Jeff Sessions needs to go!

by Rod Williams - I hate to come to this conclusion. I thought I liked Attorney General Jeff Sessions, but I have come to the conclusion he needs to go. Jeff Sessions needs to resign or be fired.

He does not need to resign because he recused himself from the Russian probe; that was the right thing to do.  I think he should resign, if he has any self respect, because his boss Donald Trump routinely belittles and demeans him. He should resign out of his own sense of dignity. That is not the reason I want Jeff Sessions to resign however. I want him to resign because I fundamentally disagree with him on the right of citizens in a free society, more specifically on the issue of civil asset forfeiture.

His position of civil asset forfeiture is not the only disagreement I have with Jeff Session.  My first disappointment with Sessions was when he revealed himself to be an unreformed hardliner on the desire to keep marijuana illegal.  In January of this year he issued new guidance on marijuana which reversed Obama-era policies. His new directives gives prosecutors more leeway to enforce federal laws against the drug in states where it is legal. My view is that Congress should decriminalize marijuana and leave it up the states to determine it's status. Sessions is taking us backwards.

Marijuana is listed by the Federal government as a schedule 1 drug meaning the drug has no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. This is nonsense.  Marijuana is classified as worse than cocaine which is a schedule 2 drug. This flies in the face of experience and science. It is also contrary to popular opinion.  Eight states have legalized marijuana use for recreational use and over half of the states have legalized marijuana for medical use and most Americans now favor legalization or decriminalization. Session is an embarrassment who still calls marijuana a "gateway drug."  With the Federal government still classifying marijuana as a dangerous illegal drug, people living in those states where it is legal are still guilty of a federal crime if using, producing or selling it. This needs to change.

Another issue I have with Jeff Sessions is his view on locking people up. He was in Nashville earlier this month and spoke to the conference of the International Association of Chiefs of Police. At that time he made the argument that putting  more people in prison would increase community safety. He bemoaned the fact that the federal prison population had dropped in recent years from about 220,000 to 180,000 and he pledged to pursue longer sentences moving forward and he advocated for mandatory minimum sentences. This is just wrong.  There is no evidence that longer sentences reduce crime. In my view, we should aggressively be exploring how to reduce recidivism and removing regulatory barriers to felons re-entering the workforce after prison.  With improved technology to monitor people who are not locked up, we should be pursuing using those technologies and increase the number of parole officers and reducing the number of people incarcerated. Prison is often a training ground for making really bad criminals out of minor criminals. We should not make it hard for people to go straight but should try to make it easier.

The straw that broke the camels back and made me reach the opinion that Jeff Sessions needs to go is his position of on civil asset forfeiture. Civil forfeiture is a process that allows the police to seize a person's property without the person having been convicted or even charged with a crime. To get the property back one must go to court and prove that he was not in procession of the property for the purpose of committing a crime.  Often it will come about that the police stop a car for a traffic violation and the owner gives the police permission to search the car or the police search the vehicle under probable cause. 

Upon searching the vehicle, the police discover the driver has $5,000 in cash.  They can confiscate the vehicle and the car.  It may be that the person was on his way to Florida to buy cocaine, but he may have been on his way to Florida to rent a truck and buy a truck load of landscape plants for a work project.  In any case, the person who had his property confiscated, in order to get it back must go to court and prove he was not in procession of the cash and the vehicle to commit a crime.  This can be a lengthy and expensive process. Often people do not have the means to wage the legal battle and just lose their property.

The confiscated money often flows to the police department rather than the treasury of the jurisdiction and this process has earned the name of  "policing for profit." Normal jurisprudence in America assumes one is innocent until proven guilty; this is the one circumstance where that does not apply.  Instead of the police proving one committed a crime, the person suspected of illegal activity has to prove he is innocent.  He may never even be charged with a crime and never regain ownership of his property. Both liberal and conservative civil liberty advocates including the ACLU and organization such as The Institute for Justice are fighting against civil forfeiture.

Recently, Sessions described civil forfeiture as a “key tool that helps law enforcement defund organized crime, take back ill-gotten gains, and prevent new crimes from being committed.” He is probably right about that to an extend. It does make police work easier. Police work would also be easier if the police could just lock you up until you could prove your innocence. I do not want to live in a police state.

