City Commission - Regular Meeting

Obviously, we don't necessarily know what the people that are homeless have been through nor what their conditions are. So I think if we have a better understanding of what the law says about it, I think at that point maybe we can move forward and find a collective way to start working with this and not keep kicking the can down the road and start trying to deal with it if we can.

Could you- Would you like for me to provide a quick overview right now?

Yes, if you could, for me please.

I will try and keep this at the baseline. So the challenge that you have, and it's not unique under Franklin, it's any city in any state throughout the country, is that every single one of us has First Amendment rights that are protected and that the government cannot infringe upon. And so the question that comes up when you are dealing with a specific group of people is the way that you go about enacting legislation cannot start infringing upon their rights and the one that usually comes up in the context of homelessness is the first amendment and so what you have seen some communities do successfully and others do unsuccessfully is try and pass ordinances to address this but they do have to be tailored in a way that still protects each person in their individual speech while also addressing things like public safety and general well-being and so it's trying to navigate those two guideposts in a way that yields something that is workable for the community and hopefully addresses the underlying issue

Basically, you just can't just tell them you got to go and push them out without creating some type of program or programs that could help them. I know that over the years, we've supported a few programs here. Obviously, Good Samaritans, Hope Harbor, even the 211 United Way. some of those programs have been around for a long time and they've been essential in this community uh mayor i'd like to maybe sit down with you sometime in the commission as a whole i'd like to sit down and present something to the commission uh maybe to create a group and have someone from each one of those organizations sit down and i'll even serve on the group uh and even some of the some of the outside churches that has been working with them. I know the Presbyterian Church has been very gracious with giving food and helping and I think Harvester Warehouse is also has worked with them and maybe invite some of these into some of these individual churches and groups and maybe even the housing authorities maybe could work with us as well because the work they do is helping people as well. The Habitat for Humanity. See, we collectively get these groups together and sit down and maybe have some conversation. And again, maybe that's something we'll talk about and bring before the commission and see if we can get any approval. But before I, you know, I'm somewhat done with that, but if anybody else has got anything they want to add on, and I don't want to prolong this conversation because we do have a long agenda, but I just wanted to bring that out. And again, I'm bringing this forth today because I think The can has been kicked down the road long enough, and we need to have some real heart conversation addressing the situation. It's not as bad as it was a few years ago, but at any day, it could just ramp up. And we have to have some proactive plan in place to try to help deal with this if we could.

so i you know it's open up for anybody else that may have something that they want commissioner stewart that's that's a very good uh that's a very good comment and uh i would be willing to sit down with the commission and any uh community members that would be interested and we can talk about that and do as much try to do as much as we can to help the situation and i think i think that's a very uh a good

Well, let's see if we can identify some groups that we can maybe send out something, see if they would be interested in participating, and then we can start move from there.

You mentioned some ways that people can get help, and those that you mentioned, they have been in service a good while. Exactly. And there's no need for anyone in Simpson County to ever go hungry. First Baptist Church does Feeding America every week. The Catholic Church does feeding. The churches and organizations that you mentioned, they help. So there's lots of help out there for people. And I think maybe we should do a better job. I don't know, I'm talking to myself. Maybe we should do a better job of getting that information out to people. But that's a good thought and we can talk about that and go from here on that. Anyone else have any comment?

I would just include the Human Rights Commission in that discussion.

We will move on to approval of minutes and that'll be the approval of minutes of the August 10th, 2026 regular meeting.

Make a motion to approve.

We have a motion by Commissioner Powell. Do I have a second? Second, Mayor. Second by Commissioner McQuarrie. Are there any comments or questions concerning? If not, we'll have a roll call vote. Kathy?

Commissioner Powell?

Yes.

Commissioner Bush?

Yes.

Mayor Dixon?

Yes. Commissioner McQuarrie?

Yes. Commissioner Stewart?

Yes.

And that motion passes.

Thank you, Kathy. We will move on to recognitions. And I don't believe we have any today. Community services? No community services. We'll move on to general government. And under general government will be discussion and a possible action regarding proposed ordinance setting the 2026 real and personal property tax rate. And Jennifer has spent a lot of time on that and a lot of work. And Jennifer, you can take off.

Yes, thank you all. Thanks, Mayor. Thanks, Commissioner. This year, we've received the 26 certified valuations from PVA and have completed the calculations to set the 26 property tax rates. The table that you have in front of you shows the calculated compensating rate and the compensating plus four rate for the 26 tax year and we use the DLG calculation based upon that KRS. So with the comparison to the 27 budget. So you can see all of those comparisons in the table worksheet that was provided to you in your agenda packet. The compensating rate is the 10.6, the compensating plus four is the 11.0 and then the 25 rate is the 10.8. So I just bring this before you today for you all to have discussion and to set that possible rate.

What was the compensating rate?

Compensating was 10.6 and that would be reducing the rate from the current year that we have here for 25. And just keep in mind, this does compound each year, so in the reduction or increase, you have to think about that. It's an over, year-over-year change. It's not just a one-year hit for our revenue, so.

Basically means it'd be the 4% plus the .4% that we got last year on the non-cop rate, which equates to about, $1,200 maybe?

Are you talking about the compensating rate?

No, you was explaining how the comp rate worked. And I understand the theory of if you do the 4% increase, next year that increase, 4%, would be added on to the following year, too, so you don't get behind.

Correct. Correct. Yes. But the state limits that compensating rate changes with each assessment value each year.

We're limited on how high that can go.

So you're saying if you take the compensating rate, we're going to have a budget shortfall of $30,000?

Correct.

