@startleseasily is a fervent observer of the Metro government's comings and goings. In this column, "On First Reading," she'll recap the bimonthly Metro Council meetings and provide her analysis. You can find her in the pew in the corner by the mic, ready to give public comment on whichever items stir her passions. Follow her on Twitter here.
Metro's chief development officer Bob Mendes waited in the wings, counting down the minutes until he could head home. A bevy of lobbyists huddled together in the gallery, no doubt billing untold sums of money to their clients for their mere presence at Tuesday’s meeting.
In the end, all parties interested in the passage of the East Bank development agreement could’ve saved their time and money. The agreement sailed through on the consent calendar without so much as a “thank you” to Mendes, who spearheaded negotiations on Mayor Freddie O’Connell’s behalf.
Fear not the lack of gratitude, though; the council showered Mendes with his fair share of praise earlier this month.
The Single-Family Wash
You may recall the rancor at the last Metro Council meeting surrounding a bill on first reading from Councilmember At-Large Quin Evans Segall. With the animosity demonstrated at the April 2 meeting, I thought for sure we’d get stuck in the same pointless spin cycle on Tuesday night when the bill came up for second reading.
Evans Segall had other ideas. To my surprise and delight, she was able to broker a compromise: a substitute bill co-sponsored by her chief detractor, Councilmember Jennifer Gamble. By getting Gamble on board, Evans Segall preempted debate from the Washer/Dryer Caucus and secured unanimous approval for her bill on second reading.
The substitute bill retains the requirement for a washer and dryer connection in single- and two-family dwellings — a requirement that does not exist for multifamily developments. The original bill would have removed the requirement for single- and two-family dwellings, putting them on par with multifamily.
For all the hand-wringing about harming the dignity of low-income families, the councilmembers attacking Evans Segall’s intentions at the last council meeting sure didn’t seem to understand what the bill in its original form would have done.
The government is not trying to repossess your washer or criminalize owning a dryer. As Evans Segall herself noted, the current market would likely dictate that washer and dryer hookups be included in new builds — though that could change as market conditions fluctuate. One might think this type of market-oriented argument would be appealing to the more conservative members of the body, but apparently their distrust of Evans Segall supersedes their love for the free market.
In any case, the majority of non-rich families live in multifamily housing — think apartments, townhomes and condos — as single-family housing prices remain out of reach for most Nashvillians. If councilmembers are convinced that having a personal washer and dryer is essential to the well-being of Davidson County residents, they should sponsor a bill to extend this requirement to all types of housing.
Speaking on the substitute bill, Evans Segall expresses thanks to Gamble for her “leadership and support in incorporating public and colleagues’ feedback.” She adds: “Codes and zoning reform almost always involves hard conversations and compromises, and I look forward to continued collaboration ... on these issues during this term.”
Evans Segall is a transactional lawyer by trade; she’s well-practiced in the art of hammering out deals that leave everyone feeling happy-ish. Perhaps more relevant, though: She’s a mom of three kids. You simply can’t survive that without knowing how to turn down the heat on irrationally explosive arguments.
Automated scanners approved for countywide implementation despite protests from community and councilmembers
Again?
We’re back on license plate readers, folks.
For nearly three-and-a-half years now, Metro elected officials have hemmed and hawed over plans to implement a countywide license plate reader program.
After a six-month limited-scope trial run last year, the Metro Nashville Police Department received the previous council’s blessing for full implementation of LPRs throughout the county, with no end date in sight.
Shortly thereafter, the landscape changed.
Freddie O’Connell, who consistently opposed license plate readers during his eight years on the Metro Council, was elected mayor.
I assumed that, once in office, O’Connell would tack to the center on this issue, saying something to the effect of, “This is a decision for the legislative body to make, and I will respect their decision.” It would’ve been an easy out.
But he didn’t. And as the months have ticked by with no legislation filed to approve LPR vendor contracts — the next step before the program can actually begin — I’ve regained some hope about O’Connell’s intentions.
In January, the MNPD held a series of “precinct advisory group” meetings about LPRs. With groups handpicked by the police themselves, the meetings reeked of manufactured consent. To hear the MNPD representatives talk about it, LPRs were a foregone conclusion, a simple matter of crossing a few T’s and dotting some stray I’s.
Three forms of police technology raise questions about privacy and public safety
In a statement provided around the time of those meetings, the mayor’s office wrote: “The mayor has conditioned any further consideration of LPRs on a more meaningful process of public engagement around the data collected from the pilot program as well as direct engagement with the concerns raised by community organizations on behalf of vulnerable populations.”
It seems the time has come for said public engagement. Next week, Nashvillians will have the opportunity to participate in a series of “community conversations” — on April 22, 23 and 25. The stated intention of these conversations — which will include presentations from the MNPD and the Community Review Board — is to “provide data and other information, understand concerns, and help shape future considerations around license plate readers.”
Friends, I know you’re tired of giving feedback that seems to fall on deaf ears. But if you can muster the tolerance for just one or two more meetings, it might just make a difference.