During Obama's presidency some limited curbs were put on the practice of civil asset forfeiture but now Sessions has reversed those modest curbs.  The Obama era curbs were just policy and not law. We should be ending, by law, the practice that allows police to seize property without charging a person with a crime. We should be going way beyond were Obama went, not going backwards.  Jeff Session is out of step, wrong, and I think he has a dangerous authoritarian streak. He needs to resign.  He needs to go.  I have been hoping for some stability within the Trump administration and hoping Trump would not fire anymore of his management team but I would be pleased if he fires Jeff Sessions.   

Top Stories

1st Tuesday is Mon. 3-25-18, Guest Speaker is KY Gov. Matt Bevin

From Tim Skow:

 

1ST TUESDAY Members and friends

1ST ....... Just a quick reminder for some who have not already secured seating for lunch on MONDAY ......seating is going briskly for lunch with Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin.

IF....you...or someone you know would like to join us ... PLEASE ... secure seating while its still available! Visit our website at  http://www.1sttuesdaynashville.com and click on ''JOIN US''

Before....our 1ST TUESDAY event [ yes...on 4th Monday] with Kentucky Gov. MATT BEVIN there

Gov. Matt Bevin

will be a special ''pre-event'' starting at 10:30am. [ see attached invite for details ]

We are expecting a number of TN Legislators and other notables. But there is still room for a limited number more to join us for this gathering on the 8th floor at BAKER DONELSON.

If you too would like come early and spend some time speaking with Gov. Bevin [and/or those also coming] here's your opportunity. For $25 on a ''1st come ...1st confirmed basis'' .... those who visit our 1ST TUESDAY website can secure their participation that morning with Gov. Bevin and more! Just use the $25 ''Dues'' icon... and then hit me with an email response to this note that you're coming for the ''pre-event''. 

I look forward to seeing MANY of you on Monday .... and seeing some of you at both events. Thanks! AND...a very special thanks to our 1ST TUESDAY Co-Hosts who help make this happen

Tim Skow

Host of 1ST TUESDAY

Top Stories

Democrat Party in Tennessee Just Named a Planned Parenthood President as Its Executive Director

Read more here and here.

Top Stories

School Director Shawn Josepth under fire for budget shortfall and his handling of it.

Metro Schools is facing a $7.5 million shortfall due to getting less money from the State due to a decline in enrollment.  At a time when the greater Nashville area is growing by about 85 people a day the student population in Davidson County public schools is shrinking. I can only assume parents with school age children are choosing to locate somewhere else in the 14-county region rather than Davidson County or are putting their children in private schools. Who can blame them? Nashville is a great place to live. I love this city. However our schools suck! If someone was considering moving here I would have to tell them that we have terrible schools and they may want to live in an adjoining county or figure they will need to send their children to private schools.

It is possible but difficult to get a good education in Davidson County public schools but parents have to be diligent and proactive. The qualify of schools can vary greatly from one school to the other.  Marking sure you live in a neighborhood with good or "not terrible" schools is one way to do it. More important than the size and desirability of the house and the convenience and amenities of the neighborhood, the most important factor in selecting a home in Nashville may be the quality of the district school.  Seeking a good magnet school is another options.  There is no guarantee you can get in a good magnet school but those who do can get a good educations. Unfortunately, some of our best schools are charter schools but they are not widely available and charter schools are only allowed to exist when they can replace a failing school. For many parents who care about their children's education, living in an adjacent county or biting the bullet and sending their child to a private school is the best option.

Metro Nashville School Director Shawn Joseph has come under fire for not alerting the School Board to this expected cut in funding. Members of the School Board and members of the Metro Council are urging Joseph to cut travel and other overhead expenses and not cut funding directed to the classroom. School Board members have called for an audit of the school system funding since Joseph became director.

