a vendor over objections about the technology’s performance in the August primary.(link)

 Metro Council Purchases Controversial Voting Equipment
 from NewsChannel5.com

NASHVILLE, Tenn.- Metro Council Members exchanged some heated words over controversial electronic poll books during a meeting.

Despite the debate, the council voted to appropriate $400,000 to buy the equipment for the Davidson County Election Commission.  The money will purchase 200 machines and upheld a contractual agreement signed last year.

Top Stories

Nashville parents explore taking over schools

Never-before-used state triggers law allows public schools to be converted into charters

Sep 19, 2012, The Tennessean

Dissatisfied parents and elected officials from West Nashville are exploring a never-before-utilized state law that would allow a public school to be converted into a parent-controlled charter school.
Under the so-called trigger law, if 60 percent of the parents or teachers at a public school sign a petition, the school board then votes on whether to approve converting the school into a charter. (link)

This is a positive development. Congratulation to Council Member Emily Evans for her leadership roll in exploring  this option for education reform.  

Top Stories

General Assembly is picking winners and losers with planning bills

Emily Evans

by Emily Evans

 

Rod is right. Planning and zoning issues can be pretty dull. The language of setbacks, variances, accessory uses and bulk regulations can turn the most interesting person into a dullard.

Planning and zoning is also uniquely local in character. Each county or region emphasizes what is important to them. In Williamson County, historic zoning, which has turned into the goose that laid the golden tourist egg, is pretty important. In Knox County they seem to work hard to protect their sweeping views of the majestic Smokey Mountains. In Davidson County, our zoning regulations reflect the urban hipness that comes with being a center of culture and learning.

The introduction of HB3694, HB3696, HB 3698 and HB1345 which have been promoted by the Nashville Chamber of Commerce serve as a radical departure from the legislative scheme that is the state zoning law. For the most part the zoning law in the Tennessee Code Annotated is permissive. It tells us we can zone land for different uses. It tells us we need to have a plan around which we make zoning decisions to avoid arbitrary decisions. It tells us to have a process for appeal. The law refrains from a specific list of do’s and don’ts for the simple reason that what is a “do” in Davidson County might not fly in Williamson.

Take the zoning ordinance that applies to signs, for example. In Nashville, we are pretty permissive. We have LED billboards, tri-face billboards, and regular billboards. We have on site signs and off site signs. We have big tall signs, low monument signs and some in between. In Williamson County, they have monument signs and not too many of those.  Why the difference? Williamson Countians decided a long time ago they didn’t like all our signs. So, they passed a law that limited them. Davidson County came to a different conclusion. Has it made a difference in how prosperous each of those two counties are? Clearly not. 

If the Tennessee General Assembly gets its way Williamson County and Davidson County will have to comply with the same sign law even though there is clear evidence we don’t want or need the same rules.

There are other aspects about these bills that fly in the face of fairness and good government. One of the bills sets rules for properties whose use is not the same as its zoning. The jargon for that situation is “legally non-conforming use.” But is has another set of rules if you happen to be the owner of a car lot.  I guess car dealers let their Chamber membership expire. In another bill, there is a set of rules for what regulations would apply when you develop land unless you happen to work in Pigeon Forge. The General Assembly is picking winners and losers in the real estate development business.

Please support your Metro Council and pretty much every other legislative body in the State of Tennessee and ask your State Representatives to vote “no” on HB3694, HB 3696, HB3698 and HB1345.

Emily Evans is a Member of the Metro Council representing District 23. I appreciate her contribution to this discussion. Opinions expresses in a guest editorial are the opinion of  the writer and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of A Disgruntled Republican.

Top Stories

Highlights of the Nov.15, 20ll Council meeting

Former Metro Councilman Mike Jameson was elected General Session Judge. In the first round of votes, of the eight candidates running, Jameson, Freeman and Jones received votes in that order with none getting 21 votes resulting in a runoff between Jameson and Freeman. Jameson won the runoff.

