►
From YouTube: Chattanooga City Council Agenda Meeting 08/01/23
Description
Chattanooga City Council Committee Meeting
B
A
A
Okay,
take
a
look
at
your
resolutions,
any
comments
or
questions
all
right.
If
you
would
take
a
look
at
your
next
week's
proposed
agenda,
any
comments
or
questions
and
I
did
have
a
question
item
F
of
planning
regarding
the
short-term
vacation
rental
Amendment.
If
someone
could
come
and
explain
it,
please.
C
I
know
I
have
a
couple
slides,
I
can
show,
but
the
amendment
does
a
couple
things.
One
is
kind
of
some
general
housekeeping
and
I'll
wait
for
the
presentation
to
come
up
when
we,
the
zoning
ordinance,
got
amended
several
months
ago.
We
started
using
it
and
just
kind
of
noticed
there
were
a
few
housekeeping
items,
and
that
is
the
first
part
of
it.
Let
me.
C
And
so
there's
the
first
section
is
housekeeping
and
basically
switching
out
the
definition
just
a
few
other
things
and
those
aren't
substantive
changes.
It's
just
responding
to
the
new
short-term
vacation
rental
regulations,
there's
also
a
change
based
on
the
discussion
that
Council
had
about
ugc
all
the
ugc
zones
we've
had
with
residential
use.
Only
and
just
coming
from
that
discussion,
the
staff
recommended
Planning,
Commission
and
planning
commission's
moving
on
a
recommendation
to
add
language
there.
C
That
says,
for
purposes
of
this
Division
and
the
use
of
conditional
zoning
absentee
properties
used
for
short-term
vacation.
Rentals
are
not
considered
to
be
a
residential
use,
so
we
have
lots
of
ugcs
out
there
as
an
example
residential
use.
Only,
and
so
this
is
just
saying-
for
the
use
of
conditional
zoning,
short-term
vacation
rental
absentees
are
not
considered
residential
use
and
this
is
to
provide
Clarity.
C
The
language
in
red
there
that
says
the
owner
applicant
may
not
apply
for
a
certificate
within
18
months
of
lifting
or
mending
conditions.
So
again,
it's
if
you
want,
because
the
attention
was
that
there
would
not
be
rezonings
to
to
these
commercial
zones
that
Council
would
be
acting
on
it
kind
of
gets
back
to
where
Council
was
originally.
So.
C
Just
had
not
noted
that
so
we're
proposing
that
that
language
be
struck
through
and
basically
it
applies
to
any
commercial
Zone
that
allows
absentee
short-term
vacation
rentals,
because
right
now,
councilman
Hill
noted
that
the
r
zones
kind
of
make
it
look
like
you
could
possibly
do
one
there,
and
that's
just
for
clarification.
We
would
ask
that
the
the
ordinance
be
amended
to
make
that
clarification
too.
A
D
C
Was
not
directly
related
to
tax?
We
were
thinking
solely
of
the
use
and
our
understanding
that
this
was
kind
of
a
discussion
with
Council
that
this
had
been
kind
of
viewed
as
an
absentees
were
kind
of
a
commercial
use.
They
were
pointing
towards
commercial
zones
and
because
we
do
have
commercial
zones
that
are
residential
use.
Only.
This
is
trying
to
be
clear
that
those
are
not
considered
residential
use,
so
we
did
actually
not
discuss
the
tax
Implement
implications.
We
were
talking
about
really
how
they
function
as
a
land
use,
so.
D
Then
I'll
have
one
follow-up
question
with
that:
are
there
any
potentially
unintended
consequences
with
enforcement
noise?
Things
of
that
nature
that
we
are
explicitly
enforcing
in
residential
areas,
for
residential
purposes,
that
I
say
a
short-term
vacation
rental?
It
would
not
apply
to
them
if
they
are
not
to
be
considered
residential
any
longer.
E
C
Okay,
so
if
you're,
if
it's
an
absentee
property
being
used
for
a
short-term
vacation,
run
off
their
Quest
and
you
have
a
zoning
condition
that
says
you're
in
a
commercial
Zone
but
residential
use,
only
it's
not
going
to
be
considered
a
residential
use.
So
we
do
have
several
commercial
zones
and
again
the
most
common
being
the
ugc
Zone,
because
we've
used
it
for
multiple
okay.
F
E
C
I
think
that
so
I
will
again
give
the
non-tax
perspective
that
that
staff
is
moving
forward
here,
that
the
when
a
council
acts
on
a
zone
that
is
a
commercial
zone
right,
but
has
the
condition
to
residential
use
only
in
staff's
mind.
The
intention
is
that
function
as
a
residential
use,
only
single
family,
multi-family,
and
so
just
to
clarify.
We
were
saying
absentees,
don't
count
to
that,
based
on
our
understanding
of
what
council
is
trying
to
accomplish,
with
the
distinction
between
absentee
and
kind
of
the
home
stay.
C
E
I
see
people
going
like
this
like
this,
and
so
might
that
be
hard
for
people
coming
in
to
understand
I'm
having
trouble
I
get
it.
So
it's
in
a
commercial
Zone,
but
it's
for
residential
use
only
except
it's
going
to
be
for
absentee
land
Lords.
So
it's
really
going
to
be
used
commercial,
but
we
don't
call
it
commercial.
We
call
it
residential
I
mean
I.
Think.
C
Is
presented
where
you
know,
however,
Council
wants
to
move
on
this.
You
know
it
went
into
the
zoning
ordinance
as
tied
to
zones
and
there
was
a
lack
of
clarity,
and
this
was
our
attempt
to
add
Clarity,
because
we
were
starting
to
have
zoning
cases
about
lifting
conditions
for
residential
zoning
and
instead
of
having
kind
of
an
enforcement
policy
decision,
it
was
determined
that
amending
the
ordinance
to
be
clear
might
be
the
the
best
approach,
because
then
it's
very
clear
that
this
is
the
intent
of
it.
G
A
H
While
I
recognize
that
this
this
work
is
about
clarifying
the
zoning
and
and
ensuring
that
the
spirit
of
any
reasons
that
that
have
been
done
is
is
maintained,
so
we've
seen
a
lot
of
rezonings
in
district,
seven,
eight
and
some
and
nine
as
well,
that
the
best
tool
we
have
for
density
is
ugc,
but
our
leaders
from
those
districts
have
said
we
want
them
to
be
in
Resident
residential
areas.
New
residential
areas,
so
I
appreciate
this
work.
H
I
do
hope
that
it
furthers
the
strength
of
our
conversation,
our
legal
conversation
about
switching
to
a
commercial
tax
regardless
of
zone
four
and
absentee
and
I
appreciate
councilman
Smith's
question
I.
Think
where
he's
headed
is,
if
we
say
somebody's
commercial,
are
they
allowed
to
be
loud
longer
than
in
a
residential
area?
So
it's
by
virtue
of
having
Legacy
properties
that
are
absentee
in
residential
areas.
We
have
a
little
bit
of
a
tricky
Wicket,
but
so
goes
the
world.
So
I
appreciate
this
step
forward.
C
And
we
did
try
to
clarify
for
the
purposes
of
this
Division
and
the
use
of
conditional
zoning,
so
that
might
trying
to
narrow,
not
all
of
city
code,
but
just
for
division,
I,
think
it's
15
for
sure
term,
vacation
rentals
and
how
zoning
conditions
are
used,
but
we
will
make
sure
there's
not
a
conflict.
Thank.
A
I
A
All
right
that
was
painless.
That
was
all
thanks.
So
much
any
other
questions
for
future
considerations.
All
right.
We
have
no
departmental
reports,
but
we
do
have
two
committees.
Today
we
have
Public
Safety
committee
meeting
today
with
councilman
Henderson,
as
well
as
planning
and
zoning
committee
today
with
councilman
Smith.
Following
that
we
would
have
an
attorney
client
privilege
meeting
and
with
that
I
will
turn
it
over
to
councilman
Henderson
foreign.
J
Good
afternoon
we
will
call
to
order
our
Public
Safety
Committee
could
I
have
a
motion
on
the
minutes
without
objection,
those
minutes
will
stand
as
recorded
So.
This
afternoon
we
are
here
to
discuss
some
changes
that
we
need
to
make
to
our
police
advisory
and
Review
Committee
ordinance
I
do
want
to
recognize
our
Park
members
that
are
with
us
here
this
afternoon.
I
see
Kay
and
Marion
any
others.
Oh
yeah.
K
I
J
All
right,
thank
you
all
for
being
here
this
afternoon,
and
we
do
want
to
give
you
an
opportunity
to
address
the
council
at
the
sort
of
at
the
end
of
our
presentation
that
we
that
we're
going
to
have
and
at
this
time
I
do
want
to
recognize.
Miss,
Brook,
Satterfield
I
think
she's
going
to
come
up
and
give
us
a
brief
presentation
of
that's
kind
of
where
we
are
what
the
state
law
the
changes
that
how
they're
going
to
affect
us
and
then
try
to
figure
out
a
path
forward.
Miss
Satterfield!
Yes,.
N
N
I
first
want
to
Echo
what
councilman
Henderson
said
about
our
current
Park
members.
They
have
I
know
worked
extremely
hard
to
sort
of
build
out
this,
this
system
that
we
have
and
so
I'm
very
appreciative
of
of
their
work
and
then
also
for
being
here
today
and
look
forward
to
hearing
from
them
as
well.
N
I
just
want
to
recap
what
we
briefly
talked
about
last
week
as
it
relates
to
what
you're
going
to
be
voting
on
this
evening
so
and
we'll
expand
on
a
couple
of
these
throughout
the
presentation.