Do we typically get more than what they? I know in other taxing districts, we always typically got more than what was anticipated by the state. Nope, I've not seen that since I've been doing it.

These are the assessment values that we got from Allison. That is what she will give us the detail for. We will have our contractor bill out bills to that amount and we will collect what we collect. It's not gonna be any more than this assessment equals and most likely we end up not collecting about $50,000 every year because people just don't pay. So we never get more than this.

So Jennifer, when we talk about these numbers, compensating rates, trying to get the general public to understand, that's a complicated process. It's a hard way to explain something. But here's what I'd like for you to tell the public. People like to know, OK, how does this affect me and my bottom line.

Correct. And I'm glad you asked that, Commissioner, because, right, we do have that comparison on the back of your sheet. If you look at the compensating rate, which would be the 10.6, which would be reducing the rate from what we currently have, the tax bills would go down approximately $5 based on an assessment of $250,000. So, and then if you do the compensating plus four, you see the increase, and then the 2005 rate, it would be a decrease as well, so. You see that based on that $250,000 tax assessment based on the rates, all three of those rates.

But in essence, it's a $5 difference between the different rates if your house is valued at $250,000.

Yes, if you have a house that's valued at $250,000, at 10.6, it's $265 tax due. At $250,000 a house, 11% is $275. So you're talking about an increase of $10. I don't like raising taxes, but we hear to chew up the bad of it as well and make tough decisions. When you talk about a $30,000 decrease in your general fund, that means that something is going to be of severe impact. The cost of everything goes up, and I'm not making excuses because I have to do it in everyday life as well. I don't like it, but it's just a part of what it is. So I just hope that whatever route we take to keep us from falling under, that the community will understand what it is that's taking place here, and that whatever is said about it, that the impact, it's not as bad as it sounds. We're talking about a $10 increase on a 200. So please understand that if we choose to do that, because it is a tough decision that we have to make when we talk about increasing versus decreasing taxes. And I know everybody loves a decrease.

But you know and Commissioner I would like to just point out at the current rate that you have this year Let's say I had a tax bill that was sent to me for the assessed value of 250 at the current rate Your tax bill would have been two hundred and seventy dollars Based on the new rate if you go with the compensating plus four you're looking at a five dollar increase. Okay Yeah

Okay, I think that's very important that people understand that process and what the bottom line impact's gonna be.

And just so the public understands, too, that if you don't keep up, it'll come back to bite you. somewhere down the road. That's exactly, I mean, you'll get a much higher increase somewhere down the road. That's what's gonna happen to you. So that's, and I think that is the public, as long as the public understands that too. And.

So what are you asking for today?

I'm asking for the commission to decide the property tax rate for the 2026 calendar year and I'll just need a, A motion to set forward with that so we can have the first reading of the ordinance today.

I'll make that motion. No more discussion.

I'll just need you to be detailed as what rate you're wanting to make that motion. Oh, okay. All right. Thank you, Commissioner.

Good question. Thank you for really being back in line. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. You know, due to the nature of taking the hit of losing $30,000, I move that we do the compensation plus 4% rate. And reasoning is making sure that we stay at a good place with our income coming in so that we can continue to provide the services we provide for this community and to improve those services. So that's my explanation behind why I feel that way. So I'm going with the compensation plus four, that's my motion.

We have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Stewart. Do we have a second?

So you're going with the middle of the pipe? Yes.

I'm going with where it goes from 11 to 11, yeah.

I'll second it.

Seconded by Commissioner Powell. Any further comments or questions? We'll have a roll call vote, Kathy.

We just need sponsors. We just need sponsors. We have a motion on the floor. Let's settle that, then we'll get sponsors. Commissioner Stewart? Yes. Commissioner McCrary?

No.

Mayor Dixon?

Yes.

Commissioner Bush?

No.

Commissioner Powell?

Yes.

And that motion passes. And we'll also need two sponsors

We need another sponsor for the ordinance.

Do you want to do that, Commissioner Powell? Okay.

Then we'll have a, there will be a second reading.

We'll do a first reading today and a second reading on September the 14th. The compensating plus four requires a public hearing. Would you all be amenable to that for Monday the 14th and 11th? 45 a.m.? Yes. Just 15 minutes per hour? Yes.

We always do. We always do.

Okay.

No, thank you, Kathy, I appreciate that help. No, you're good. You're good. Well, I appreciate it. Takes a team effort. Thank you all.

Thank you, Jennifer. Okay, under general government moving on, we will have discussion or possible action regarding proposed ordinance amending Franklin planning and zoning regulations regarding the qualified manufactured homes, and Amanda is going to speak to that, and...

Thank you, Mayor. So this is bringing our planning and our ordinances and our planning and zoning regulations into conformity with what the state general assembly did this spring. And essentially it provides a defined term for a qualified manufactured home. But the idea is that these are like the what we would consider like modular homes that are assembled within a site and then brought and constructed. And the idea is that it just provides a more affordable option, seeing as how that's something that is on people's minds. It's a more affordable option to have in residential areas. They still have to, whatever residential area they're in, they still have to comply with those residential requirements. It's just providing a different and alternative form of housing in that zone. So, yeah. Happy to answer any questions. Otherwise, we would just need two sponsors, and I would let Ms. Cathy read the ordinance out loud.

I will ask for two sponsors for it.

Powell, and then to McCrary.