 When Joseph announced the funding cut, his first response was to announce a drastic shifting of what is called "Title 1" spending.  Title 1 funding is money received from the federal government meant to subsidize the teaching of low-income students. Initially Joseph announced that title 1 funding would only go to schools with 75 percent or more low-income students. That would take money away from some forty schools and funnel it to the poorer schools.  After getting push back, he announced the phase in of this policy would be gradual instead of all taking place this year (link)

Another change Joseph announced is an end to what is called "legacy positions."  This is funding given to some schools separate from money in the funding formula. Legacy positions include things such as  world language, Suzuki Strings, STEM (Science, technology, engineering and math), advanced academics, International Baccalaureate and overall enhanced staffing. These positions could still exist at schools, but principals would have to prioritize funding them without additional district funding. To me, this seems unwise. There must be some middle class parents sticking with Metro Schools because their child can get a good education because the school their child attends participates in the International Baccalaureate program or offers advanced academics. Ending these programs will drive away more middle class families, further leaving Metro Schools as schools only attended by immigrants, Blacks and the poor. With the exist of more middle class parents, lower enrollment will mean even less funding. 

Top Stories

What happened at the Council meeting of 3/20/18: Move to rescind MLS deal fails, Burkley elected Pro Tem, vote not to hire outside firm to investigate Barry, vote to protect jobs of current bus drivers,

Move to rescind stadium deal fails
The most dramatic activity of the night occurs at the end of the meeting starting at timestamp 2:45:50. This is worth watching.

Councilman Steve Glover takes to the floor and expresses anger at the city for spending money on the stadium project when the money had not yet been appropriated. $135,000 has was spend out of the Bridgestone Arena account for design work on the MLS stadium. Glover announced that at the next council meeting it would invoke "rule 36" which allows a council to rescind an action taken by a previous council. Councilman Sledge, a proponent of the MLS deal, in what I think was a gutsy parliamentary move takes to the floor and says, "Let's do it now." He invokes rule 36 and forces a vote. Rule 36 rescinds a previous positive motion of the Council.  Apparently realizing that with several members absent, now was a better chance of defeating Glover's effort than waiting until April 3rd. A motion to rescind takes 27 votes.  Note however, that if a motion to rescind fails, it can be brought up again. So tonight's action would not stop Glover from invoking rule 36 on April 4th as he said he planned to do.

The Council approved the stadium deal in November but bonds have not yet been sold. The proposal to sale bond to fund the deal will have to come back to the Council and will require 27 votes, so the city is spending money not yet appropriated. It is possible that the city could build the stadium in a location other than the fairground. The November action conditionally stated the fairground would be the location. The city should not be spending money on a project until it has the money.  I share Councilman Glover's outrage. Several members take to the floor. Some argue that we need to resend as a way to send a message to the administration that it cannot spend money not appropriated. Others argue that Metro will be subject to liabilities if it rescinds the MLS deal. The MLS development team has already spend money relying on the Council's November vote. This is disputed saying it has always been clear that until the Council approves the bonds no deal is final.

A motion is made by Councilman Hagar to table the motion to rescind but that motion fails. Back on the motion to rescind after more discussion the motion to rescind fails by a vote of 8 in favor and 16 opposed.  Please watch this blog for a list of how members of the Council voted on this issue.

Other Council Action
At three and a half hours long, this is a long meeting. If you are going to watch the meeting, you need an agenda and the staff analysis to know what is going on. You can get those at this link along with my commentary on the agenda. These are the meeting highlights.

The meeting is moderated by Sheri Weiner who as President Pro Tem of the Council was elevated to the roll of Vice Mayor replacing David Briley who was elevated to mayor upon the resignation of former Mayor Megan Barry.

The first order of business after the pledge and prayer is approving changes to the rules of procedure for the Metro Council. Once the new rules are posted you can find them at the highlighted link. The rule changes are explained from  2.54 to 20:12 in the video. This is of not much interest to the general public but for those who may follow the council closely or have business before the body, it is good to know where to find these rules to understand why some things happen the way they do.

Burkley Allen is elected Deputy President Pro Tempore to be next in line to serve as moderator of the Council in the absence of Sheri Weiner.  The nominees are Jacobia Dowell and Burkley Allen. On a machine vote Allen is elected receiving 18 votes to 15 for Dowell and six not voting. There are no speeches.

All appointments to boards and commission are deferred at the request of the mayor. The current nominations were made by former Mayor Barry and it is understandable that David Briley would want to pick his own appointees to the various boards and commissions. 