So
kind
of
bear
bear
with
us
as
we
get
through
this,
but
so
temporary.
The
moratorium
tonight
will
temporarily
suspend
the
existing
Park
ordinance
as
it
is
not
in
compliance
with
the
new
state
legislation
that
was
passed
earlier
this
year.
N
N
It
is
our
intent
to
simultaneously
be
working
collectively
collaboratively
with,
with
all
of
you,
with
Park
members
and
CPD,
to
address
the
areas
that
we're
out
of
compliance
and
work
to
bring
them
into
compliance,
and
so
the
purpose
of
the
moratorium
is
basically
to
allow
the
department
to
carry
out
the
operational
duties
as
it
relates
to
Internal
Affairs
investigations
and
directing
discipline
as
necessary.
So.
N
N
Officers
with
sustained
allegations
should
you
know,
get
the
final
disposition
and
be
handed
the
discipline
as
as
close
to
the
incident
as
responsibly
possible
and
then
offers
officers
with
unsubstantiated
allegations.
We
want
to
get
closer
on
those
as
well,
so
this
moratorium
allows
the
department
to
move
forward
on
those
things
so
going
to
where
we
are.
Currently
we
are
we,
the
administration,
mayor,
Kelly
I,
know
all
of
you
part
current
Park
members
and
the
police
department.
We
are
all
I
know
committed
to
transparency,
Community
oversight
and
accountability.
N
We
are
all
working
towards
the
same
goal
here
to
maintain
transparency
and
oversight
on
behalf
of
all
of
the
all
the
residents
that
we
that
we
serve
I
said
this
earlier,
but
we
have
had
an
extremely
positive
experience
with
our
Park
as
it
exists.
Currently,
I
know
that
the
department
and
Internal
Affairs
and
park
I
know
there's
a
great
relationship
among
all
parties
and
we're
grateful
to
existing
Park
members
who
have
worked
really
hard.
N
Not
only
to
provide
the
support
service
to
our
community,
but
also
to
kind
of
build
out
what
a
couple
years
ago
was
a
brand
new
committee
and
establish
real
credibility
within
our
community.
So
I,
don't
think
any
of
us
really
intended
on
making
any
substantial
changes
to
our
Park
ordinance.
We
certainly
didn't,
but
the
legislation
was
passed
by
the
state.
N
We've
been
a
res
in
a
kind
of
a
research
and
information
gathering
phase
over
the
last
several
weeks,
working
collaboratively
with
police
department,
the
city
attorney
and
councilman
Henderson.
The
goal
has
been
essentially
to
sort
of
get
an
understanding
of
the
new
legislation
and
figuring
out
how
it
does
apply
to
us
and
then,
due
to
the
timeline
challenges,
we
just
have
kind
of
wanted
to
be
helpful
throughout
the
process
and
kind
of
get
a
jump
start
on
some
of
the
research
before
we
move
forward.
N
This
is
because
it
appears
as
though
the
state
legislation
has
is
largely
based
on
Knoxville's
model,
so
because
in
it
it
is
an
example
of
a
police
advisory,
Review
Committee.
That
is
largely
in
compliance
with
the
new
law.
We
thought
it
was
in
our
best
interest
to
at
least
learn
and
understand
how
how
they
operate
in
compliance.
N
So
we
do
have
a
general
understanding
of
that
framework,
but
we
will
obviously
make
you
know
improvements
to
to
ensure
that
our
ordinance
fits
our
needs
and
within
the
balance
of
the
law.
So,
lastly,
the
new
legislation.
It
is
pretty
prescriptive
in
terms
of
what
our
part
coordinates
can
look
like.
It
does
not
leave
a
lot
of
room
for
interpretation,
and
the
state
is
extremely
specific
about
the
roles
and
responsibilities
of
the
of
the
committees
as
well
as
any
staff.
N
So
this
is
the
start
of
section
two
of
the
of
the
legislation,
and
this
is
essentially
why
it
applies
to
us
and
the
what
what
happens
if
we
are
not
brought
into
compliance
within
120
days,
and
it
is
that
the
current
Park
will
be
terminated
and
obviously,
as
you
can
see,
the
this
preempts
any
existing
ordinance
that
we
have
in
place
so
as
quoted
by
the
state.
The
summary
of
the
bill
abolishes
Community
oversight
boards
authorizes
a
municipal
governing
body
to
create
police
advisory
and
Review
Committee
upon
adoption
of
an
ordinance.
N
These
are
not
the
only
differences,
but
these
are
they're,
certainly
subsequent
changes
that
will
be
required
to
make.
But
these
are
the
ones
that
are
most
apparent
and
you
know
require
the
most
heavy
lifting
to
to
address.
So
this
is
just
an
overview.
I
will
not
outline
every
line
of
the
legislation,
but
after
we
get
done
today,
I
do
have
a
one-pager
kind
of
analyzing,
the
our
current
ordinance
up
against
the
the
new
legislation,
but
the
first
one
is
the
board
composition.
N
So
subsection,
two
or
section
two
subsection
C,
dictates
that
a
committee
must
consist
of
seven
members
appointed
by
the
mayor
and
confirmed
by
a
majority
vote.
Are
you
all?
So
there
are
several
different
requirements
that
are
that
that
are
under
the
committee
members
that
are
very
similar
to
our
existing
requirements.
For
for
committee
members,
the
legislation
does
dictate
initial
term
links
as
well
as
term
links
after
the
initial
appointments
expire
committee.
Members
cannot
be
compensated
which
is
similar
to
what
we
have
now.
N
N
There
are
several
functions
listed
as
well,
but
to
highlight
a
couple
for
the
executive
director.
They
can
accept
complaints
from
members
of
the
public
regarding
misconduct
of
local
Law,
Enforcement
Officers.
The
executive
director
is
to
be
notified
by
IA
when
an
investigation
is
closed
and
review
the
file
and
determine
if
the
investigation
is
complete.
The
executive
director
can
determine
that
a
case
should
be
further
investigated
or
that
information
additional
information
is
needed.
N
We
have
open
meetings
and
order
of
operations.
So
the
subsections,
O
and
P
discuss
the
allowable
operational
framework,
which
includes
making
the
park
meetings
open
and
requiring
Park
meetings
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
public
comment
that
is
obviously
quite
different
than
what
we
have
currently
as
the
current
Park
meetings
are,
are
confidential.
N
So
this
the
open,
the
open
meetings,
requirement
essentially
mirrors
the
rules
that
you
all
have
to
follow.
Religion,
open
meetings,
publicly
noticed
meetings
allowing
for
the
public
comment,
establishing
the
committee's
own
adoption
of
rules
and
procedures
and
so
on,
and
then
subsection
Q
outlines
several
limitations
for
the
park
board
and
staff
to
abide
by,
one
of
which
is
when
cases
can
be
reviewed.
So
the
committee
or
its
staff
shall
not
review
an
investigation
prior
to
the
closure.
N
I
N
O
Good
afternoon,
I
just
wanted
to
go
over
essentially
a
first,
a
micro
overview,
step-by-step
of
the
process
and
then
we'll
expand
out
as
we
go
and
I'll
try
not
to
belabor
any
points.
Essentially,
the
way
our
complaints
are
received.
They
can
come
from
either
internal
or
external
external
meaning,
a
Community
member,
internal
meaning
a
member
of
the
department.
O
So
the
our
allegations
are
divided
into
two
classes,
essentially
class,
one
and
class
two
class,
one
being
the
more
egregious
offenses
which
are
investigated
solely
by
Internal
Affairs,
and
then
the
class
two
offenses
are
investigated
by
the
individual's
chain
of
command.
So
the
invest.
The
the
complaint
comes
in,
it's
pre-revved
as
we
call
it
by
Internal
Affairs
and
then
it's
assigned
to
a
sergeant
typically
for
investigation.
So
that's
the
first
step
is
the
report
of
Investigation
is
completed
where
the
the
sergeant
comes
in.
O
So
the
Lieutenant's
job
is
to
read
the
the
totality
of
the
investigation
review
all
of
the
evidence
and
then
determine
based
on
the
preponderance
of
evidence.
What
actually
occurred
to
where
what
that
does.
Is
it?
It
keeps
a
lot
of
the
the
perceptions.
That's.
The
goal
is
to
keep
the
perceptions
of
what
may
or
may
not
occurred
and
rely
solely
on
the
evidence
and
the
preponderance
thereof
in
order
to
move
forward.
From
that
point,
there
is
a
little
bit
of
a
difference
between
the
internal
affairs
workflow
and
the
chain
of
command.
O
The
chain
of
command
has
a
captain,
whereas
the
internal
affairs
China
command.
They
report
to
me
as
the
major
over
Professional
Standards,
so
I
don't
have
a
captain.
So
the
captain
in
this,
in
this
role
for
the
chain
of
command,
fills
out
a
quality
control.
So
essentially,
the
captain's
responsibility
is
to
review
the
entire
case
File
to
make
sure
that
all
potential
evidence,
all
questions
that
that
may
need
to
be
asked
are
asked
and
all
evidence
is
included
in
the
case
File.
O
Those
cases
so
does
the
major
over
whichever
chain
of
command,
and
we
send
that
over
to
the
assistant
chief
over
that
command
same
thing,
that
I
do
so
with
even
with
an
internal
affairs
case,
once
I
make
my
recommendation,
I
forward
that
case
to
the
the
assistant
chief
over
the
chain
of
command
that
that
officer
reports
to
the
assistant
chief
reviews,
it
also
makes
their
recommendation.
In
addition,
they
also
make
a
recommendation
of
discipline
from
that
point,
the
entire
case
File
goes
to
park.