Thank you. No, this just brings it in line with the state. Yes, it does. So in this instance, can cities make it, they can't make it more restrictive than what the state has allowed, correct?

so what they can do is they can follow the the state mandates on it um if you go through and you read the way that it's written what you can't do is you can't single out these homes and say well because you are a qualified manufactured home we're going to hold you to a higher standard than everybody else in your zone So your home has held to the same standard as everybody in your zone. Now if your zone is held to a more stringent standard than what the state would have, then I think that would be acceptable because you're not being singled out as a qualified manufactured home. You're being treated like everybody else in your residential area. No problem.

You have your two sponsors.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Okay, moving on under general government will be discussion or possible action regarding the renewal agreement with Comcast. And Carol, you wanna?

Sure. We utilize a contract with Comcast to livestream WBKM news on the city of Franklin's Comcast Channel 3. We've been doing that for several years. It's a three year contract and it's up for renewal. The new rate will be about $208 per month, which is a $20 per month increase since the renewal back in 2023. The contract was there for you to review. It's a fairly simple two-page contract. Recommended action, motion to approve a three-year contract renewal agreement with Comcast Business and authorize the mayor or his designee to sign the renewal agreement.

Carol, just one question. Has Comcast ever released a number of customers they have in this community?

I do not know.

No, you don't know. I'm just curious to know. Because I know a lot of people that stream, do different things.

I know if it goes down, we get some calls. Yes.

There are some people using it. We have Fiber, which a lot of people are using. And they do a lot of streaming at home. And I don't know how much, I don't know how many customer base that Comcast has. But I don't want to interfere with 13 News, the 13, Channel 13, to nobody that's got it. But I'm just curious to know that. Okay.

And this does live stream WBKO and the city of Franklin, Channel 9. I mean, that's, we have no control of their price increases. You've heard the proposed motion. Do we have a motion to that effect?

I'll make the motion.

Okay, you have a motion by Commissioner Stewart. Second. Second by Commissioner Powell. Powell, okay. And we'll, any further comments or questions? And all in favor, aye. Any opposition? And that motion carries. Thank you, thank you. Okay, we will move on to discussion of possible action regarding software agreement for planning and zoning, and Carol will speak to that also.

Yeah, so we have reached out to a company called iWork who provides cloud-based software primarily used by local governments, cities, counties, whatever. And it's for public planning and zoning, permitting, code enforcement, those kind of functionalities. What we currently use is just our GIS map and we can put on there a dot at the address where a permit has been applied for. We can then add a dot when we know there's inspections that have been done so we can pull up that map and get that information. Invoicing is all handled separately through an Excel spreadsheet. If you know the planning and zoning rules and those charges, there's several lines to that. Mistakes happen just because we're keying in a bunch of stuff. And so that's handled all outside the system and then we keep a lot of paper files for all of that. Troy Mills, who is our primary inspector now for planning and zoning, he obviously does a lot of inspections, not just here but other places, and he has recommended this iWork because he's very familiar with it, he uses it in all the other locations, he's an inspector. So we have had, I think, three Zoom calls with them, gone through the functionality both of planning and zoning, permitting, and code enforcement, and compared to our current system, it is gonna have a lot more functionality. It's all integrated, meaning that if Mo needs to look and see if she sees somebody building and wants to know, hey, do they have a permit, she can just look it up on her iPad while she's out and about. She doesn't have to call and ask somebody else to look it up for her. The invoicing is automatic. The rates will be loaded in and you put in the square footage of the facility and what kind of inspection you're gonna need and it'll do the math and spit out an invoice. I think it will simplify what we do. It'll make not, I mean, Abby estimated we'd save a ream of paper every single week just because of all the stuff she's printing for these permits. And then she has to file them, and then we have records retention rules to follow and all of that. So that could all just be electronic. We'd still file the records rules, but it would just be not so much paper to deal with. We currently pay about 60, what'd I say, 6,600 for the code enforcement software already. We started that about four years ago, I believe. So to get into this new contract, there's a one-time implementation fee of $10,000. and then the ongoing annual charge is $14,500 and that's for a three year service agreement, that's the annual charge. So it would be about almost $8,000 increase annually over what we're currently paying for code enforcement. but I just think it would be a much better solution. It also has the functionality to automatically create agendas and packets for Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. Abby can then use it, taking those minutes, or those agendas, it converts them into a minutes package and she can type in the minutes as the meeting is going on. It allows all that to be sent out electronically as one packet to the Commission on the Planning and Zoning Board. So I just think it would be an overall improvement over what we have now if the commission is willing to do that. So my ask is to allow the city to enter a three year agreement with I work for planning and zoning permit management and code enforcement applications and authorize the mayor or his designee to sign the service agreement and any other documents related to the agreement. Any questions?

So when we were looking at this, did we list our use cases on what we want the software package to actually do? And then did we?

I'm sorry, I missed part of that. What did you say?

When we were looking into this, did we list our use cases on what we want the software to do and then rank that with other software packages?

No, we have not looked at others. We took Troy's recommendation. We can do that if you want us to do that. He's familiar with several, so we were relying on him.

I mean, I just think it's, I mean, I just have a hard time approving something when we've done no further due diligence to see if there's other packages, especially when we're not listing our use cases, and then assigning a weight to must haves and then nice to haves.

Well, I mean, we went through that with them when we were on the call, yes, if that's what you mean.

No, I understand, but I'm just saying, like, we haven't listed, so, I mean, in the past, when, I mean, obviously it's a different, a little bit different scenario because i've done it for larger companies but we will list our use cases and then this is what the software must do based on our use cases and then we have another set of use cases that are nice to have and then we will stack rank those and then everything that is a must have is a higher weight And so, I mean, I realize there's not a lot of people. You know, I realize you're working on a gun, but I had a hard time proving something that's where I'm just taking the word of someone. I mean, for that, I mean, that would be a no. I've also, I got serious issues with code enforcement, but that's a whole separate conversation.