Resolutions:
There are 44 resolution on the agenda and most of them pass on the consent agenda. Items on the consent agenda are noncontroversial and passed the committee to which they were assigned unanimously. Resolutions on consent are lumped together and pass my a single vote. These are the resolutions I find of interest:

Resolution RS2018-1088  declares eleven parcels of metro owned property surplus and transfers them to selected non-profit organizations for the purpose of  developing affordable and "work force" housing. It also grants $10.7 million from the Barnes Fund for Affordable Housing to subsidize the housing development. Woodbine Community Organization, Our Place Nashville, and Living Development Concepts were selected as recipients of the grants and properties. In addition ten other organization get grants to promote the development of affordable housing. This resolution requires 21 affirmative votes to be approved. It passes on consent.

Resolution RS2018-1110 concerns the Council investigation of the Mayor Barry scandal. On February 6, 2018, the Metro Council adopted Resolution No. RS2018 calling for a Council investigation. Since then, as everyone knows, Mayor Barry plead guilty to a crime and some of what the Council was to determine has already been determined. So this resolution modifies the prior resolution to clarify that the Special Committee will prepare a Report and Recommendations to the Council about its findings to include any recommendations for further action, as well as recommendations for additions or revisions to the Metropolitan Government Code of Laws, policies, or regulations. In light of what has happened, this seems appropriate. It passes on the consent agenda.

Resolution RS2018-1111 authorizes the employment of Burch, Porter &; Johnson, PLLC as Special Counsel to the Metropolitan Council to investigate the Mayor Barry scandal. Since Mayor Barry has already plead guilty to a crime and the scope of the Council investigation will be limited as outlined in resolution 1110 above, my view is that this expenditure is no longer necessary. Councilman Steve Glover makes that point.  This resolution does limit the payment to the firm to only 15 hours of billable time at a rate of $395 per hour. After some discussion the resolution fails by a vote of 11 in favor and 22 against. To view the discussion see timestamp 54:34 -1:14:00 in the video.

Resolution RS2018-1113 request of the Metro Transit Authority that if the May 1 light rail referendum should be approved, that MTA continue to use the Davidson Transit Organization as its "sole management provider." Regardless of your opinion of the wisdom of Metro pursuing a $9 Billion light rail transit system, this is a dumb idea. Should the referendum pass, Metro should seek the best operator for the system. This resolution is designed to protect the jobs of current bus drivers. A government's job should not be to award patronage or to protect the current employment of current employees but to provide necessary services in the most cost-efficient means possible. This would be non-binding but express the will of the Council. Since MTA must come to the Council for budget approval a resolution like this sends a strong "mere request" to the MTA. Council members Swope and Glover speak against this resolution. It passes on a voice vote with some audible "no" votes. To see the discussion see the video at time stamp 1:14:05- 1:25:45.

Resolution RS2018-1120 is a meaningless memorializing  resolution expressing the support of the Metropolitan Council for the right of public employees to unionize and urging the Supreme Court to rule in favor of public employees in a case before the Supreme Court. In my view the Council should not be passing resolutions of this nature. I suspect most do not know the complexity of the issue before the court. After all, it must be complex or it would have never have reached the Supreme Court. However, this has no legal impact and is probably not worth opposing. I don't think the Supreme Court is going to be persuaded by an opinion expressed by the Metro Council.  The resolutions contains some verbiage about income inequality and recalls the Memphis sanitation workers strike of the 1960's and references the "I am a man" speech.  It passes on  the consent agenda.

Bills on Second Reading: There are only six bills on second reading and this is the only one of interest.

Bill BL2018-1056 would regulate the on-line market for Short term rentals, that is it

would regulate websites such as Airbnb.   It would require these sites to  require a Metro permit number for each STRP application prior to placing the property on the online marketplace site. It would also require the sites to provide a detailed quarterly reports to Metro.  This is a bad bill and I question if Metro has the authority to compel organizations like Airbnb to do anything. This is deferred three meetings at the request of the sponsor.

Bill BL2018-1111 would put under the purview of the Board of Ethical Conduct and the Standards of Conduct those who violate executive orders regarding rules of conduct. Currently this board only has authority to act on those who violate a section of the Metro code concerning standards of conduct. Concern is expressed that this would put too heavy of a burden on employees to defend themselves against complaints filed with the board. This is discussed and then deferred one meeting. To understand the arguments on both sides of this issue you may want to watch the video at timestamp 1:29:18-1:51:15. 