RESOLUTION NO. RS2011-59 sponsored by LANGSTER & MCGUIRE was deferred to November. Duane Dominy raised a question, asking if using  public funds for this purpose would endanger the tax exempt status of the church. The staff adviser confirmed it possibly could, but that would be a decision for a state agency to make.  This resolution approves a contract between the Metropolitan board of health and Corinthian Missionary Baptist Church to upgrade the church’s kitchen facilities and to promote community gardens in North Nashville. The funds for this contract are from the federal stimulus grant the health department received to promote healthy living. These funds will be used to provide nutrition education, as well as to purchase a dishwasher, install kitchen sinks, purchase a new refrigerator, and purchase kitchen utensils for the church.  The church is to receive $24,275 in federal stimulus pass-through funds under this contract. An amendment was approved to revise the language of the bill to remove any reference to the ministry activities of the church and to specify that the programs are open to everyone regardless of religious affiliation. Despite this amendment, this still appears to be the use of public funds to benefit a religious institution and in my view should be rejected.

BILL NO. BL2011-3 sponsored by Councilman Tygard would allow recreational athletic fields and associated structures to be constructed within the floodway under certain conditions. Councilwomen Evans argued that fences and dugouts could obstruct water flow and be detrimental to flood control. Councilman Dominy argued that ball fields could be build that would not obstruct water flow. The bill passed on a voice vote.

BILL NO. BL2011-4 sponsored by Councilman Stanley which would require quarterly stormwater reports to be submitted to the Metropolitan Council was deferred one meeting for more study.  Councilman Stanley did not oppose the deferral but argued in favor of the need for the bill. I found his arguments persuasive. This bill needs to pass.

ORDINANCE NO. BL2011-31 sponsored by TYGARD and others amended the “meal ban” provisions in the Metro ethics code to allow elected officials, employees, and members of boards and commissions to accept free food or drink up to a value of $25 from a single source in any calendar year. This bill restores some sanity to an overreaching reform that went as far as prohibiting Councilmembers from accepting a cup of coffee at a neighborhood meeting. It passed by voice vote.

ORDINANCE NO. BL2011-39 privatized the metro tow-in lot eliminating several metro positions and saving millions of dollars. This was discussed at length at the Budget and Finance Committee and passed the Council without discussion.  This seems like a very wise move to me. Privatization almost always saves the city money. 

ORDINANCE NO. BL2011-39 increased from $2 to $3 a per seat ticket tax at Titans stadium.  The reason for this is to have the revenue to fund a bond issue to be presented next council meeting that would in essence have Metro co-sign a loan for improvements to the Titans stadium. It looks like a bad deal to me.  One of the objections was that the bonds were 25 years and the useful life for the improvements was much less than 25 years. Another objection is that the deal between the city and the Titans, has Metro taking the risk and the Titans taking the profits. The bill passed by machine vote 36-1. However there was a lot of discussion and many are not pleased with the relationship between the city and the Titans but feel the Titans have the city over a barrel. 
 
Controversial BILL NO. BL2011-25 sponsored by Councilman Matthews that would rezone a small portion of the lot in order to allow Temple Baptist Church to construct an LED sign was deferred one meeting.

The backyard chicken bill was not on the agenda but will be up for public hearing in December.

Top Stories

Council Member Emily Evans explains the Fairgournd Charter Amendment.

I found this on Emily Evans blog and am reproducing it in full.  I assume she would not mind. This is a great explanation of why we need to vote for the Fairgrounds Charter Amendment and what the amendment would do. Rod

by Emily Evans

There is but one amendment to the Metro Charter on the ballot this Thursday. Known as the "Fairgrounds Amendment," this change to the charter would require two things.

1) The Metro Board of Fair Commissioners will be required to continue to conduct all activities held at the Fairgrounds as of December 31, 2010. Those activities shall include but not be limited to the Tennessee State Fair, the expo activities (lawn and garden show, Christmas Village, etc.) flea market and auto racing; and

2) The Fairgrounds property will not be demolished unless it is approved by 27 votes of the Metro Council.

Some have raised the rather specious argument that the question of the Fairgrounds does not rise to a level of importance necessary for inclusion in the Metro Charter. They are, of course, ignoring the fact that the reason we have a State Fair in the first place is because we are directed to do so by the Metro Charter.

Way back in 1909, the State of Tennessee determined that each county in the state should have a divisional fair. The state set about obtaining locations and sponsoring fairs. After a few years in the fair business the State realized that sponsoring a fair in each county was a load of work and they decided to shift the burden to the counties themselves. So, through Chapter 515 of the Private Acts of 1923, all the counties were enabled to obtain control of their fairgrounds from the state, hold a fair and, if necessary, levy a small property tax to pay for it. This last feature, more than the other, expresses the State's strong support of fairs that exhibit the agriculture and industry of the great State of Tennessee. The only other entity that can levy property taxes in Davidson County is the Metro Council.