Are you saying that you think the software may be more than what we need?

I mean, it could be more, it could be less. We don't know. I mean, we haven't clearly defined what we need the software to do or what use cases we're trying to accomplish with the software. And it doesn't have to be a detailed list. I mean, you know, it's just that we've got to we're going to do things correctly. We've got to go through and we've got to assign these cases to this stuff before we actually go out and purchase things. That's at least my perspective on it. I'm sorry.

I mean, I'm relying on an inspector who's done this for many, many years and has used several sets of software. He's seen what ours is like and how difficult it is when he's out in the field.

No, I'm sure he's got a lot of difficulties, but as we've seen in this past year, we've gone through several inspectors. So, you know, my hopes is that maybe this program would be a good fit. But based on everything that I'm seeing here, I don't see how it is and I don't see how We've gone through so many inspectors that taking the word that this gentleman would be beneficial to the city.

Probably none of the other inspectors actually use the system. Maybe one of them did. I know they're invoicing it to us was not good. It was all some of them were half sheets handwritten each time. Some were Excel sheets that were pages and pages just by address, hand typed in. So I don't think any of them were nearly as tech savvy, is my guess. But I can't swear to that. But it's up to the commission. We can look at some other ones.

I would trust that Carol being our interim city manager, she does a great job of going through things and selecting these resources and I would trust her judgment. Well, how about this?

What's the time frame? I know the sooner the better with all the the building and the code enforcement i know that's a it's a sensitive issue um i know carol i know you're representing um the the building inspector electrical inspector i know you're representing his suggestion what if we what if we waited at our next meeting and have him here that he can address the commission as to the why.

I don't think that will answer Kelly's. I think we can look at another software package or two. We'll have to search those out. We're not under a deadline. What we have now functions. It's just not the easiest. It's not ideal. We're just trying to improve and automate a little bit and make it faster for us and more. but more accurate probably overall. It's up to you guys, however you want us to move forward.

Well, Mayor, I'm gonna make a motion. Okay. I wanna make a motion that we accept it. The reason I'm making this motion that we accept it is because we get this agenda and we can do our homework coming into this meeting. to find out a lot of these things and a lot of these questions that we would have. Obviously, we have not, there's a lot of things out of date in our community that needs to be brought up to date. and a lot of the problems that we previously have is because of that, and not to nobody's fault, but we're seeing a tremendous growth. Everybody knows that all this stuff is taking place. We don't have the mechanisms in place to keep us at a good place of knowing what's happening. We're gonna continue to butt heads, cross-reference on things, which creates a mess. I'm not saying that this is the say-all, be-all, fix-to-it, but when we have situations where we can improve how business is done in this community, I think we need to really take a look at that. Some of the technicalities of it, we can talk about and discuss that, but if there's something that can improve the character of what it is we do without creating, that makes things a lot more simpler and less complicated, I think we need to give that, we have to consider that and look at it. And that's the reason why that I'm voting yes that we move forward with this process.

So we have a motion on the floor to accept this proposed motion. Do I have a second? We have a second by Commissioner Powell. Is there any further discussion?

and you answered or you further verified my concern is that we don't know if this is the end all be all solution. And we're once again making decisions without having all the information. And it has nothing to do with getting the agenda packets a week ahead of time. understand what use cases we're trying to solve and then what other applications out there, whether it be an actual software application or a piece of equipment or whatever, actually solves those problems. So if you're not sure if it's the end-all, be-all solution, then it's not the end-all, be-all solution. That's why it's up there.

Well, it's a rebuttal, and I don't want to get off into going back and forth. Yes, these agenda packages that we have now, a week ahead of time, it does give us an opportunity. to investigate any question, any concern that we have. I do take the liberty to do that. I'm just speaking for myself. So therefore, when I do get to the meeting, I'm very versed and well formed in something that I feel adamant about. Or if I feel like that it's not, then I'll ask questions and I have a reason why I feel that way.

I understand, but let's be clear about the agenda packets. The agenda packets come out a week early because I forced the issue. well i mean so therefore there you have it you have a reason you know you're still not gentlemen we've got a motion on the floor is there any more discussion related to that motion yeah so you're not grasping the concept that i'm trying to relay here is that you haven't defined your use cases for this software package and you're making a

judgment without having the full data so we may not have defined the use cases but planning and zoning has reviewed this code enforcement has reviewed this i reviewed this i don't know the specifics but the pieces i knew anything about we did make sure it met our needs

They think it's way better than what we have.

After discussion. After discussion, we will call for a vote. Roll call. Roll call vote.

Mayor, OK. Commissioner Powell? Yes. Commissioner Bush?

No.

Mayor Dixie? Yes. Commissioner McCrary?

Yes.

Commissioner Stewart? Yes. And that motion passes.

Thank you, Kathy. We will move on to discussion and a possible action regarding board appointments, and that's on page 39. Carol, you want to speak to?

So we have an opening on the Franklin Planning and Zoning Board, and I would like to recommend appointing Cody Shuler to the board. Mayor Dixon, Debbie Thornton, Carter Munday, and I met with him, and we feel he would be a great asset to the board. The appointment would be for a four-year term that will expire on September 1st of 2030. sally maloney is currently serving on the epb board of directors and her term is expiring in september we would like to recommend reappointing sally maloney to the epb board of directors for a four-year term that will expire on september 30th of 2030. okay okay you've heard the proposed motion question do we have any more opens on the pnz board vacancies that will make us full

That will fill us up at this point.

I think we have one maybe in a year that expires.