Bill BL2018-1113  renames a portion of Charlotte Pike to "Dr M L King, Jr Boulevard." Council member Sharon Hunt speaks on the bill as do several other council members, but there was no opposition. Time spend speaking on this bill was unnecessary. It passes on a voice vote.

Bills on Third Reading:  There are 31 bills on third reading and most are approved zoning bill. These are two disapproved zoning bills, Bill BL2018-1099 and Bill BL2018-1100 which will take 27 votes in favor to be approved.  Sometimes because a member may be absent or distracted or take a position that they do not vote for bills disapproved by the Planning Commission or based on their perceived merits of the bill may vote "no" or abstain. In the case of a disapproved bill an abstention is the same as a "no" vote. Sometimes it can be hard to get 27 votes for a bill. I have no opinion on the merits of the bills. Bill 1099 is deferred indefinitely.

Bill 1100 by Robert Swope is amended and passes by a voice vote. I was surprised and thought I may have missed something. A disapproved bill requires a machine vote. After consideration of the next two bills, someone must have realized passage of 1100 required a machine vote and a machine vote was taken and the bill passed by a roll call machine vote of 27 in favor, 3 opposed and 9 not voting. So, it passed with no votes to spare.

Top Stories

Attempt to rescind stadium deal fails.

At Tuesday nights council meeting Councilman Steve Glover  attempted but failed to rescind the stadium deal. The Tennessean has the story at this link.

Top Stories

Metro's finances are really in bad shape.

by Rod Williams - Yesterday, March 19, marked the beginning of Metro "budget discussions." Mayor Barry changed the terminology to "discussions" rather than "hearings." Not that it is terribly important but I prefer the traditional term "hearings," but I guess "discussions" sounds more feminine and more collaborative and less hierarchical. It sounds more in tune to the new sensitive progressive touchy-feely Nashville. Anyway, the budget process is that first, the mayor has "discussion," in which all of the various department heads appear before the mayor and usually the finance director and maybe a couple of key advisers to the mayor and make their case for their budget request.

Before these "discussions" even began, however, the mayor's office has given the department heads directions such as telling the department heads to tell the mayor what they would fund if they had 5% more money or maybe what they would cut if they had to take a 5% cut. Of course, "cut" is not the way we would think of cut if in our family budget if we had to cut 5% of our budget. A government cut means the rate of growth is less than anticipated.

After the mayor hears from all of the department heads then the mayor develops and presents a budget to the Council  and then the Council has budget hearing. (As of now they are still called "hearings," not "discussions.") At the Council budget hearings most department heads say then can live with the amount of money the mayor's budget awards them but not always. Some department heads make the case for more spending. The Council then has a public hearing at which group after group ask for more money for their favorite cause; more for schools, more for parks, more for the arts, pay raises for Metro employees, etc.. The Council then develops its own budget which it then substitutes for the mayor's budget.  The Council always passes the substitute. The substitute may only make the smallest of tweaks to the mayor's budget or it may make substantial changes to the mayors budget.

One thing that  most people do not understand is that the effect of a council member's vote cannot be to vote against the budget. In years of a tax increase some council members who vote "no" on the budget will claim they voted against a tax increase. That is not truthful. A "no" vote on the Council vote is a vote for the mayor's budget. If the Council refuses to pass a budget then the mayor's budget goes into effect by default. If a mayor proposes a 75 cent tax rate increase and the council substitute calls for only a 60 cent increase, then a "no" vote on the council substitute has the effect of favoring the mayor higher tax increase over the Council's lower tax increase.

The mayors budget discussions and the council budget hearings can be informative. Sometimes new demands for services actually do mean a department actually needs more money than before.  One never hears, however, a department head say they have more money than they know what to do with and they could easily take a budget cut. They say houses will burn, people will die, kids will not get educated, pot holes will swallow cars,  and our quality of life will suffer if they do not get an increase.

Today,  it was revealed (surprise, surprise) that Metro was facing a budget shortfall. This is despite the fact that revenue to Metro has grown at a phenomenal rate. In 2014 Metro's revenue was $1.81 billion and in 2018 it is $2.2 billion. One of the reasons for this shortfall is that when Metro reappraised property last year, more people than ever before appealed their new appraisal and a greater number of appeals were granted than ever before. So, the shortfall is that Metro will not get as much of an increase in revenue this year as it thought it would.