This
is
our
current
workflow.
O
It's
where
park,
reviews
it
and
then
also
meets
with
usually
for
the
internal
affairs
investigation,
they're
meeting
with
the
actual
investigator
with
the
chain
of
command
investigations,
they're
meeting
with
either
the
assistant
chief.
That
made
the
final
recommendation.
You
know
the
recommendation
that
that
proceeded
where
it
met
it
was
met
with
park,
or
sometimes
the
major
will
also
sit
in
and
kind
of
brief.
O
If
there's
any
questions
from
that
point,
after
Park
gives
their
recommendation,
it
goes
to
the
either
Chief
or
executive
Chief,
where
a
final
disposition
will
be
determined
and,
in
the
event
of
a
sustained
delegation,
then
will
be
determined
what
type
of
discipline
will
be
given
out
that
may
require
disciplinary
hearing,
and
then
that
disciplinary
hearing
is
held.
The
chief
for
executive
Chief
will
make
the
final
determination
on
the
case
and
then
the
case
is
essentially
closed.
O
After
that
the
way
current
law
reads
that
Park
would
review
after
or
at
the
tail
end
right
after
the
process
was
complete.
This
way
the
the
current
law
reads,
so
everything
would
track
the
exact
same
with
the
exception
of
it
would
go
from
the
assistant
chief
over
the
command
to
the
officer
that
was
being
complained
on
reports
to
go
to
the
executive
chief
for
final
determination,
and
then
it
would
be
reviewed
by
Park
quarterly.
O
At
that
point,
they
would
be
able
to
review
not
only
the
whole
case
File,
but
also
the
actual
final
decision
made
by
by
the
chief
or
executive
chief
that
that
concluded
the
or
closed
the
case,
and
this
is
more
of
the
the
I
guess,
broader,
look
at
it
when
it
comes
to.
You
have
a
the
current
workflow,
where
Park
Falls
within
the
recommendation
and
within
the
investigative
process,
and
then
with
the
way
the
law
is,
is
explaining
that
it
has
to
fall
at
the
end.
O
After
final
disposition,
I
did
want
to
bring
a
couple
things
to
life.
I've
been
in
my
position
currently
for
a
year,
just
maybe
just
a
little
bit
over
and
it
didn't
take
long
before
I
got
to
see
the
the
true
value
of
of
our
Park
team
and
I
do
want
to
refer
to
them
as
a
team
versus
a
committee,
because
that's
exactly
how
they
operate.
O
It
has
been
one
of
the
most
valuable
assets
to
the
department
that
I've
personally
experienced.
In
my
you
know,
25
years
with
the
Department
some
of
the
things
that
will
not
go
away.
Some
of
the
things
that,
regardless
of
the
law,
we
will
still
be
able
to
do,
and
one
of
the
most
important
functions
of
Park,
isn't
just
the
oversight
isn't
just
being
able
to
to
look
at
the
Case
Files.
O
But
it's
also
their
ability
to
make
recommendations
on
training
and
policy
changes
as
well
as
we've
had
multiple
incidents
where
they'll
have
very
very
valuable
input
into
some
of
the
after
effects
of
law
enforcement
actions
that
maybe
they're
in
policy.
But
maybe
there's
opportunities
there
for
us
to
to
reach
out
to
families
to
have
more
of
an
educational
session
of
why
we
did
what
we
did.
O
There's
a
lot
of
value
in
that
and
that
does
not
have
to
go
away
in
addition,
they'll
be
able
to
recommend
if,
if
there's
an
aspect
of
an
investigation
that
requires
further
investigation,
that
has
happened
on
a
number
of
occasions
currently
and
that
doesn't
have
to
go
away.
There
have
been
times
when,
when
park
has
reviewed
a
case
and
we're
like
well
what
about
the
supervisor?
In
this
case,
we
we
understand
the
officer.
The
officers
held
account.
What
about
the
supervisor
and
you
you
know
the
response
is
you're
exactly
right.
O
O
O
The
other
thing
that
I
think
is
extremely
valuable
is
the
relationship
between
the
police
department
and
the
committee.
We
currently
have
a
fantastic
relationship.
The
input
that
they
have
is
extremely
valuable
and
we
really
hope
that
that
does
not
change.
There
is
nothing
in
the
law
that
would
preclude
that
from
occurring,
that
that
is
something
that
I
think
we
can
continue
to
work
towards
and
continue
especially
utilizing.
O
That's
something
that
that
is
allowable
by
this
by
the
law
and
then
meant
to
being
able
to
maintain
the
standard
of
reporting,
regardless
of
what
that
looks,
like
I,
think,
there's
opportunities
there
for
us
to
be
as
elaborate
as
we
want
to
be
when
it
comes
to
the
data
that
we
have
the
actions
that
are
taken
or
actions
that
are
not
taken.
I,
believe
those
types
of
reports
can
can
be
worked
out,
whether
we
add
to
what
we
currently
do
or
we
keep
it.
The
same
and
I
believe
Chief
Murphy
will
has.
J
K
F
E
F
E
N
N
E
E
E
The
reason
I'm
asking
is
Mr
chair
is:
it
looks
like
we're
just
doubling
over
and
saying:
okay
and
letting
the
state
preempt
something
that's
very
important
that
we
gave
a
lot
of
thought
to
and
and
then
maybe
taking
something
that's
really
good
and
not
examining
any
further.
Some
of
the
questions
I
just
had,
and
so
I
would
very
much
like
you
to
return
to
me
once
she's
finished.
Okay,
thank.
P
You
well
it's
kind
of
hard
to
follow
that
you
know
I'm
really
just
here
to
provide
at
least
you
know
as
being
the
lead
of
the
department,
because
this
is
a
separate
entity
from
the
Department.
It's
oversight
about.
You
know
what
we
do,
whether
it
be
our
disciplinary
recommendations
and
final
dispositions,
as
well
as
any
policy
recommendations
and
yes
to
answer
the
point,
your
point:
it
has
been
working
well
to
Major
Chambers
point.
You
know,
there's
a
good
relationship
there
and
that's
not
to
say
that
another
model
doesn't
work.
P
P
We
just
follow
the
law
and
we're
just
going
to
do
whatever
we're
told
to
be
able
to
become
in
compliance
with
that
with
the
current
voice
of
everyone
that
was
in
the
old
process
and
I
think
that
I
and
if
I
have
and
I'll
tell
you
that
it's
very
important
to
me
that
the
police
department,
that
I'm
a
leader
of
is
consistent,
transparent,
Fair
and
I
think
I've
made.
It
apparently
know
that
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
saying.
There
was
something
not
done
right
here
and
we're
going
to
correct
it
fix
it.
P
I
do
have
experience
with
having
a
department
that
has
an
appointed
executive
director,
there's
a
difference
in
this
model
and
where
I
come
from
the
model
there.
But
there
are
some
similarities
in
both
models
to
where
I've
come
from
so
I'm
used
to
that
executive
director
model
and
what
I'll
say
is
the
same
relationship
that
we
have
in
the
old
model.
P
I,
don't
I
I'm,
not
countering
away
from
hearing
the
oversight
of
our
community,
because
that's
who
we
you
know,
they
deserve
a
voice
in
this,
and
they
absolutely
it's
important
to
me
that
we're
meeting
their
needs,
not
our
needs.
So
I
came
up
here,
just
to
kind
of
maybe
hopefully
give
you
some
type
of
Peace
in
in
in
in
in
knowing
that,
as
it
comes
from
The
Stance
of
this
Police
Department,
regardless
of
what
the
model
is
nobody's
voice
in
this
community
is
going
to
be
in
any
way
taken
away.
J
Thank
you,
Chief
I
think
just
hang
close.
What
I
would
like
to
do
before
I,
open
it
up
to
the
council
and
and
obviously
I
feel
like
we
have
maybe
more
discussion
than
we
do
questions,
but
I
would
like
to
hear
from
our
Park
members
that
are
here
and
I
think
we
need
to
hear
from
them
as
well
I'm
going
to
ask
Miss
Hensley
if,
if
she
has
anything
to
say
or
if
any
of
the
other
Park
members
would
like
to
address
the
council
before
we
begin
discussing
this
ordinance.
Q
Very
familiar.
Thank
you
good
afternoon.
Thank
you
for
having
us.
As
most
of
you
know,
my
name
is
Kay
Baker
I'm
in
District,
Two
and
I
was
the
former
chair
for
two
years
over
the
park
I'm.
Currently
a
voting
member
with
a
few
years
left
under
the
current
system,
the
current
Chattanooga
Ordinance
Works.
Q
It
works
the
park,
members
that
you
have
assembled
our
diverse,
passionate,
committed
and
very
effective.
We
do
not
always
agree
with
CPD
decisions
and
we
do
not
rubber
stamp
their
decisions.
We
are
independent
but
even
being
independent
as
major
Chambers
indicated
and
chief
Murphy
indicate.
We
have
a
big.
We
have
developed
very
strong
relationships,
good
working
relationships
with
the
police
department
and
we
feel,
like
we've,
brought
around
big
change.
Big
positive
change
in
the
relationship
between
the
community
and
the
police
department.
Q
Chattanooga
deserves
better
than
Senate
bill.
591.
I
don't
have
a
bone
to
pick
with
the
council.
You
created
the
ordinance
you
created
us,
it's
working
I,
don't
have
a
bone
to
pick
with
the
police
department.