Who's this replacing?

This would be replacing John Mayer.

John Mayer.

Did John Mayer resign or was it his expiration?

He just asked not to be reappointed. His term. His term expired in a year when we formed that board. a year ago he staggered those terms so everyone wouldn't expire at the same time so his term expired and he asked not to be reappointed can we can we do them both yeah we can okay we have a motion by commissioner powell second second second by commissioner stewart any further comments or questions

Roll call vote, Kathy, please.

Commissioner Stewart? Yes. Commissioner McCrary? Yes. Mayor Dixon?

Yes.

Commissioner Bush?

Yes.

Commissioner Powell?

Yes.

And that motion passes.

Thank you very much, Kathy. Okay, moving on under general government will be discussion and or possible action regarding the award of bid for the Kroger Distribution Center Road construction project. And Carol has spent hours and hours and hours and Amanda on this. So we will let Carol speak to that.

So the city published an invitation to bid number 202707, Kroger Distribution Center Road. Jeff Arnold from Jaycon Consulting administered the bid documents and drawings for the bid on behalf of the city. The commission had approved that agreement back on the July 27th meeting. We held the bid opening on August 20th at 10 a.m. and we had two bidders, RD Site Work LLC, total bid $7,764,174. And Scotty's Contracting in Stone, total cost $8,737,702.17. The bid documents were attached for your review. Based on the bid evaluation from Jaycon Consulting, Jeff has recommended the city to award the bid to RD Site Work in the total amount including the unclassified ad alternate of $7,764,174. So if the commission agrees with that recommendation, it would be to award bid twenty twenty seven oh seven for the construction of the Kroger Distribution Center Road in the amount of seven million seven sixty four one seventy four and authorize the mayor or the designee to sign any and all documentation related to this project.

We keep calling this the Kroger Access Road, but it's really the OTN Road.

So the road is for the Kroger distribution that's being built out in that area.

The Kroger distribution center will utilize the road. There's going to be 400 trucks a day. It's for the private developers to OT anchor. Kroger will utilize the road.

so well my understanding is that property has been sold to kroger so they actually own the property and would use the road as well as any additional industries that would come out there in the future or other other people in that area which includes the otn group and then we have to we're going to work with the otn group on this

assuming that they were to build something out there in the future they would also have the benefit of the road we've entered into an agreement with the other hand group to get reimbursed we have entered into a contract with the state the state has agreed to fund this road up to eight million seven something in this current fiscal year for the state. Once it's built, they'll reimburse us for that. They left any excess above that amount that they're agreeing to would be the city's responsibility. The city was not willing to sign on to that risk. So we signed an agreement with Tenkey, the developer, that if it goes over that amount, they would cover any overages to protect the city from having an unknown liability at this point.

And then after the one-year period, after everything stays.

After one year, we'll go out there and make a visual inspection. If there's any problems with that road, it has to be repaired before we take it over.

Right. And then once we take it over, we're responsible for snow removal, potholes, everything else. Correct. Correct.

As is the custom with every road.

As we are with any other road in the city. We're responsible for any road in the city, for any repairs that need to be made, always.

As it relates to industrial development, all our industrial parks is under the same provision. It's nothing different. It's nothing different than any of the other industries, industrial parks, or anything like that. It's nothing different.

No, I agree. I understand. I just don't think that it should be and they should maintain it, but here we are maintaining it.

They did not offer that, they just offered to pay for it. The state offered the funding for it.

Carol, what's the state gonna give us up to?

8.7 million something? I think it's like 8.6. 8.6, yeah.

Okay, so this is a legitimate question. So what's the chances of it exceeding, I mean that's almost a million dollar,

there's always potential for change orders and things in that fashion and that's one of the roles that Jeff would serve as the city's representative is to address those and to see that so it would really depend on the circumstances I can throw out an example that I'm not saying that this is the case or that it would happen but if there was the need to go in and potentially require more asphalt than we thought or it required more rock for the initial layering and to do testing and things of that nature. That might be something that requires a change order and then Jeff would review that and sign off on whether or not that was appropriate and go from there.

Darryl, with your experience, how often does that happen or is it a big variance off of a quote like that versus reality?

I mean, I couldn't hear everything she said. Sorry.

Yeah, what's, I mean, what's, what, But what have you seen in the past? Would it be, do you feel like it'd be more than a million dollar variance?

You have heard the proposed motion. Do I have a motion to that effect?

To go with the proposed $7,764,174.

I'll make the motion.

And any overages, the city is not responsible for. Absolutely.

As it is stated in the agreement, I make that motion pertaining to that and for you to sign any and all documents related to effectuate this deal.

Do I have a second? Second. We have a second by Commissioner Powell. Do we have any further comments?

One, Mayor. Just one. I know it's come with a lot of scrutiny, but this is a gift for us. As we look at the tax dollars that we pay, this is something that's being reimbursed back to us. Obviously that land, again, I think I made this point last week, but I'm gonna say it again. That land had been targeted some time ago for industrial development. The biggest issue that we were gonna, and being on the industrial board at some point, we will probably run out of land for industrial recruitment. So we do have another piece of partial out there, although it's privately owned. In some degrees, that's good. In some degrees, it's bad. And the good is that we have it, the land for it to go on. But in the past, industrial authorities pretty much could dictate what goes in and what goes out. But we still have a voice in that process. But the biggest problem that we had with that land back there was trying to figure out how to get to it. There was no viable way at that point in time to know what process was going to be put in place to get to that road. And obviously, as all of this unfolds, the state has given money to put a road back there for future industrial development on top of the programs. So again, I'll say that this is a gift for us. It's not really a gift because it's our money. but you know the state has the right to allocate money when and where they so choose to do it and they've decided to invest into our community and uh i'm grateful that they that they chose to do that irregardless do you know what the five and the ten year cost is going to be to maintain this road probably the same if it is it won't be the same as the other it's probably a little bit more do you have any idea what they'll do i don't know do you

Put the money up to build the road. We have a motion, and we have a second. And we'll have a roll call vote.