Another reason for the shortfall is that the school system is going to get $7.5 million less from the State this year than last year. Despite the growth in Metro's population the number of children enrolled in Metro schools has dropped and the State has reduces the funds it pays to Metro to help educate school children.  Of course, it should cost less to educate fewer children but the school board and the city does not see it like that. They take the view that overhead cost are fixed. To be fair, there is some truth to that but not much. Schools can not be closed or bus routes redesigned immediately to correspond to fewer school children. In the short-term some cost are relatively fixed.

One indications of how bad the financial situation is for the city is the status of Metro's reserve fund balances. Look at the below chart presented to a recent special committee meeting of the Metro Council.

Notice the GSD General fund balance is now 3.4% of the budget. During the hearing at which this was presented to the Council a spokesman from the Finance Department said bonding agencies like to see these balances within a 5 to 10 percent range and they would like to see it "ten or more."

This is an indication that Metro is seriously mismanaging our money. This is at a time when the economy is booming and we are growing by leaps and bounds. Future looming problems facing the city that the city just ignores is future health care cost of retirees and pension obligations. If the citizens of Nashville should approve a $9 billion light rail system when such systems are already obsolete and ridership is declining, then it will prove much more difficult to manage the city's finances. Debt must be paid and pension obligations met and the taxpayers of Davidson County are ultimately responsible for the city's obligations.

What happens if Nashville's time in the sun comes to an end and we are not longer the "it" city?  What happens if we kill the goose that lays the golden egg by taxing away tourist and conventioneers? What happens if we have another major flood or other disaster? What happens if we lose one of our sports franchises? What happens if we have another "great recessions?"

Thankfully, Mayor Briley has said he will not propose a tax increase this year. If he plans to run for elections as mayor in August, raising taxes would not be a wise move. Unless we address the spending problem, a tax increase would only solve our problem for a short time. If bonding agencies raise the cost of borrowing, then more money will have to go to pay interest on the debt rather than fund needed service. I am sure there is sufficient fat in the current budget to cut the budget without causing severe hardship to residents of the city, but unless Nashville exercises prudence and caution and restraint, things will only get worse. This is serious.

Top Stories

Surprise, surprise. Metro has a budget shortfall.

When you are drunk on being the "it" city and take no thought for tomorrow and spend money like a drunken sailor, you might have a budget shortfall.

When you have a mayor gallivanting all over the globe like royalty to conferences of questionable necessity in order to facilitate her affair, you might have a budget shortfall.

When you have the city throwing money at an unnecessary hospital that no one wants to  use and whose primary function to is boost the collective ego of the Black community, you might have a budget shortfall.

When you spend $60 million to build three miles of sidewalk, you might have a budget shortfall.

When your schools are so bad that as the population grows enrollment shrinks and as a result the state education appropriation to the schools shrink, you might have a budget shortfall.

When the revenue grows from $1.81 billion in 2014 to $2.2 billion in 2018 and yet you must dip into the rainy day fund to meet current obligations, you might have a budget shortfall.

Metro does not have a revenue problem, Metro has a spending problem.

For The Tennessean coverage of the issue, follow this link.

Top Stories

What's on the Council agenda for 3/20/18: Protecting from competition the jobs of current bus drivers, regulating the Airbnb website, changing the scope of the Mayor Barry investigation and more.

By Rod Williams - The Metro Council will meet Tuesday, March 20, 2018 at 6:30 PM in the Council chamber at the Metro Courthouse.  If you are going to watch the Council meeting, you need a copy of the Council agenda and the staff analysis  or you really will not know what is going on. You can get the agenda and analysis at the highlighted links. I know a lot, but I often don't know if a piece of legislation is good or bad but I know enough to know if it raises a red flag and I see some red flags on this agenda. I hope someone is paying attention.

Boards and Commissions
The first order of business is the call to order, prayer and pledge followed by consideration of mayoral appointments to boards and commissions. The first item is the selection of a Deputy President Pro Tempore. With David Briley elevated to the position of Mayor, current President Pro tem Sheri Weiner will serve as moderator of the Council which necessitates the selection of another council member to be next in line should she be absent or need a break. I suspect there has been a lot of jockeying to fill this roll with a lot of vote solicitation. This is something that normally would only interest Council members but can be instructive as to the factions and relative power of those factions.