When Metro was formed in 1963, Chapter 515 of the Private Acts of 1923 along with the earlier Chapter 490 of the Acts of Tennessee for 1909 were incorporated by reference along with additional language about how Fair Commissioners would be selected and provisions on payment of personnel. The Charter further states that the Metro Council can adopt any ordinance providing for additional duties of the Fair Board. So, it is both proper and appropriate that an amendment to the Charter pertaining to the duties of the Fair Board be brought to you for consideration at the ballot.

The first part of the amendment requires that the activities held at the Fairgrounds as of December 31, 2010 be continued. Unfortunately, the language does not make clear that these activities are to be conducted on the property we know as the Tennessee State Fairgrounds. So, if you ignored the rowdy debate last winter or just moved here from Cleveland, you might not fully understand the intent which is to continue the operation of the Fairgrounds in south Nashville as they are today.

The second part of the amendment prohibits demolition of the Fairgrounds structures unless there are 27 votes. The purpose of this section is in direct response to an effort, which ultimately failed, to demolish the historic auto short track at the Fairgrounds.

So, how you vote on this charter amendment will really come down to how you feel about fairs and the Fairgrounds. There is little doubt that the Tennessee State Fair and the Fairgrounds are not living up to their potential. The place has been plagued by bad politics, bureaucratic indifference and poor management for many years. On a more macro level, the last 50 years or so have seen Nashville, and to a lesser extent, the State of Tennessee put some distance between its urban/suburban present and its agrarian past.

I think it is the latter trend that prompted some folks to view the Fairgrounds as a place to realize their real estate development ambitions. It is the promise of "mixed use" (which most real estate development experts find unlikely) that motivates them. There has also been some chatter about unspecified jobs and economic impact that makes them think we should dispense with the legacy that is the State Fair and the Fairgrounds.

Its checkered past does not mean the future for the State Fair cannot be a bright one. Appreciation for local agriculture is once again on the rise. A few weeks ago, I went to a "cheese" dinner at a Hillsboro Village restaurant. The dinner featured cheeses made in Tennessee. CSA's like Bells Bend and Avalon Acres are becoming more and more popular for people who don't like to speculate on how far their food travels. Tennessee's contributions to industry continue to increase. The Smyrna-built Nissan Leaf is just one example of the innovation that could be put on display at a Tennessee State Fair.

The motto of the State of Tennessee is "Agriculture and Commerce." As Senator Douglas Henry likes to point out, "Agriculture" comes first. Like it or not, we are the capital of the State of Tennessee and with that honor comes some responsibilities and activities that are pressed upon us by our unique status - like the Tennessee State Fair.

Top Stories

Teacher Union (MNEA) Endorses Candidates for August 4th Election

The Metropolitan Nashville Education Association has issued its endorsement for the August 4th Metro General Election. With only a few exceptions, highlighted in Red below, this is a list of people not to vote for.

I am pleased to see that in District 33 they failed to endorse anyone. Robert Duvall, one of the really good councilmen, is in a very tough battle in that district. Of course, I wish they would have endorsed Robert, but I did not expect it.  At least they did not endorse any of his several opponents. This is a plus for Robert.

In District 29, I am surprised that they failed to endorse Karen Johnson. Karen is a former member of the School Board. In the Spring, when the unionist flocked to Nashville for a big rally to oppose education reform, Karen marched with the teacher union to support their cause. You would think in gratitude they would have endorsed Karen. Who did she make mad?

Here is the list:

Mayor: Karl Dean

Vice Mayor: Diane Neighbors

At-Large:  Megan Barry

               Sam Coleman

               Jerry Maynard

               Ronnie Steine
               Vivian Wilhoite


District 1: Lonnel Matthews, Jr.

District 2: Frank Harrison

District 3: Walter Hunt

District 4: Brady Banks

District 5: Scott Davis

District 6: Peter Westerholm

District 7: Anthony Davis

District 8: Nancy VanReece

District 9: Bill Pridemore

District 10: No Recommendation
District 11: Darren Jernigan

District 12: Steve Glover

District 13: Marilyn Robinson

District 14: Bruce Stanley

District 15: No Recommendation

District 16: Anna Page


District 17: Sandra Moore

District 18: David Glasgow

District 19: Erica Gilmore

District 20: Buddy Baker

District 21: Edith Langster

District 22: Seanna Brandmeir

District 23: Emily Evans

District 24: Jason Holleman

District 25: Sean McGuire

District 26: Chris Harmon


District 27: No Recommendation

District 28: Tanaka Vercher

District 29: No Recommendation

District 30: No Recommendation

District 31: Fabian Bedne

District 32: Jacobia Dowell

District 33: No Recommendation

District 34: Carter Todd

District 35: Bo Mitchell

Top Stories

Realtors endorse candidates

 Below is the list of candidates endorsed by the Greater Nashville Association of Realtors.