I'll start with you, Mayor Nixon.

Yes.

Kushner Bush?

No.

Kushner McCrary?

Not before vote. I agree with Kelly on some points. I'm not a big fan of 10 key kind of cover the excess cost. just because of the situation and the recent governor's executive order about being forthcoming with all the information, and I'm sure you guys know about that. However, with what Carol said and Darrell said, and me personally, I don't think it's gonna exceed a million dollar variance, but again, I'm voting on the behalf of the city and saving us money or the potential of. However, I'm not real happy about the people that are securing it. Even though it does benefit us, but I will still vote yes.

CHRISTIE WOODARD. Commissioner Stewart? Yes. CHRISTIE WOODARD. And Commissioner Powell?

Yes.

CHRISTIE WOODARD. That motion passes. DAVID BURRAGE.

Thank you, Kathy.

Moving on, under general government, we'll have discussion and a possible action regarding resolution authorizing a pilot agreement with the Ashgrove Real Estate Holdings, and Carol will bring that to us also.

So we have a resolution, as you said, G2026 that would authorize a pilot program, which is a payment in lieu of taxes. That's what that stands for. With Ashgrove Real Estate Holdings and GeoQuest, they have purchased the old Toyo property out on Page Drive. The county has agreed to issue industrial revenue bonds, but this agreement is an agreement that the school system will be made whole on property taxes even in light of that industrial revenue bonds. That's what this does. So the request is for the motion to approve City of Franklin Resolution G2026, authorizing the payment in lieu of taxes agreement to assist Ashgrove Real Estate Holdings LLC in the development of an industrial project and further authorize the mayor or his designee to execute the pilot agreement on behalf of the city.

You all have heard the proposed motion. Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Bush.

Second.

Commissioner Powell. We have a motion by Commissioner Powell.

I didn't know if Commissioner Bush seconded it or not.

Did you second that, Kelly? I didn't hear. It's hard to hear. I'll second the motion, Mayor. We have a second by Commissioner Stewart. Any further comments or questions? We'll have a roll call vote, Kathy.

Commissioner Powell?

Yes.

Commissioner Bush?

Yes.

Mayor Dixon? Yes. Commissioner McCrary? Yes. Commissioner Stewart? Yes. And that motion passes.

OK. Thank you very much, Kathy. We will move on to public safety. Anything under public safety? Utilities, nothing under utilities. There is something under utilities. With discussion or possible action regarding award a bid for wastewater treatment plant bar screen equipment. And Richard or Carol, keep going.

I'll handle this in Trent's absence today. So we published an invitation to bid 202704, wastewater treatment plant flow screens and washing compactors equipment bid. We only had one bidder. That bid opening was on Friday, August the 7th. Southern Sales Company bid $572,000. We evaluated it, looked at their qualifications. We have worked with them in the past and have been satisfied with their service to us. We would like to recommend that we award this bid, 202704, for the equipment purchase of flow screens and washing compactors to Southern States Company in the amount of 572,000 and authorize the mayor to sign any and all documents related to this project. and this was a budgeted item that we yes actually was in last year's budget partially we need to roll that forward in the first amendment but yeah yeah um we actually did this in the installation as one package several months ago and it came in significantly higher um so we rebid it separate and i think we took about 180 000 or so out of it something like that almost 20

I'll make that motion.

DAVID BURRAGE. OK, we have a motion by Commissioner McQuarrie, second by Commissioner Bush. Any further comments or questions? If not, Cathy, would you do a roll call vote, please?

Commissioner Stewart? Yes. Commissioner McQuarrie? Yes. Mayor Nixon? Yes. Commissioner Bush? Yes. Commissioner Powell?

Yes.

And that motion passes.

Thank you, Kathy. Okay, moving on, we'll have discussion or possible action regarding award a bid for wastewater treatment plant bar screen installation. And Carol will speak to that also.

So this bid was 2027.05 and this is for the installation of the equipment that we just approved the purchase for, the flow screens and washing compactors. We had a bid opening Wednesday, August 12th and we had two bidders. Scott and Reuter's bid was $141,150 and Herrick Company bid $162,500. We went through our normal bid evaluation, looked at their, we did a lot of work with Scott and Ritter, we checked references on Herrick and scored them and the proposal is that we award bid 202705 for the installation of flow screens and washing compactors to Scott and Ritter in the amount of $141,150 and authorize the mayor or his designee to sign any and all documentation related to the project. I don't know that we had enough in there for the whole amount last year, so I haven't looked at that that closely. But I don't think there'll be any surplus.

Okay, we have a motion.

We have a motion by Commissioner Bush Second. Second by Commissioner McQuarrie. Any further comments or questions? If not, Kathy, can we have a roll call vote?

Commissioner Powell? Yes. Commissioner Bush?

Yes.

Mayor Dixon? Yes.

Commissioner McQuarrie?

Yes. Commissioner Stewart?

Yes.

And that motion passes.

Thank you again, Kathy. And from here, we will move on to ordinances. And Kathy Dillard will bring those to us.