They
have
been
fascinating
and
fantastic
Partners,
as
we've
learned
to
grow
through
this
process,
but
I'm
here
to
express
excuse
me
strong
opposition
to
Senate
Bill
591,
because,
while
it
claims
to
quote
strengthen
the
relationship
between
citizens
and
law
enforcement
and
to
ensure
the
timely,
fair
and
objective
review
of
Citizen
complaints,
close
quote,
it
actually
does
the
opposite.
Q
It
reduces
Community
oversight
to
a
non-existent,
impotent
and
ineffective
paper
tiger,
who
am
I
to
tell
the
legislature
who
drafted
this
the
legislatures,
who
sponsored
this
that
voted
for
this
and
the
governor
who
signed
this
that
this
is
this
Senate
bill
is
not
even
worth
the
10
pages
that
it's
written
on.
Here's.
Why
I
feel
confident
in
saying
that
I
do
not
brag
about
my
my
background,
but
in
this
case
I'm
going
to
have
to
because
I
I
have
very
strong
opinions
about
this,
and
this
is
why
I
was
a
former
federal
law
enforcement
officer.
Q
I
was
a
former
Assistant
Attorney
General
that
represented
state
law
enforcement
officers
in
Georgia
when
they
were
sued
in
federal
court
under
civil
rights
legislation
and
litigation.
I
was
a
former
Assistant
Attorney
General
representing
the
Georgia
peace
officers,
standards
and
training,
Council
to
review
and
settle
certification
disputes
of
law
enforcement
officers
who
were
accused
of
violating
the
law
and
their
agency
policy.
Q
I
was
a
former
Assistant
Attorney
General
working
closely
with
law
enforcement
agencies,
Prosecuting
misdemeanors
and
felonies,
and
since
2015
I've
been
a
private
investigator
working
criminal
defense
cases
as
well
as
working
with
local
attorneys,
who
represent
state
and
city
law
enforcement
officers
when
they
are
sued
in
civil
court
in
federal
court.
Excuse
me
so
24
years
in
state
and
federal
government,
either
in
a
law
enforcement
role
or
representing
law
enforcement
officers
in
their
official
capacity
and
eight
years
as
an
investigator,
with
an
up
close
and
very
personal
view
of
police
Behavior,
both
bad
and
good.
Q
Q
I
appreciate
I'm
preaching
to
the
choir
right,
so
my
message
is
directed
to
our
state
delegation.
I,
don't
think
they're.
Here
the
legislators
whose
legislators,
who
sponsored
Senate
Bill
591
the
legislators
who
voted
for
it
and
the
governor
who
signed
it.
You
have
failed.
You
have
failed
your
constituents,
you
have
failed
law
enforcement
officers
who
effectively
legally
and
within
policy,
protect
and
serve
our
communities,
and
you
have
failed
the
state.
Q
Q
The
Ed
and
all
community
members
must
maintain
confidential
of
internal
and
confidentiality
of
internal
affairs
complaint
at
the
same
time,
demanding
that
our
meetings
are
open.
How
in
the
world
can
we
just
discuss
officer,
Behavior
content,
specific
to
to
make
any
kind
of
policy
change
or
recommendation
for
a
policy
change?
We
can't
do
it.
Q
The
result.
There
will
be
no
substantive
discussion
of
Officer
conduct
that
might
lead
to
changes
in
policy
and
or
punishment
for
the
offending
officer
which
has
been
taken
away
from
us
anyway.
We
can't
weigh
in
on
whether
they,
the
punishment
for
the
officers
and
finally
Senate
Bill
591,
gives
the
authority
of
appointing
seven,
not
nine,
which
is
what
we
current
hat
currently
have
to
the
mayor.
Q
You
have
to
approve
it
and
we
appreciate
the
city
working
the
city,
mayor's
office,
saying
they're
going
to
meet
with
us
and
we've
gotten
the
invite
and
that's
on
on
the
schedule
in
whether
we
want
to
stay
or
not.
But
the
fact
of
the
matter
is
the
mayor.
He
or
she
could
appoint
up
to
two
people
from
One
District,
which
could
effectively
worst
case
scenario,
leave
five
districts
without
a
community
representative,
okay,
worst
case
scenario
granted,
but
that
sometimes
happens
as
a
sidebar.
Q
The
legislative
fiscal
note
that
we
got
in
our
packet,
which
is
from
March
2023,
noted
that
the
oversight
board
in
Nashville
had
a
2
million
dollar
budget.
You
know
what
our
budget
is
lunch
and
free
parking
once
a
month.
They
want
to
add
an
ex
an
expense,
a
fiscal
impact
on
the
city.
Whatever
bucket
it
comes
out
of
it's
an
additional
cost,
there's
gonna
and
again
good
luck.
Finding
somebody
that's
worth
that
position
for
less
than
a
hundred
thousand
dollars.
Q
I
mean
I'm,
sorry,
I
I,
don't
know
who
would
do
it
so
it
adds
the
benefit
or
the
salary
and
the
benefits
of
the
executive
director.
Now
it's
open
meetings
we
need
transcriptions.
We've
got
to
do
that.
It
allows
for
public
comment.
We've
got
to
allow
that
just
just
like
you
in
closing
the
sponsors
of
Senate
Bill
591,
the
legislators
that
voted
for
it
and
the
governor
who
signed
it,
do
not
want
transparency
in
police
misconduct.
Q
They
do
not
want
honest
and
Community
Driven
evaluations
of
police
conduct
and
policy.
Senate
Bill
591
eliminates
any
hope
for
a
true
strengthening
of
relationships
between
communities
and
the
police
departments
that
serve
them,
and
maybe
that
was
their
plan
all
along
I'm,
not
a
lobbyist,
I,
don't
know
what's
going
on
in
Nashville,
but
somebody
doesn't
want
Community
input
in
police
matters.
Q
What's
insulting
is
that
they
hijacked
language
from
your
ordinance
almost
to
a
word,
but
they
took
out
the
sections
that
gave
our
Park
the
ability
to
successfully
work
with
CPD,
to
offer
valuable
citizen
input,
strengthen
relationships
and
bring
about
effective
change.
Even
worse,
no
one
even
reached
out
to
us
to
see
if
it's
working
and
if
it's
not,
why
not
so
whatever
you
have
to
do,
we
are
asking
you
to
please
do
it,
because
Senate
Bill
591
is
nothing
more
than
a
paper
tiger
and
it's
not
worth
the
paper.
Q
L
It's
a
tough
act
to
follow.
Tell
you,
okay,
my
name
is
Lee,
clear,
I'm,
the
owner
of
wnoo
radio
and,
as
I
say
it
owns
me
actually
I'm
a
slave
for
the
and
I'm
the
district
7
representative
for
the
park
committee
I've
served
three
years
on
the
board,
so
expiring,
August,
1st
and
I'd
like
to
compliment
Chief
Murphy
and
the
former
Chief
Roddy
on
their
Administration
and
the
training
of
the
police
department.
They
it's
a
great
Department.
It
is
a
very
professional
operation.
L
You
see
some
of
the
other
departments
around
us
and
they're
heads
and
shoulders
above
some
of
the
other
departments.
After
serving
on
this
board,
I
see
that
most
cases
they
get
it
right.
We
reviewed
the
cases
and
in
most
cases
very
few
cases
that
we
disagree
with
them
on.
You
might
think
that
we
just
agree
with
everything.
They
say:
it's
not
it.
It's
just
that.
Usually
we
agree
because
their
findings
are
very
thorough
and
some
cases
I
think
they
may
be
a
little
too
thorough.
L
It's
very,
very
difficult.
Being
a
police
officer
and
I
think
that
we
treat
these
guys
like
robots,
sometimes
I
mean
they're
human
beings
that
they
have
conscious
and
emotions,
and
they
have
things
that
bother
them
and
you
don't
know
what
they're
going
through.
They
left
the
last
call
when
they
come
to
the
new
call,
but
we
still
expect
them
to
get
it
right
every
time
and
that's
that's
not
realistic.
L
In
my
opinion,
I've
got
a
lot
of
family
members
in
law
enforcement
and
nieces
and
nephews
who
are
assistant,
daas,
Federal
prosecutors
and
I've
heard.
The
stories
I
know
some
of
the
things
that
they
that
they
have
to
go
through
and
we
kind
of
take
that
under
consideration
Even
in
our
committees.
We
think
sometimes
that
you
know
we're
dinging
the
guys
and
hey
it's
a
human.
You
know
so
he
used
a
bad
word.
L
You
know
we
all
use
bad
words,
but
they're
not
allowed
to
do
that
and
I
think
sometimes
I
understand
that
the
supervisors
expect
them
to
act
a
certain
way
and
be
a
certain
way,
but
they
can't
they
can't
always
do
that
and
sometimes
I
think
we
have
to
just.
If
it's
serious
you
got
to
do
something
about
it,
but
if
it's,
if
it's
just
minor,
you
have
to
maybe
kind
of
look
the
other
way.
L
L
For
example,
we
made
recommendations
that
all
police
officers
should
always
have
a
body-worn
camera
if
you're
working
on
an
outside
job
at
Wendy's
or
wherever
you're
working,
you're
still
a
police
officer,
and
we
need
to
have
that
camera
to
see
what's
going
on,
because
if
you
smack
some
guy,
if
there's
a
use
of
force
of
some
sort
and
the
public
says
one
thing,
the
police
officer
say
something
else:
there's
no
camera.
How
do
we
know
you
don't
know
what
to
do
with
it?
L
L
Chattanooga
can
be
very,
very
proud
of
the
the
work
that
the
park
performs
in
addition
to
the
complaints
such
as
this
courtesy,
which
is
probably
the
level
one
complaint
I
see,
he
was
discouraged
to
me.