There are eight mayoral appointments to boards and commissions on this agenda for Council confirmations. The council normally rubber stamps whomever the mayor nominates, however last council meeting the Council, in an extremely rare move, rejected the appointment of  distinguished former Councilman Charlie Tygert to a position on the Sports Authority. I never did discover what was behind that unexpected development. I would not expect any of the nominees to be rejected, but then I would not have expected the nomination of Charlie Tygert to be rejected.


Resolutions on Public Hearing: There are two of them and both are exempting establishments for the minimum distance requirements for obtaining a beer permit. I have no opinion on the merits of these applications.

There are 44 resolution on the agenda and all are on the consent agenda at this time. A resolution stays on the consent agenda if it passes  unanimously the committees to which it was assigned. Resolutions which receive negative votes in committee are pulled off of consent. Also any councilman may have a resolution pulled off of consent. Those remaining on consent are lumped together and passed by a single vote. Resolutions on the consent agenda are usually not controversial and tend to be routine matters, such as accepting grants from the Federal or State Government, entering into inter agency agreements over mundane things, appropriating money from the 4% fund, settling lawsuits, or approving signs overhanging the sidewalk. Unlike a bill which requires three votes of the Council to pass, a resolution only requires one vote of the Council. These are the ones of interest:

Resolution RS2018-1085  authorizes a short-term extension to the liquidity facility agreement related to the Metropolitan Government’s water and sewer commercial paper program. This is complex and I have no opinion of it but it will cost metro money. I hope the Budget and Finance Committee looks at this closely to determine of it is an appropriate, necessary and wise move.

Resolution RS2018-1088  declares eleven parcels of metro owned property surplus and transfers them to selected non-profit organizations for the purpose of  developing affordable and "work force" housing. It also grants $10.7 million from the Barnes Fund for Affordable Housing to subsidize the housing development. Woodbine Community Organization, Our Place Nashville, and Living Development Concepts were selected as recipients of the grants and properties. In addition ten other organization get grants to promote the development of affordable housing. This resolution requires 21 affirmative votes to be approved.

Resolution RS2018-1109 would set a public hearing for the creation of the Donelson Transit- Oriented Redevelopment Plan. This is development focused on development around the Donelson train station. To learn more about it follow this link.

Resolution RS2018-1110 concerns the Council investigation of the Mayor Barry scandal. On February 6, 2018, the Metro Council adopted Resolution No. RS2018 calling for a Council investigation. Since then, as everyone knows, Mayor Barry plead guilty to a crime and some of what the Council was to determine has already been determined. So this resolution modifies the prior resolution to clarify that the Special Committee will prepare a Report and Recommendations to the Council about its findings to include any recommendations for further action, as well as recommendations for additions or revisions to the Metropolitan Government Code of Laws, policies, or regulations. In light of what has happened, this seems appropriate.


Resolution RS2018-1111 authorizes the employment of Burch, Porter &; Johnson, PLLC as Special Counsel to the Metropolitan Council to investigate the Mayor Barry scandal. Since Mayor Barry has already plead guilty to a crime and the scope of the Council investigation will be limited as outlined in resolution 1110 above, I wonder if hiring an outside firm is even necessary at this point. This resolution does limit the payment to the firm to only 15 hours of billable time at a rate of $395 per hour. Unless they have already determined that the firm is racially diverse in addition to questioning if we even need an outside law firm at this point, expect some Black members of the Council to raise the issue of the firm's racial diversity.

Resolution RS2018-1112  adds a representative of Saint Thomas Health to the strategic planning committee established pursuant to study the future of Nashville General Hospital operations. While my preference would be that we would get totally out of the hospital business, if that is not going to happen then it is wise to bring in outside experts to advise the city how to better manage General Hospital. I support this.

Resolution RS2018-1113 request of the Metro Transit Authority that if the May 1 light rail referendum should be approved, that MTA continue to use the Davidson Transit Organization as its "sole management provider." Regardless of your opinion of the wisdom of Metro pursuing a $9 Billion light rail transit system, this is a dumb idea. Should the referendum pass, Metro should seek the best operator for the system. This resolution is designed to protect the jobs of current bus drivers. A government's job should not be to award patronage or to protect the current employment of current employees but to provide necessary services in the most cost-efficient means possible. This resolution needs to be defeated.