Thank you, Mayor. We'll have first summary readings of ordinance number 2026016, an ordinance setting forth a property tax rate for the city of Franklin, Kentucky for the tax year 2026. calculated using the certified property assessments as provided by the simpson county property evaluation administrator and levying an ad valorem tax of 0.11 cents per 100 assessed valuation on all taxable real property within the jurisdiction and an ad valorem tax of 0.11 cents per 100 assessed valuation on all taxable tangible personal property and merchandise inventory within the jurisdiction and we'll move on and have first summary reading of ordinance number 2026 017 an ordinance amending the city of franklin zoning regulations to ensure compliance with KRS 100.348 as amended by House Bill 160 related to qualified manufactured homes. This concludes first summary reading of both of these ordinances. They will become effective upon passage and publication and will be posted on the city's website. A full copy of these ordinances are available on request by contacting the city clerk at City Hall during normal business hours.

OK.

Thank you very much, Kathy. From here, we will move on to executive session. And under executive session is personnel. And that would be discussions or hearings which might lead to the appointment, discipline, or dismissal of an individual employee or member. And that's under KRS 61.8101F. Also, we have litigation and this discussion of proposed or pending litigation under KRS 618.8101C. And I will need a motion to go into executive session.

I think we're taking litigation out, correct? Yes, that I understand.

We're taking litigation off for executive session.

We have a motion to go into executive session. Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Powell. All in favor, aye. Aye. And we now move into executive session. I will need a motion to come out of executive session. We have a motion by Commissioner Bush. Second, Mayor. Second by Commissioner Stewart. All in favor, aye. Aye. And we now move back into regular session. And I believe we have some motions to come. We have three or four to come before the floor. So at this time.

I've got the first one, Mayor. We need a motion to accept Jason Richardson's retirement effective September 1st, 2026.

I'll make that motion.

We have a motion by Commissioner Bush. Second. Second by Commissioner McQuarrie. All in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposition? And that motion carries. Okay.

Thank you, Mayor. The next motion that we will have, assuming someone's willing to make it, will be a motion for permission to create and then subsequently post a deputy city clerk position. So if anybody would like to make that motion.

I'll make that motion. We have a motion by Commissioner Bush. Second. Second by Commissioner Powell. All in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposition? And that motion carries.

And then the next motion will be to have a special call meeting. That special call meeting will take place on August 31st at 8 o'clock in the morning. And that will be for purposes of executive session, specifically under KRS 61810, parentheses 1F. personnel discussions or hearings which might lead to the appointment, discipline, or dismissal of an individual employee or member, and then possible action to follow after that executive session if somebody is prepared to make that motion at this time.

I'll make a motion.

I heard Commissioner Bush and then Stewart.

Commissioner McQuarrie has a motion, second by Commissioner Bush. All in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposition? And that motion carries.

Thank you, Mayor.

OK, thank you. I believe that concludes our motion. At this point, we will move to city attorney reports. No report, Mayor. City Manager report.

Just one thing. About a year ago, if you remember, we had a fraud issue with our accounts payable at German American Bank. We had to close the account. We ended up getting our money back, but it was a big hassle. At that time, we implemented the positive pay system, and that has now come to be of good use after a year. We have someone who has gotten a copy of a check and is making, manufacturing their own checks with city numbers in kind of the same sequence. It's been small dollars, rarely small dollars. so far and we're catching all of them and reporting them immediately to the bank so it's no loss to us we've also filed a police report with the city police in case we should have any loss but at this point everything is good the bank is monitoring it we're monitoring it but it's happening a lot just lots of opportunities somehow for people to be creative i just wanted to let you know that we are on that Thank you.

Thank you, Carol. The things we put in place has come into fruition.

Yes, exactly.

Commissioner Stewart.

I don't.

Commissioner McQuarrie. I don't have any. Commissioner Bush.

I sent an email that were documented. I printed it out. Everybody had it. It's from a meeting set up in Washington, D.C. with the EPA and EPA and different various agencies, USDA. USDA may not be the best fit for us, maybe the White House Intergovernmental Affairs Office, but I've spoken with the city manager about it, I've spoken with the public works director about it, so what this would be is a small group to go talk to some, hopefully, it depends on when we get the trip scheduled. Obviously, the sooner the better, but it just kinda all came up pretty quickly. So, the Senate and Congress, they're back in session, I believe, this week, and they'll be back in session next week. Congressman Comer's office has agreed to help us set up some meetings with these organizations to help them understand some of the nuances that we have from a small town government aspect on trying to work through some of our wastewater and water challenges. I was speaking with Trent and we've got at least eight projects identified that total approximately $50 million. And as we all know, we don't have $50 million to cover these projects. There's no guarantee of funds. We're not an applicant of any grants at this point. There's one grant that I reached out to Carol about that I'm still looking at, but that's due in six days, and I've still got a little bit of work to do on that. I don't know that we are gonna be able to get that in in time. the population increased, yeah. We do definitely qualify for the water usage because we're still right around that 30% mark or above. So this is one of those things where there's an opportunity. The opportunity would be for a small group of folks to go to Washington to have these meetings. in the event that we do get these scheduled so i wanted to bring it in front of you guys to see what your thoughts were to see if you had any questions i realize this is kind of spur of the moment but again it all kind of happened pretty quickly so it would cost for about four people budgeted approximately ten thousand dollars so that would be three days two nights and that would fall under so it should be around eighty five hundred but uh i would budget ten thousand for it because i would expect that uh there would probably be a three night four day trip are you asking the city to to fund this eighty five hundred dollars yes

Who all would you think, have you talked to anyone who might want to go?