I,
don't
like
the
way
he
spoke
to
me
and,
of
course
the
camera
will
show
he
didn't.
He
didn't
speak
discouraging
to
you.
He
was
not
racist
with
you.
What
are
you
talking
about?
You
know,
but
we
don't
know
if
we
don't
get
the
camera.
L
L
Maybe
a
field
and
his
wisdom
can
find
a
way
to
you,
know,
get
to
the
state
and
find
out
if
there's
some
way
to
to
kind
of
modify
that,
because
we
have
nine
districts
and
of
course
it's
not
fair
for
nine
districts
to
have
seven
Representatives,
whereas
Kay
said
maybe
two
from
one
District.
You
know
in
three
from
one
District
I
mean
the
mayor
can
appoint,
who
he
wants
to
appoint.
L
R
R
R
They
began
to
associate
the
police
with
racism
with
violence
with
the
system.
That
is
not
meant
to
protect
them
because
of
how
who
they
are,
how
they
look
so
like
a
mom
should
I
talk
to
my
boys
about
that
and
then
I
looked
out
into
the
community,
because
I
wanted
to
do
something
more
I
wanted
to
get
involved.
I
wanted
to
make
a
change.
I
wanted
my
boys
to
know
that
they
didn't
have
to
compromise
their
dreams.
So
I
got
involved
with
my
city
councilwoman
and
became
a
member
of
Park.
R
It's
important
for
me
to
help
bridge
the
gap
between
the
community
and
law
enforcement
because,
because
of
my
children
and
part,
this
committee
I've
learned
so
much,
we've
built
so
many
great
relationships
with
law
enforcement.
We've
spent
countless
hours,
reviewing
footage,
making
recommendations,
things
that
you
know,
I
think
that
the
police
department
at
one
point
would
not
have
thought
about
you
know
doing,
but
they
welcomed
those
recommendations
in
and
we've
been
making
a
difference.
R
We've
made
so
much
progress
within
our
community
and
I'm
constantly
in
the
community.
I'm
constantly
doing
things
in
the
community,
so
I'm
able
to
take
these
things
back
that
we
learn
from
each
other
into
the
community
and
help
change
the
minds
of
people
in
our
community,
especially
my
community,
who
believe
that
complaints,
their
complaints
are
done
by
the
wayside.
They
feel
like
they
don't
have
a
voice,
and
so
we've
been
able
to
change
that
through
the
work
that
we've
done
with
Park
I
believe
that
these
changes
that
have
been
implemented
will
set
us
back.
R
It
will
damage
the
work.
The
progress
that
we've
set
in
place.
The
changes
do
nothing
but
add
more
limits.
More
restrictions.
More
red
tape,
more
control
and
it
confirms
the
thoughts
of
what
the
community
is
already
having
that
you
know,
there's
too
much
control
going
on
that
my
complaints,
don't
matter
it's
difficult,
dealing
with
a
critical
public
and
a
self-regulating
police
department,
so
park
is
that
middle
ground
and
so
I'm,
definitely
in
opposition
of
the
changes.
Thank
you.
K
K
K
How
can
we
be
a
one
Chattanooga
if
we
have
two
districts,
not
represented
I,
think
all
voices
are
very,
very
important
and
I
think
this
bill
is
billed
as
K
said,
to
take
away
the
voice
of
our
community
I.
Thank
you
all
for
your
time.
I
want
you
to
know.
This
team
is
very
well
needed
here
because
of
the
diverse
nature
of
this
team.
It's
not
a
rubber
stab
team.
We
can
agree
to
disagree
and
still
leave
the
me
love
each
other
and
still
communicate
so,
please,
whatever
you
all,
can
do.
K
If
you
have
connections
in
Nashville,
let's
contact
them
and
let
them
know-
and
also
when
the
mayor
is
making
his
decision,
because
it's
been
taken
from
your
hands.
Let
him
know
the
people
that
you
want
to
work.
I've
been
on
this
team
from
the
Inception
I
was
the
first
African-American
woman
approved
for
this
team
and
I.
Thank
you
all
for
your
investment
in
me,
I
retired,
from
the
Electoral
power
board,
with
38
years
of
service
to
our
community
in
the
customer
service
and
I
presently,
service,
Lake,
Hills,
president
and
I'm.
K
M
Good
afternoon
Marianne
Hensley,
chair
of
Park
in
District,
three
and
I'm,
really
just
happy
that
you
all
got
to
see
a
bit
of
the
community
I
guess
that's
represented
across
this
board
and
the
passion
that
we
have
for
the
work
that
we
do
and
thank
you
all
for
you
know
appointing
us
for
making
this
happen
for
giving
our
community
a
voice
that
we've
not
had,
and
obviously
there
is
some
fiery
passion
around.
You
know
that
voice
being
mostly
taken
away.
M
I
just
want
to
Echo
both
K
and
major
Chambers
comments
about
just
the
trust
that
we've
been
able
to
build
when
this
board
was
formed
and
we
did
our
ride-alongs
with
the
officers.
There
were
a
lot
of
questions
and
there
were
a
lot
of
officers
feeling
like
this
was
just
people
breathing
down
their
neck.
You
know
scrutinizing
every
move
that
they
were
making
and
over
time.
They've
gotten
to
see
this
board
is
just
as
much
about
you
know,
holding
them
accountable
as
it
is
about
protecting
them.
You
know
when
they're
doing
doing
good
jobs.
M
M
M
The
public
has
the
opportunity
to
provide
open
commentary
around
these
different
issues.
What
we
saw
a
lot
of
those
issues
were
completely
out
of
the
purview
of
park.
It
was
just
people
that
came
in
and
wanted
to
complain
about
something,
and
these
people
are
volunteers
and
it's
it
just
opens
the
door
to
a
lot
of
scrutiny
around
a
committee.
That's
meant
to
serve
and
to
hold
people
accountable
in
this
really
we
feel
kind
of
takes
that
away
and
also
muscles
I
think
the
impact
that
it
has
and
opens
it
up
to
more
scrutiny.
M
As
Kay
mentioned,
the
chief
decisions
are
already
made
by
the
time
they
ever
get
to
us.
That
really
removes
a
layer
of
accountability
and
and
kind
of
removes
us
completely
from
the
process.
If
we
get
to
recommend
things
on
the
back
end,
there's
no
guarantee
that
those
things
are
ever
going
to
happen,
and
so,
with
the
with
the
current
partnership
that
we
have,
you
know
we
do
feel
that
we
really
have
a
voice.
We
feel
like
we're
really
integrated
into
this
partnership.
J
J
E
Continually
disappointed
with
State
preemption
and
disrespect
for
our
city,
yeah
and
the
way
it
works.
It
hasn't
just
been
police.
It
has
to
do
with
guns.
It
has
to
do
with
a
number
of
things
that
are
not
in
the
best
interest
of
our
community
and
somehow
the
state
gets
away
our
Representatives
get
away
with
not
representing
the
best
of
what
our
community
can
do
and
that's
so
disappointing
to
me.
E
E
F
E
E
E
There
was
a
comment
made
about
the
executive
director.
The
executive
director
can
meet
with
the
park
Phil.
Does
the
executive
director's
meeting
with
the
park
have
to
be
public?
Yes,
all
right,
so
I
think.
If
you
go
to
each
one
of
the
phases,
each
one
of
the
phases
of
this
bill,
it's
meant
to
totally
neuter
what
we
in
Inception
thought
would
be
and
turned
out
to
be
a
terrific
police,
Community
Partnership,
and
for
that
I'm
very
sad
and
I
hope
that
we
don't
just
sit
down
and
say:
okay,
I
think
we
do
more
than
that.
S
Thank
you,
chair.
Listen,
it
ain't,
no
secret.
How
I
feel
about
it.
I'm
really
disappointed
in
it
and
as
I
stated
last
Tuesday
is
that
you
know
I
have
all
the
confidence
in
Chief
Murphy
and
her
decisions,
but
I
really
worry
about
our
police
Union
when
they
undermine
her
decisions.
That's
that's
my
concern
and
we've
seen
that
time
and
time
again
and
as
I
look
through
the
bill
and
have
went
over
time
and
time
again.
S
It's
really
talking
about
the
accountability
of
the
people,
that's
serving
as
committee
members,
that
is
making
sure
we're
holding
them
accountable
right
and
in
the
role
in
the
things
that
they're
supposed
to
do
and
making
sure
that
the
committee
understand
that
part
of
their
role
is
to
make
sure
they're
upholding
the
rights
of
the
police
officers
right
and
it's
so
much
gold
into
that.
We
get.
S
We
can
back
and
forth
about
what
the
rights
of
the
police
officer
should
be,
but
it
really
takes
divorce
of
our
community
members
away
and
I
too,
like
Kanika
that
live
in
my
district
and
have
heard
from
other
people.
You
know
why
and
why
we
even
created
it
and
since
May
2019
our
Council,
we
went
kind
of
back
and
forth.
S
We
got
some
new
members
and
Dove
back
in
it
again
and
just
to
see
four
years
later,
after
all
the
work
that
we've
done
on
it
and
we
all
come
to
a
consensus
about
it
that
the
state
is
saying
we're
going
to
take
all
of
that
away
from
you
we're
going
to
pre-owned,
like
councilwoman
Byrd,
said,
like
it's
very
frustrating
that
our
state
is
not
held
accountable
and
their
actions
and
what
they
do
because
they're
running
our
city
right.
We
only
have
about
two
or
three
of
them.
S
That's
there,
but
we
are
sidelined
by
this
I.