Resolution RS2018-1120 is a meaningless memorializing  resolution expressing the support of the Metropolitan Council for the right of public employees to unionize and urging the Supreme Court to rule in favor of public employees in a case before the Supreme Court.  This is hardly worth opposing, but I think if I were serving in the Council I would ask to be listed as abstaining. I do not think the Council should be expressing itself about national issues or requesting the Supreme Court rule a certain way. The resolutions contains some verbiage about income inequality and recalls the Memphis sanitation workers strike of the 1960's and references the "I am a man" speech. Probably this will pass without discussion but someone may take an opportunity to grandstand.

Bills on First reading: There are 19 bills on first reading. First reading is a formality that gets bills on the agenda and they are not considered by committee until after they pass first reading. They are all lumped together and pass by a single vote except in rare circumstances. I do not read them until they get to second reading.

Bills on Second Reading: There are only six bills on second reading and this is the only one of interest.

Bill BL2018-1056 would regulate the on-line market for Short term rentals, that is it

would regulate websites such as Airbnb.   It would require these sites to  require a Metro permit number for each STRP application prior to placing the property on the online marketplace site. It would also require the sites to provide a detailed quarterly reports to Metro. I would oppose this if I served in the Council. The development of the quarterly report could require new computer programs or lots of man-hours for the sites. While the staff analysis does not address the issue, I would like to know by what authority Metro had to require this of a company that is not physically located in Nashville and is simply a go between facilitating the interaction of people who want to provide a place to stay and people seeking a place to stay.  What if Metro required Airbnb to have agents who were locally licensed real estate agent? Could Metro do that?  If Airbnb simply ignores this law, what can the city do about it. How would they enforce it. The Internet does not stop at the county line. 

Bills on Third Reading:  There are 31 bills on third reading and most are approved zoning bill. These are two disapproved zoning bills, Bill BL2018-1099 and Bill BL2018-1100 which will take 27 votes in favor to be approved.  Sometimes because a member may be absent or distracted or take a position that they do not vote for bills disapproved by the Planning Commission or based on their perceived merits of the bill may vote "no" or abstain. In the case of a disapproved bill an abstention is the same as a "no" vote. Sometimes it can be hard to get 27 votes for a bill. I have no opinion on the merits of the bills.

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 it is streamed live at the Metro Nashville Network's livestream site and you can watch it live on Roku. You can catch the meeting the next day (or the day after the next) on the Metro YouTube channel. If can stand the suspense and just wait, I will post the video on this blog the day after or the day after that and provide commentary.  

Top Stories

Jonah Goldberg predicts Trump presidency is in for more turmoil and "it won’t be pretty."

I love Jonah Goldberg's writing. Maybe it is because I almost always agree with him, but I think I would enjoy his writing if he were writing recipes or travelogues. He is my favorite political commentator of the time. He is insightful and humorous and has a way with words. Here is an example:

But you could exclude all the anonymous quotes and thinly sourced stories, and a reasonable person would still have to conclude that this White House is operating as if the dispensing nurse at the asylum accidentally grabbed the amphetamines instead of the Xanax. As the vet said when I brought my cat in for an appointment and pulled a tuxedo-wearing, rainbow-colored iguana with a monocle out of the carrier, “This is not normal.”

He is writing about the disarray in the White House. He says Trump supporters have two lines to repudiate those who point out the White House chaos.  On the one hand they say it is a brilliant strategy and is planned chaos but when that doesn't work they say it is fake news and made up.  About that he says, "(As Stormy Daniels never said to a director), you can’t have it both ways."

Jonah Goldberg lays out a possible, if not likely unpleasant future scenario, in which Democrats capture the Congress and with subpoena power they more aggressively pursue Trump scandals, more and more unpleasant stories emerge and a slew of tell-all books get published. Then, he suggest how Trump may respond and likely outcomes. He says, "one prediction I made two years ago, over and over again, was that “character is destiny.” And I’ve never been more confident that that destiny is coming, and it won’t be pretty."

I suggest reading the story for the insight but also for the joy of a master story teller laying it out for you.

Top Stories