So I think depending on the schedule and when it would be, so obviously September would be a better option. I know that's right around the corner, but with the session being in during September, that would be a... a better time to go, but October, November, even after the election, I mean, this is one of those things that, honestly, it's just trying to position Franklin into a better spot to help those folks in Washington understand some of the challenges that we're facing and also make some connections for the future to see what the possibilities are to help get Franklin and other small communities in Kentucky some money to undertake some of these projects.

I think it's a very noble effort. I applaud you for bringing out these concerns. of things that we are currently addressing. I think the only issue that I would have with it is I could not approve spending $8,500 to send people to Washington for this reason. I think in September, of course, we're going to be going to the KLC, and I just don't, you know, federal agencies, I'm not sure who those people would be, because we have our representatives. Of course, we have Rand Paul, obviously, that we could probably talk to and get him to come. I don't know if he'd do it or not. James Coomer, who we can also speak with. I know that when we go to the KOC, maybe we can find some time to get with some of the legislators up there and the governor to see what monies would be available for us through that process. I'm pretty sure, because I know before, we had a renewal urban grant back in, it's been a while ago, that that federal money funneled through to communities that had blighted homes and things of that nature. And we addressed a lot of those and then all of a sudden they just cut it off. So if any federal money for infrastructure and things of that nature, it was more likely it would go through the state's office and then they would allocate that money down to wherever they saw fit for it to be appropriated. I'm not saying it wouldn't be a good trip to make. I just don't feel like I could support funding. If somebody wanted to go and pay their way, that's fine. I think it would be maybe noteworthy to do that. But I think we have representation. And plus, Matt Pettigo, that's with the Brad office, works extremely hard for us in writing grants and things. So we have the vehicle to use locally I just I don't see where that I could probably go up there federal agency out of Iowa that's in the Senate and say we need some money for infrastructure in Franklin, Kentucky and him saying well we need it in Iowa too.

I understand I mean this is all about trying to make connections outside of the state and I think that you know as time goes on we're going to have to make as many connections as we can.

But we have to use our resources that we have of the people that we vote and put in those positions, just like our constituents use us as liaisons to get things done today, like in this community. And I think we should use those same vehicles that we have. We have them in place. We just have to channel our energies to those people and give them a chance to be able to address some of these. And I think, rightfully so, they've done some of that. But I mean, I think what you're saying right here, without a doubt, I mean, yes. Any money that we could find now, I think we should. But I just couldn't. My only problem, I just couldn't approve the $8,500 to send this out there.

I think Kelly got a noble idea. Speaking of James Comer. I could line up myself. I could easily line him up when he's here through Sandy Simpson, who actually I will be at the Brad Wednesday. And Sandy Simpson is always, she's his, she and I have a very good relationship. And I could talk to her and get maybe lined up.

Get him lined up with us if that's if that's if we could get him to come and he would strong if he would Urge us and to do this, you know if he could come and tell us this is what we need to do and You know, I'll help I'll help you with this, but I know it's the long shot But I would like I would like to hear something from someone who we who is our representative Who has the the means of navigating through that process and getting to the right people. I don't know, I wouldn't know who to ask for it.

Yeah, that's the assistance they're offering to help us with is to navigate us through that process to help make some of these connections so that we can make some of these agencies aware. So for instance, with Brad, and we would go after some of these grants and some of these various monies, we have to have construction-ready projects, but we don't really have the money to have the engineering done and just have these projects sit on the shelf to be construction ready. So we've got $60 million worth of projects and I think these projects are different, but they're just the tip of the iceberg. So that's one of the concerns is I don't know

that everyone always understands and yes it is a long shot but again um so that's you know their office is is willing to help us make these connections well if you don't ever ask you never know what you get but i still think that i still support the idea of of getting some of our legislators to come here and ask them to come so we can ask questions to see what they're already doing you know i'd like to challenge that i think that would be a good beginning

Yeah, I like the idea of trying to go through Sandy, trying to get Representative Comer here, and he could give us an idea if there's any money out there before we spent this money, if there wasn't.

All right, well, sounds like it's a no on three.

No, I mean, it's not a no. No, okay.

It's a no on spending the money to go. It doesn't stop you from going. You can still go. You can still go. If you want to spend your own money to go and do a whole report.

I'm not going to pay for Carol and Trent to go as well.

Well, I mean, if there's a group of people that's willing to fund their trip up there, that's perfectly fine. But again, I think that what you're talking about here and the concerns you have, I think it's warranted. I do. I don't think I'm throwing the whole idea away. I just don't see us investing money when we vote, when we have representation already that advocates for us, for monies to take care of some projects like this.

All right, I'll reach out and see.

And if we can get a start, because somewhere it may lead, it may take us right down the road that you're proposing. It may do it, but I would just like to, you know, I'd like to, you know, take the baby steps and go through the process of using the people who we depend on carefully for us anyway. All right.

I'd like to hear from Jack McConville first. Yeah, okay.

But don't take it, I'm not opposing what you're saying as far as the interest of making sure the infrastructure, things of that nature, we can find money to do it. Because it would be wonderful if they could write us a good checkbook. We should do it.

No, I understand. I mean, they're not going to write the check. It's just there's a lot of struggles in small towns. I don't know that, you know, everybody in Washington understands those struggles. And so this was just an opportunity through Comer's office to help us facilitate some of that. But I understand.

Well, we got a lot of things that we need to address in the community as far as the money. I know, you know, raise the property tax and things like that. It's not going to be the answer to it. If we could find outside money to help us with, it would be great.

DAVID BURRAGE. OK. Commissioner Powell? DAVID BURRAGE.

OK. We have a motion by Commissioner Powell to adjourn and a second by Kelly. And all in favor, aye. Aye. And we now stand adjourned.