Don't
think
anybody
spoke
up
in
behalf
of
what
currently
what
we
do
have
going
on,
and
you
know
the
ones
that
we
do
have
I
could
very
much
say
confidently
that
they
agreed
with
it
that
they
agreed
with
it,
and
we
know
why
they
agree
with
it
and
and
if
they
want
to
check
call
themselves.
Chin
checking
me
tell
them
to
come,
see
me
and
we
can
have
some
discussions
about
it,
but
also
okay.
You
made
a
statement
that
was
very
moving.
S
You
said,
who
are
you
worth
to
tell
the
senate
that
that
bill
is
trash?
You
worth
everything
just
like
you
stood
here
and
said
that
you
want
all
nine
of
us
to
contact
the
state
legislators
I
want
you
to
call
them
too,
not
just
the
people.
That's
on
the
Park
Board
you
rally
up
and
get
your
people
in
the
community,
the
state,
the
city
of
Tennessee,
the
state
of
Tennessee,
and
you
get
them
to
go
up
there
and
advocate
for
it.
That's
how
you
effectively
make
change.
Why?
S
Because
they're
not
listening
to
the
nine
city
council
members
here
when
they
preempted
the
bill
and
they
moved
it
out
of
our
wheelhouse
and
say
this
up
to
the
mayor.
They
told
us
our
boys
didn't
even
matter
at
this
point.
That's
what
they
said.
So
we
need
people
like
you,
two
boots
on
the
ground,
they'll
email
them
so
call
them
right,
along
with
us,
get
you
a
bus
load
of
folks,
see
when
it's
gonna
be
back
when
you
can
come,
and
you
can
speak
publicly
about
it.
S
S
Your
voice
is
just
as
mighty
as
ours
is
and
I'm
sure
that
you
know
the
ones
who
is
against
it
will
call
and
do
that
same
advocacy
too
call
Bill
Lee
ask
for
a
meeting
with
Bill
Lee.
He
represents
you
too
right.
It's
all,
they
can
do
is
say
I'm
not
available.
Well,
let
me
meet
with
your
chief
of
staff.
S
Read
these
emails
that
I'm
sending
send
in
handwritten
letters
whatever
that
you
need
to
do,
because
you
matter
just
like
everybody
else
do,
and
we
Memphis
and
Nashville
are
very
Progressive
and
everything
that
we
do,
but
what
we
do
from
Time
and
Time
prior
to
me,
getting
elected
while
I've
been
elected.
We
allow
them
to
smack
us
around
is
if
we're
nothing
and
we
just
sit
back
and
say
we
gonna
take
it.
S
S
The
attorney
for
and
I
get
that,
and
my
question
is
to
Brooke
and
I'm
gonna
be
quiet
because
see
I'm
really
I'm,
just
I
feel
some
kind
of
way
about
it
when
they
say
that
we're
supposed
to
be
building
relationships
with
our
citizens
in
the
police
department
yeah,
we
we
trying
to
build
and
do
all
that
are
we
perfect?
Do
we
have
a
perfect
Police
Department?
S
No
because
until
I
see
the
racist
police
officers,
that's
beating
black
people
down
and
pulling
them
over
for
any
little
thing,
get
out
and
interact
in
the
community
with
our
kids,
then
that's
when
I
say
we
done
made
some
great
Milestones,
but
I
don't
see
those
police
officers
in
the
community
doing
it,
I
see
the
same
ones
that
we
see
every
day
that
come
down
here
and
talk
to
us.
That's
out
playing
basketball
with
the
kids
or
out
feeding
them
every
once
in
a
while.
We
need
to
see
the
ones.
S
That's
got
the
issue
with
the
skin
tone,
other
people
and
had
them
out
in
the
community.
That's
how
we're
going
to
effectively
change
but
Brooke
as
I
come
through
here
the
legislation
to
build
you
mentioned
and
said
that
we
will
pay
the
executive
director.
Can
you
show
me
where
it's
at
what
book
did
she
leave?
If
you
could
show
me
where
it's
at
in
the
legislation,
because
I
don't
see
where
it
says
that
we
will
pay
an
executive
director,
it
does
say
that
the
mayor
May
appoint
an
executive
director.
S
But
in
our
current
legislation
the
executive
director
will
be
doing
the
same
exact
thing
as
the
chair
does.
But
what
I
do
see
that
we're
responsible
for?
Is
that
we're
the
legislative
body
which
is
city
council,
we're
responsible
for
paying?
For
the
background
check
of
whomever
the
mayor,
selects
appoints
and
upon
the
approval
of
the
committee,
we're
responsible
for
paying
for
their
background
check
and
all
of
that.
But
it
doesn't
say
where
we're
as
a
body
or
the
mayor's
office
should
create
a
paying
position
for
an
executive
director.
I.
F
The
aspect
for
the
executive
director
is
at
least
set
out
in
the
code
section,
and
here
it
looks
like
it's.
My
number
here
I've
got
I
I
can
give
you
at
least
a
red
line
version
of
this
that
I've
prepared,
at
least
in
connection
with
the
meetings
on
here
and
the
the
red
line
version
of
the
code
at
least
talks
about
the
responsibility
of
the
executive
director.
Pretty
plain
and
simple
K
is
correct,
even
if
you
pay
somebody
a
whole
lot
of
money.
F
This
is
a
whole
lot
of
Duties
that
they
have
to
at
least
be
a
registered
voter
of
the
city,
not
be
a
former
employee
of
law
enforcement
within
a
certain
time
possess.
Prior
investigative
experience
such
as
would
be
possessed
by
an
attorney
they've
got
specific
requirements
that
they
have
to
meet
in
connection
with
the
state
law
here
in
order
to
be
the
executive
director-
and
it
is
an
employee
of
the
city
in
that
regard,
so
they
would
have
to
be
paid
a
specific
amount
by
the
city
of
Chattanooga
in
some
budget.
F
That's
one
of
your
problems
in
connection
with
this
act,
which
was
passed
on
July.
The
first
of
this
year,
right
after
you,
passed
your
budget
as
to
how
you
can
get
somebody
to
be
in
that
position.
But
the
mayor's
office
would
have
some
responsibility
to
at
least
establish
someone
who
would
be
willing
to
accept
that
position
and
be
able
to
review
the
items
that
they're
required
to
do
and
that
that
set
out
clearly
in
the
statute.
S
Can
you
email
that
new
one
now,
because
the
bill
that
I
have
it
doesn't
say
anything
about
paying
and
also
it
doesn't
say
in
HBO
764,
the
house
bill?
Neither
states
that
as
well
so
I
mean
we
need
to
see
what
the
amended
version
was
if
they
had
an
amended
version
or
was
that
just
a
version
that
we
created
not
us,
but
our
Administration
created
to
pass
to
us.
So
if
we're
going
to
go
by
the
state
version,
It's
the
state
version
says
there
is
no
compensation.
S
It
doesn't
mention
compensation
so
that
I
want
to
make
sure
that
if
we
go,
if
they're
going
to
create
things
for
themselves
and
I
mean
we
should
be
able
to
say,
the
mayor
should
say
what
we
can
create
two
additional
other
people.
If
we're
going
to
create
a
salary
for
the
executive
director,
that's
not
included
legislative
law.
F
J
If
that's
all,
you've
got
to
say,
but
I'd
rather
I'd,
rather
we
Direct
all
the
comments
from
the
from
the
podium
Phil.
If
you
would
would
you
email
them
legislation
there
that,
yes,
that
you're
referring
to
and
maybe
highlight
the
second
the
section
about
compensation?
Yes,
sir
councilwoman
coonrod
any
further
comments.
That's.
S
All
I
have
of
other
than
just
saying
that
you
know
you're
right,
K,
you're
not
going
to
find
anybody,
but
I
feel
the
same
way
about
Council
we
serving
on
20
000,
but
we
found
nine
people
saying
we
want
to
do
it,
but
Knoxville
was
created
prior
to
this
legislation
and
hey.
If
we
gonna
pay
somebody,
then
let's
pay
somebody
I'm
all
down
for
it.
B
Hester,
thank
you,
chair
through
challenges
and
changes.
Struggle
continues,
Park
is
spoken,
I
feel
your
pain
on
the
public.
Thank
you
for
your
devotion,
your
dedication,
your
passion
for
what
you
do
I
want
to
thank
the
police
department,
and
it
was
noted
that
as
a
good
work
relationship
with
CPD
and
Park.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
your
service.
B
H
Where
did
David
Floyd
go
on
the
whole
time
David?
This
conversation
has
been
an
excellent
insight,
has
offered
excellent
insight
into
the
reality
of
preemption
in
the
state
of
Tennessee
and
I.
Think
it
would
be
an
excellent
investigative
piece
for
the
Times
Free
Press
to
dig
into
how
many
laws
are
passed
just
in
the
last
year
pick
or
two
years.
H
How
many
you
want
to
pick
how
many
laws
have
preempted
things
that
people
at
the
local
level
have
made
decisions
on
already
and
how
our
local
delegation
has
voted
on
those
because
they
are
accountable
to
the
people
in
our
city
and
in
our
County
and
yet
to
my
colleagues
points
they
vote
against
the
interest
of
our
cities
and
of
our
counties
and
of
our
schools
on
a
regular
basis.
So
I
think
you
have
a
real
opportunity.
There
go
win
an
award.
T
H
Have
multiple
branches
in
our
government?
Obviously
we
are
in
the
legislative
branch
and
I
would
like
us
to
consider
where
the
judicial
branch
plays.
In
this
conversation,
chairwoman,
dotley
I
would
like
to
request
that
we
have
a
roll
call
vote
on
this
ordinance
tonight
and
I
hope
that
I
will
not
be
the
only
one
who
votes
against
it.