I am mystified. I don't know what to make of it. What goes into consideration in making their endorsements?  I am disappointed at some of the choices. Neither Karen Bennett, Robert Duvall, Duane Dominy, nor Emily Evans, some of my favorite incumbent district council members, received endorsements. I know these council members to be smart, fair-minded, even-handed, hard-working and proponents of good government. Is the GNAR so in the pocket of the Mayor that they dare not support any of the candidates the Mayor has targeted for defeat? I don't know.

While they did pick a few good candidates (highlighted in red below) they also picked some real losers. I also do not understand why they would pick two candidates in some districts. (highlighted in blue below) By picking two candidates, if there is a third candidate in the race, that gives the third candidate an advantage by splitting the vote of the opponents of the third candidate. It makes no sense to me. In District 19, by picking two candidates that may actually help Bob Ries. I hope so, Bob Ries is a good guy.

Also, in districts with only one candidate (highlighted in green below) they made no endorsement. You know who is going to win and have nothing to lose by endorsing an unopposed candidate. What is the logic in making no endorsement when  their is only one candidate in the race, unless that one candidate is known to be adamantly opposed to your agenda. Endorsing an unopposed candidate could win you a little good will.

I wish someone from the GNAR could explain the criteria used for endorsing candidates.

Mayor: Karl Dean
Vice Mayor: Diane Neigbors
At-Large: Maynard, Jerry
               Garrett, Tim
               Tygard, Charlie
                Barry, Megan
                Steine, Ronnie
District 1: Matthews, Lonnell Jr
District 2: Harrison, Frank
District 3: Hunt, Walter
District 4 Banks, Brady
District 5: Murray, Pam
District 6: Westerholm, Peter
District 7: Davis, Anthony
District 8: VanReece, Nancy

District 9: no endorsement

District 10: no endorsement

District 11: Jernigan, Darren

District 12: no endorsement

District 13: Stites, Josh
District 14: Stanley, James Bruce
District 15: no endorsement
District 16: Page, Anna
District 17: Moore, Sandra

District 18: Allen, Burkley

District 18: Glasgow, David

District 19: Gilmore, Erica
District 19: Wallen, Curt
District 20: Roberts, Mary Carolyn

District 21: no endorsement

District 22: Brandmeir, Seanna
District 22: Weiner, Sheri 

District 23: no endrosement

District 24: Tally, Sarah Lodge
District 24: Holleman, Jason
District 25: Mc Guire, Sean
District 26: Harmon, Chris
District 27: Parks, Brock
District 28: Vercher, Tanaka
District 29: Tataryn, Vicky
District 30: Hodge, Jim
District 31: Bedne, Fabian
District 32: No endorsement
District 33: Turner, Page
District 34: Todd, Carter

Top Stories

Gay publication, Out and About, endorses candidates

Below are the endorsement of the homosexual publication Out and About and some of the commentary that accompanied the endorsements. This is a good list of people to vote against with the exception of Glover, Evans, Blalock, and maybe Holleman, who despite the endorsement of Out and About are worthy of support. Even a stopped watch is right twice a day. Even a blind pig occasionally finds an acorn.

Those highlighted in red are good candidates disliked by Out and About who are very much worthy of our support.

Mayor: Karl Dean
Mayor Dean has supported and signed two non-discrimination ordinances and directed his administration to lobby actively against HB600, a state law that eventually nullified Metro’s 2011 contractor non-discrimination ordinance. At this year’s Pride, he told the crowd, “We’re with you,” and he has consistently demonstrated his support.

Vice Mayor: Diane Neighbors
Vice Mayor Neighbors has not had to cast any controversial tie-breaking votes on equal rights ordinances, but her inclusive outreach to our community is always appreciated. Last year, she was the keynote speaker at the Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition’s dinner.