H
You
all
are
doing
that
work
and
to
allow
an
entity
that
we
have
created
for
ourselves
to
find
itself
Above
the
Law
and
above
the
people
who
created
it
is
mind-boggling
and
Brooke.
You
have
worked
hard
with
your
Administration
to
try
to
bring
us
into
compliance
and
I
appreciate
that
effort,
but
I
cannot,
as
a
representative
of
District
2
and
the
City
of
Chattanooga,
deliver
something
that
is
an
impotent
paper
tiger.
To
quote
my
district
2
representative
on
the
Park
Board,
that's
all
true.
N
H
H
J
It,
and,
and-
and
let
me
just
point
out-
this
is
not
to
disband
Park
and
I.
Just
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
clear
on
what
this
ordinance
does
and
Madam
clerk.
Would
you
and
I
probably
should
have
done
this
at
the
very
first?
Would
you
read
this
ordinance
and
just
so
that
we're
clear
on
what
this
vote
is
about
tonight.
T
S
T
J
J
J
F
F
Unless
you
adopt
an
ordinance
or
more
in
compliance
by
two-thirds
vote,
which
is
different,
you've
not
had
that
requirement
before
here
by
October
the
29th.
Arguably,
the
state
could
say
that
your
ordinance
and
your
committee
is
not
effectual.
It
is
not
in
existence
at
that
point
in
time.
Anyone
that
was
presented
to
a
park
committee
for
review.
They
could
argue
that
that
I
guess
action
would
not
be
appropriate.
The
concern
I
guess
on
the
the
bottom
line
in
here
is,
if
there
is
advice
given
to
the
chief
before
a
final
decision
is
made.
J
F
At
I
have
one
state
law,
one
last
thing
here
on
there.
The
the
new
state
law
also
prohibits
anybody
for
from
engaging
in
anything
while
the
internal
affairs
is
continuing
to
occur.
It
also
prohibits
you
from
in
getting
involved
in
anything
if
there's
any
threatened
or
actual
civil
proceedings
going
on,
which
is
really
pretty
difficult
in
that
law.
E
E
F
We
can
do
that.
We
can
continue
to
operate
in
that
regard.
The
the
issue
would
be
whether
there
would
be
some
a
group
of
cases
that
would
be
not
be
able
to
be
heard
by
the
department
if
you'll
remember,
it
also
says
that
there
is
I,
guess
anything
that
is
not
in
effect.
As
of
January.
The
1st
of
2023
is
one
of
the
concerns
in
connection
with
this.
The
park
board
would
have
no
ability
to
consider
anything
prior
to
that
date.
T
J
P
P
P
So
my
only
stance
in
the
matter
is
I.
Don't
want
to
risk
losing
Park
in
this
manner.
I
think,
in
my
opinion,
doesn't
matter,
but
I
would
rather
just
try
to
I'd
rather
I'd.
Rather,
us
try
to
come
into
compliance
until
we
have
someone
who's
able
to
make
the
decision
that
you
know
we
get
at
least
excluded
from
some
of
the
the
elements
of
the
statute.
P
J
I
have
had
some
discussion
with
our
state
legislature
to
try
to
explain
some
of
the
difficulties
that
they've
placed
upon
us.
I.
Think
the
next
opportunity
to
to
make
some
revisions
would
probably
not
be
until
February.
You
know
my
thought
was:
we
could
operate
in
the
space
within
the
law
and
then
try
to
get
something
changed
in
February.
That
could
more
mirror
what
we
were
doing
right
or
what.
P
H
H
No
ma'am
I
understand
the
public
perception
challenge
that
we
have
that
you
that
you
all
from
Park
really
brought
up
I,
believe
it
was.
It
was
Miss
Jones
who
made
the
point.
You've
got
a
critical
public
with
the
self-regulating
PD
that
that
creates
a
very
real
challenge,
but
I
I
do
Wonder.
Might
that
be
an
Avenue
that
we
could
pursue
that
Chattanooga
police
department
creates
its
own
yep.
J
J
H
F
Could
either
do
a
proclamation
by
the
entire
Council
to
your
legislative
group,
or
some
type
of
declaratory
judgment
action
in
court
would
be
the
methods.
The
concern
you
got
right
here
is
that
the
section
in
the
law
right
now
says
that
it
preempts
any
local
governing
body
which
is
y'all
from
making
any
ordinance
or
change
to
the
law.
That
is
not
consistent
with
what
the
state
has
done
so
that
that
section
under
38
8
312,
is
the
concern.
F
F
S
Okay,
so
we
can
still
operate
under,
like
councilwoman
has
stated
that
we
can
continue
operating
while
they
Administration
could.
No,
because
we
got
to
be
in
compliance
before
121
days,
so
wow
the
mayor's
office
of
gathering,
whatever
legislation
they're
going
to
do,
we
can
still
because
we
we
have
to
be
in
compliance
by
120
days.
No.
F
S
Right,
so
that's
what
I'm
saying
about
it:
120
days
since
July,
the
first
it's
just
August.
We
can
still
go
to
the
end
of
October
and
be
in
compliance
because
by
that
time,
they're
gonna,
but
not
provided
us
with
information
on
what
they
would
like
to
see.
So
we
don't
really
have
to
stop
it.
Why
they
do
the
work.
The.
F
J
S
J
P
And
whether
or
not
it's
successful
or
not
right
now,
we
have
I
think
about
42
cases
that
are
in
limbo
and
if
we
were
to
hear
them,
regardless
of
whether
it's
successful
or
not
we're
talking
about
the
potential
of
that
many
lawsuits
to
to
add
kind
of
a
little
more
frustration
to
to
the
system
and
what
we're
really
trying
to
accomplish,
and
if
you
can,
if
I'm
mistaken,
please
City
attorney.
Let
me
know
I
believe
that
those
40
something
cases
can
be
heard
after
we've
come
into
compliance
or
or
it's
developed.
P
They
can
still
hear
those
cases
after
the
fact
correct.
So
it's
not
that
that
the
more
you
talk.
Excuse
me:
the
moratorium
is
skipping
anything
it's
just.
You
know
allowing
the
process
to
run
through
and
then
they
can
still
hear
those
cases
after
the
fact
now,
when
I
spoke
to
dealing
with
an
executive
director
in
my
previous
role,
there
were
times
when
because
they
did
an
investigation
after
or
it
was
parallel
to
ours,
but
it
was
independent,
and
so
so
this
is
a
little
different
model.
J
P
P
Will
will
do
the
process
of
our
disciplinary
hearings
similar
to
what
this
up
coming
into
compliance
with
the
state
law
and
those
40
cases
will
not
be
seen
by
Park
before
the
decision
is
made
by
the
department,
but
that
does
not
stop
them
from
being
heard
once
we're
once
the
the
compliances
is
brought
into
place
in
the
Mandate
is
put
into
place.
Those
40-something
cases
can
still
then
be
heard
by
part
it's
just
under
the
new
model,
as
opposed
to
the
old
model.
J
P
It
is
my
my
concern
about
the
risk
that,
if
we
continue
doing
it
without
coming
into
immediate
compliance
and
I
and
in
my
opinion,
is
not
necessarily
the
best
advice
I
just
my
my
risk
on
the
matter
is
that
it's
going
to
bring
some
type
of
frustration
due
to
possible
lawsuits
from
those
40
cases
or
individuals
that
are
affected
by
those
cases,
whether
they
have
a
chance
or
not.
In
being
successful,
it
will
frustrate
the
system
if
we
if
we're
broke,
if
all
of
these
lawsuits
are
broken
on
because
of
it
just
challenging
it.
T
J
N
N
F
E
J
S
S
So
I'm
not
sure
why
we're
with
this
Memorial,
like
we
got
120
days,
one
we
just
now
getting
the
information
like
boom.
Here
it
is
put
on
our
agenda
to
discuss.
We
got
120
days
if
we
get
it
from
who's
ever
working
on
it
in
the
mayor's
office.
If
they
get
it
to
us
in
time
to
be
placed
on
the
agenda,
we
will
be
in
compliance
with
whatever
it
is,
so
we
should
be
able
to
move
forward
with
the
part
with
those
40
cases
still
being
heard,
while
they're
working
on
it.
S
It
shouldn't
be
paused
just
to
work
just
for
them
to
work
on
anything
we
they
because
they
work
on
stuff
all
the
time.
They
don't
need
a
pause
to
complete
what
tasks
they
need
to
do
for
us
to
come
into
compliance.
We
don't
get
a
pause,
so
we
I'm
just
simply
saying
we
can
move
forward.
Still
we
don't
have
to
have
that
Memorial
in
place.
I
know
Jermaine
gonna
come
up
here
and
try
to
convince
us
as
otherwise,
but
just
a
reminder,
we're
the
legislative
body
we're
the
legislative
body
here.
J
I
And
so
the
concern
from
the
administration
is
whether
or
not
there
is
any
legal
liability
during
the
process
of
of
during
this
time
period
in
which
we
are
trying
to
get
park
into
compliance.
So
that
I
think
is,
is
the
point
that
we're
trying
to
make.
We
completely
understand
the
frustration
that
the
council
is
expressing
and
articulating,
and
we
also
completely
understand
where
the
park
members
are
coming
from,
and
we
didn't
choose
this.
I
But
what
we
are
saying
is
is
is
that,
in
order
to
protect
the
city,
we
do
have
a
concern,
and
our
attorney
can
speak
to
this
is
that
if
there
are
cases
that
make
their
way
through
this
process,
knowing
that
a
state
law
was
passed
on,
July
state
law
went
into
effect
on
July
1st,
then,
is
there
legal
liability
for
the
city?