Council Members At-Large: Megan Barry, Jerry Maynard, Ronnie Steine, Vivian Wilhoite, Sam Coleman. Barry, Steine, and Maynard were all sponsors of the 2009 non-discrimination ordinance. In addition, Barry and Steine were cosponsors of the 2011 CAN DO law.

District 1: Lonnell Matthews.  Councilman Matthews was a sponsor of the 2009 NDO and voted for   CAN DO.

District 2: Frank Harrison. Councilman Harrison voted for the NDO and CAN DO.

District 3: No endorsement. Incumbent Councilman Hunt is unopposed and abstained on third reading of CAN DO

District 4:  Brady Banks. 

District 5: Scott Davis.

District 6: Peter Westerholm. He has been the public policy chair for the Tennessee Equality Project. He is the embodiment of an ally.

District 7: Anthony Davis. Current District 7 Councilman Eric Cole will be hard to replace, but Davis’s business endorsed CAN DO and his guest editorial in the Tennessean in support of the ordinance showed equality is one of his core commitments.

District 8: Van Reece. She has been active in support of our community organizations for years. Her opponent, incumbent Karen Bennett, voted against the CAN DO law on third reading.

District 9: No endorsement. Candidate Bill Pridemore is unopposed.

District 10: No endorsement


District 11: Darren Jernigan. Voted for the NDO and CAN DO. He is opposed by a socially conservative candidate.

District 12: Steve Glover. Said to be conservative, Glover nevertheless voted for inclusive non-discrimination policies for Metro teachers and students as a school board member. He is unopposed.

District 13: Marilyn Robinson. 

District 14: No endorsement, but a recommendation.Councilman Bruce Stanley did not vote in favor of the NDO or CAN DO, but his opponent is reported to be more socially conservative. Stanley did support Councilwoman Barry’s resolution opposing HB600, though. For that reason, we recommend a vote for Stanley.

District 15: No endorsement.  Councilman Phil Claiborne is unfortunately unopposed. He spoke and voted against the NDO and CAN DO. If you live in this district, consider writing in your own name.

District 16: Anna Page. Councilwoman Page supported both the NDO and CAN DO.

District 17: Sandra Moore. Councilwoman Moore supported both the NDO and CAN DO

District 18: David Glasgow. He has been an active supporter of our community for a number of years.

District 19: Erica Gilmore. She has a perfect voting record on equality ordinances and was a sponsor of CAN DO. She is a plaintiff in the suit to overturn HB600.

District 20: Buddy Baker. Councilman Baker was a sponsor of the NDO and voted for CAN DO. He has the distinction of being, as far as we know, the only Council Member who is a parent of a gay child, a son who was tragically lost to HIV/AIDS. As well as his long history with his West Nashville district, he has a perspective that we need on Council.

District 21: Edith Taylor Langster. Councilwoman Langster voted for the NDO and CAN DO. She is unopposed.

District 22: Seanna Brandmeier. A former executive director of the Davidson Co Democratic Party, Brandmeier has received a warm reception from members of our community who have already volunteered in her campaign. Her openness will be a welcome change from Councilman Eric Crafton who currently holds the seat.

District 23: Emily Evans. Councilwoman Evans voted for the NDO and CAN DO despite the fact that socially conservative organizations targeted her vote during the discussion of both ordinances.


District 24: Councilman Jason Holleman. Voted for the NDO and CAN DO.

District 25: Sean McGuire. A sponsor of the NDO and voted for CAN DO.

District 26: Chris Harmon. Harmon has reached out to our community.

District 27: Davette Blalock. Blalock has reached out to our community.

District 28: Tanaka Vercher.

District 29: Karen Johnson. As a school board member, Johnson voted for inclusive non-discrimination policies for Metro teachers and students.

District 30: No endorsement. Incumbent Jim Hodge fiercely opposed the NDO and CAN DO. His opponent Jason Potts is reportedly as socially conservative.

District 31: Fabian Bedne. When he was president of the Middle TN Hispanic Democrats, Bedne led the organization to endorse the NDO.

District 32: Markeith Braden. Supportive of CAN DO and reaching out to the community when the bill passed Metro Council.

District 33:  Page Turner. Turner has the best chance of defeating incumbent Robert Duvall who aggressively opposed the NDO and CAN DO.

District 34: No endorsement. Councilman Todd voted for the NDO

District 35: Bo Mitchell.  Councilman Mitchell voted for the NDO and for CAN DO.

Top Stories