Should
there
be
a
an
officer
or
someone
who
disagrees
with
the
outcome
of
the
case?
That's
the
concern
of
the
administration
Phil.
Please
speak
to
that.
If.
J
H
I
hear
what
you're
saying
I
appreciate
that
the
the
vote
in
front
of
us
really
is
a
question
of
what
is
more
valuable,
giving
our
citizens
our
community
a
voice
in
order
to
protect
the
city
and
keep
our
citizens
safe
and
to
protect
our
police
officers.
Or
is
it
more
important
in
this
moment
to
protect
the
city
from
the
future,
the
potential
future
lawsuits
and
that's
a
vote
that
we
make
on
a
weekly
basis?
Yes,
the
the
lawsuit
part,
not
the
community
safety
piece,
but
your
point
about
in
order
to
protect
the
city.
H
J
Before
I
get
to
you
and
I
see
your
life
Phil.
Let
me
ask
you
a
question:
yes,
sir:
the
requirement
for
the
park
to
meet
publicly
yes,
that
is,
that,
is
a
law
right
now.
In
other
words,
if
Park
met
tomorrow,
it
would
have
to
be
in
public,
correct,
correct,
so
any
cases
that
they
discuss
from
today
forward
will
have
to
be
in
public.
Yes,
sir.
That's
the
only
way
that
they
could
meet
currently
is
in
public.
Yes,
sir,
so
I
think.
J
Maybe
that's
really
the
whole
reason
for
the
moratorium
or
the
pause
is
because
if
they
did
hear
these
cases
they
would
have
to
be
heard
in
public.
That's
something
that
that
we
don't
want
to
put
our
Police
Department
through
is
is
the
public
area
of
this,
so
if
they,
if
they
meet,
they
would
have
to
meet
publicly
and
if
they
didn't,
then
they
could
I'm,
assuming
they
could
be
sued,
just
like
we're
being
sued.
F
Your
your
current
ordinance
and
the
state
law
at
least
say
that
the
I
guess
the
executive
director,
if
there's
one
that's
created
for
this
body,
May
request
legal
services
and
advice
from
the
attorney
for
the
local
government
entity
that
provides
legal
services
to
the
local
government
for
which
the
executive
director
is
employed.
So
in
that
regard,
it's
putting
all
that
on
our
office.
F
The
city
attorney's
office,
which
advises
this
board
on
how
things
work
I,
could
not
put
either
of
these
entities
the
the
park
board
nor
y'all
at
risk,
without
giving
you
advice
on
the
front
end
of
it
that
that
would
be
potentially
an
open
meetings,
violation
for
them
to
occur
without
that
occurring
so
that
that's
what
I
would
be
doing.
Hopefully,
in
my
job.
E
E
E
E
I
Can't
say
with
the
certainty
that
you
will
be
more
more
at
risk.
I
I
can't
say
that
all
that
I
can
say
is:
is
that
as
a
as
a
public
servant
and
as
someone
who
is
charged
just
like
you
all
with
looking
out
for
our
constituents
and
the
city
itself
as
an
institution,
my
job
is
just
to
tell
you
where
the
dangers
lie
around
the
corner.
I
That's
so
I
can't
tell
you
that
Beyond
a
certainty
that
you
will
be
more
at
risk
of
liability,
I'm
just
simply
and
I'm,
not
an
attorney,
and
you
know
more
about
law
than
I
do
but
I'm
just
saying
that
I
think
in
in
our
discussions.
That
is
a
fear
that
we
have
is
that.
Does
this
open
us
up
for
more
legal
liability
if
we
are
knowingly
adjudicating
cases
in
contravention
of
a
law
that
is
in
effect,
and
that
is
that's
that
that
is
a
question
for
the
council
to
to
consider.
E
I
get
that
what
I'm
hearing
is
that
if
the
chief
asks
for
input
for
input
from
a
Citizens
committee
which
is
what's
happening
now
before
she
makes
the
final
decision
that,
for
some
reason,
there's
there's
an
idea
that
we
would
be
more
in
jeopardy,
and
that's
that's
not
Computing
with
me
and
and
that
that's
one
of
my
concerns
Phil.
The
other
concern
is
if
Park
were
to
go
on
and
I'm
following
up
on
on
the
chairs
coming.
E
F
You
yes,
ma'am
reason
for
moratorium,
in
my
mind,
is
to
give
you
a
little
chance
to
be
able
to
try
to
sort
through
some
of
these
items
before
October
the
29th,
because
you've
been
given
a
short
fuse
here
by
the
state.
You've
got
to
try
to
figure
out.
What
can
you
do
legally
within
that
time
frame?
How
can
this
body
meet
legally
and
comply
with
those
terms
in
based
upon
any
tweaks
that
we
can
do
to
the
state
law
and.
F
I
You
and
I
would
I
would
just
add
if
I
may
Mr
chair,
that
we
do
not
want
to
put
the
police
department
in
the
predicament
of
seeming
as
if
they
are
now
not
complying
with
state
law.
They
are
the
police
department.
They
they
enforce
laws,
so
I
think
that
we're
also
very
sort
of
concerned
about
the
Optics
and
the
perception
of
our
Police
Department
not
being
in
compliance
with
state
law.
I
P
O
O
We
we
also
have
so
the
40
is
what
is
currently
waiting
in
the
queue
for
Park
to
hear.
We
have
an
additional
35
to
37
cases
that
are
still
pending
in
the
investigative
process
prior
to
park.
Okay,
so
if
you
know,
if,
if
we're
pausing,
then
just
understanding
the
scope
of
this
you're
talking
about
through
end
of
October,
it
could
potentially
double
between
now
and
then
you'll
be
looking
it
over.
Maybe.
S
100
cases.
Okay,
thank
you
just
saying
the
light
on
that.
But
for
me
it's
not
even
about
the
40
cases.
For
me
it's
about
this
legislation
strictly
says
we
got
120
days
you.
You
can
look
I'm
good
at
putting
my
turning
hat
on
now.
If
you're
gonna
strip,
they
already
taken
saying
that
counselor
ain't
gonna
have
no
Authority.
After
these
120
days,
we
come
into
compliance,
but
before
that
we
still
got
the
authority.
S
That's
the
field
and
I
know
you
feel,
like
you
straddling
the
fence,
because
you
work
for
both
of
us,
but
right
now,
at
the
agenda
session
at
six
o'clock
you
work
for
us
you.
You
won't
answer
that
I
get
that
what
the
administration
you
know
they
gonna
re.
You
know
get
on
you
a
little
bit,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
this
law
says
we
got
120
days
to
come
into
compliance.
S
That's
what
that
tells
us
I
mean
we
can
still
operate
the
regular
way.
If
these
cases
from
2021
comes
up
to
be
heard,
they
can
still
hear
those
cases
if
they
don't,
they
could
still
be
in
the
backlog
like
they've
been
since
2021.
Some
of
them
and
Jermaine
and
his
crew
can
work
on
whatever
ordinance
to
get
us
into
compliance.
S
S
So,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
this
is
what
the
legislation
say.
We
you
that's
what
it
say.
We
got
120
days
to
come
into
compliance
until
then
we
still
operate
on
ain't.
Nobody
gonna
sue.
If
that's
the
case,
they
would
have
been
sued,
they've
been
waiting
since
2021
anyway.
Now
we
scared
they
gonna
sue
us.
We
have
people
sue
the
city
all
the
time.
Somebody
go
out
and
fall
on
the
sidewalk.
They
soon
it
can
happen
in
somebody
other
City.
They
still
want
to
come
to
Chattanooga
and
sewers.
S
S
S
D
F
If
they
do
so,
it
has
to
be
done
in
a
public
meeting
with
an
opportunity
for
anyone
to
appear
the
confidentiality
that
they
may
have
of.
The
reports
that
are
given
to
them
by
IA
and
all
of
the
body
Cam
and
Video
in
those
cases,
would
also
be
subject
to
being
reviewed,
which
is
confidential
under
state
law.
D
F
J
D
Of
course,
this
is
the
week
that
I
get
to
do
planning
and
zoning,
so
we
will
try
to
make.
This
is
quick
and
painless
as
possible.
Council
I'm
not
even
going
to
wait
for
the
room
to
clear
all
right,
well
call
to
order
our
planning
and
zoning
committee
drop.
A
motion
on
the
minutes
on
the
motion
in
a
second
without
opposition
minutes
will
stand
as
recorded
Karen.
Are
you
ready
for
the
fastest
planning
and
zoning
committee?
We've
had
in
a
really
really
long
time,
I.
D
C
So
number
56
57
in
May,
the
applicant
Africans
to
a
larger
scale,
building
six
units.
Three
stories
got
deferred
for
him
to
kind
of
revised
this
plan.
He
now
has
a
revised
plan.
That's
four
units
two
stories
and
the
applicant
has
some
conditions
that
he
has
discussed
with
the
neighborhood
I
believe
that
these
reflect
the
desire
moving
forward
and
so
case.
C
57
revised
conditions
would
be
residential
use
only
for
townhouse
units,
maximum
two-story
height
maximum
South
Greenwood,
primary
Street
facing
entry
door,
the
South
Greenwood
10
foot
setback
and
Bennett
Avenue,
a
seven
foot
setback
minimum,
so
that
was
ready
to
move
forward
with
those
conditions
that
I
can
pass
those
along
to
Phil
and
on
the
clerk
and
then
the
the
other
item
that
I'll
discuss
briefly
is
on
first
reading
next
week
and
that's
number
221
213..
We
discussed
this
briefly
at
planning
and
zoning
committee.